There are two major socio-economic themes: socialism and capitalism. Both have pros and cons, but the pros that work such models and exploit whatever advantage they can, are the root cause for most of the cons that now fill our jails.
Socialism has faltered in recent years, but if you put yourself in the shoes of the small cluster of concerned global citizens who have the capacity and resources to influence the future of our planet, you will understand why it is on the way back. The enlightened elite are exceptionally capable and thus, by implication, surpassingly wealthy. I doubt if they even care for wealth anymore as their wealth has no relative benchmark. Rather, their identity vests in their power and the way they can use that power to shape the world.
Are they dark minded? Sure they are, so is our more familiar political and business context, who are coordinated and influenced by a power apex. At local, regional and industry level, chambers of commerce and other organisations help to coordinate and protect their collective interests, but they, in turn, submit to global mechanisms. That coordinating elite must reevaluate socialism. How else will they resolve painful issues – like the decimation of rain forests, the demise of rare species, global warming, emission standards and world economic recession? Indeed, many states are already cosignatories to global treaties that translate into national laws. That is how the world is organized.
Global levels of crime and other social deviations like drug or people trafficking, terrorism and environmental crimes, will all need to be better coordinated if we ever hope to stabilize the civilization of humanity. So, a purely pragmatic, non-emotive observation, on my part, suggests that the use of biographical identities and other controlling mechanisms, is inevitable. That would also enable a new world order to coordinate scarce resources and eliminate the forces or tensions that pose the greatest risk to our planet.
In a subsequent post I will explore capitalism and then extend the debate to alternatives, including a theocratic model, but for now stick with me. I am not lauding socialism – it persecuted Christians and propped up a dark, despotic oligarchy of atheistic leaders who brought this world to the brink of self-destruction. Even now the likes of Kim Yong Il of North Korea, the Military Government of Myanmar, or the corrupt leadership of Robert Mugabe, remind us of how bad things can be under a non-democratic, central power.
However, socialism does have its merits. It tries to remove the disparities between rich and poor and, where voluntary socialism has evolved, as in the Israeli Kibutzim system, it has become a major cornerstone of economic progress. In some African states, collective government farms help preserve food security, whilst reduce the wastefulness of subsistence farming, through a tradeoff that brings work and dignity to ordinary people.
However, when the coordination implied in such systems becomes a power elite, it devolves into the most despotic of all systems. To me the biggest downside of socialism was that it eroded self-realization and the incentive for entrepreneurship, resulting in a depressed, over-militarized and policed state. Most of all, it proved to be ungodly.
What do you think?
(c) Peter Eleazar @ www.4u2live.net
No comments:
Post a Comment