No One Is Coming To Save Us
CNBC reported, a few days ago, that Greenspan reiterated his warnings about the deep red ink affecting Social Security, Medicare and other programs and that Americans will have to renounce their entitlements. Of course he also blames the aging population, but immediately reassured that short-term projections still look okay. Though dark clouds are gathering above the horizon, planting the seeds for a dramatic decline. For course it is not America alone, the former Maestro foresees the same mess taking place in EU. Not to mention that The Commerce Department released the $891 billion trade deficit, the largest in the US history... while at least 60 companies reported that their 2018 federal tax rates amounted to effectively zero.
04/15/2019 | Only rebellion will prevent an ecological apocalypse| George Monbiot ....
GUARDIAN.UK: No one is coming to save us. Mass civil disobedience is essential to force a political response
Monbiot is a misguided leftist now considering anarchistic methods, and he is absolutely correct. As time goes, it is rather blatant that we have to take the matter in our own hands. Why are so many leftists still thinking that a centralized political body is to going listen to them since the latter is the cause of the problem. Centralization is just a mere philosophical fallacy. Personal responsibility is inescapable.
The political class, as anyone who has followed its progress over the past three years can surely now see, is chaotic, unwilling and, in isolation, strategically incapable of addressing even short-term crises, let alone a vast existential predicament. Yet a widespread and willful naivety prevails: the belief that voting is the only political action required to change a system. Unless it is accompanied by the concentrated power of protest – articulating precise demands and creating space in which new political factions can grow – voting, while essential, remains a blunt and feeble instrument.
The widespread dogmatic endorsement of monetarism and competition are at the core of all our ills, so how about quitting to buy anything that is not food for a week or so, because that would be sending a powerful message, and which will force many corporations onto their knees. It is important to strike where the power is, at the earning level. Those at the top only harvest their power from the dynamics deriving from the right to ownership, which has been with us since the dawn of times. And that people think that if we could get rid of "them", the world would be near perfection... there lies the logical fallacy... as long as people worship "ownership" (the golden calf), "they" are here to stay. It is impossible to even think of changing what is, if we can't let go this "widespread dogmatic endorsement", a truly sharing and voluntary economy remains dream out of reach.
Those who govern the nation and shape public discourse cannot be trusted with the preservation of life on Earth. There is no benign authority preserving us from harm. No one is coming to save us. None of us can justifiably avoid the call to come together to save ourselves.... (more see link below)
In a brief moment of lucidity, Monbiot clearly admits it. And if any of those governing would come forward, would call upon themselves the duty to resign. Pointing to the flaws of the system is dangerous to the establishment itself. And most people are so scared to address it that they know if if they ever did, they would wake up the next day without a job most likely. That is how powerful this "status quo" really is. And the cement used is of course money. Money has destroyed freedom to such an extent that any move done to free ourselves will bring about a collapse. The stakes are so high now that we must accept to lose everything to win everything for a shift toward a "resource based economy" to stimulate a social rebirth.
TO QUOTE ZEITGEIST PETER JOSEPH
The sobering truth of the matter is that the only thing to blame is the dynamic, causal unfolding of system expression itself on the cultural level. In other words, none of us create or do anything in isolation – it’s impossible. We are system-bound both physically and psychologically; a continuum. Therefore our view of causality with respect to societal change can only be truly productive if we seek and source the most relevant sociological influences we can and begin to alter those effects from the root causes.
FULL ARTICLES
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/15/rebellion-prevent-ecological-apocalypse-civil-disobedience
I am glad to see someone else share the same sentiments as myself! I could write a whole book in reply to your post,or a reply longer than your posts because you have summed up to a T my frame of mind for the last ten years or longer! One thing I will say is that when 2008 hit and employment went to hell the wormy weak sociopathic bastards of the most despicable vile type became leader's in the work force through despicable unethical actions that Corporate America took great advantage of, employment was so bad in my field that only the weak yes men with no backbone held on ,and regardless of skill . I wonder what people's family's would do if they really new what low levels their bread winner has stooped to for survival. Before people will fight back for what's right and ethical, an overwhelming amount will grovel and eat their neighbor, The American work place is rife with mental illness and the most unwholesome derelicts! It's unfortunate that for us to collectively unify and fight back against Corporate and Government Tyrants it will have to be a worse environment than 2008, and for me , 2008 was bad enough to set Wall Street on fire and storm the Bastille, I still can not believe the outcome of those years, enough crimes occurred to build 100's of Prison's just to house Banksters and Wall Street, and the only Banksters prosecuted was the one who stole from the rich, Bernie Madoff!
thank you for this long comment @natepower yes this is an appalling state of affairs, and I can only nod at you sadly. At this point, we have a 50-50% chance to change the world for the better if we encourage the collapse. They are prepared for it too but if we encourage its demise instead of resisting it, we'll be the winners.
Curated for #informationwar (by @wakeupnd)
Ways you can help the @informationwar!
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
I am a systems thinker, too. Maybe asking some more questions will get us further or inspire a different view...
I guess it's because one doesn't care about the local anymore. In a global world, the focus is on what is far from you. The neighbours, the urban locale disappears from view. I myself feel a certain sluggishness and unwillingness towards local political structures and events, because I don't attach any or hardly any importance to them anymore. I believe I recognise that what happens locally here in Hamburg, for example, is no longer thought of locally. Streets, real estate, ports and airports are completely geared to a global market and something like urban planning is not meant for citizens, but for ideas. The new opera house, the architecture, is a global idea that should bring people to us from afar, just like goods. Everything that is still produced here in the local area is a nice to have, but seems to be insignificant.
I wonder what it would be like if we had such a small cell energy production method that the central systems would be less powerful. What if every household could supply itself with electricity without being dependent on the big grid and even an exchange of this energy would be possible? Solar systems don't seem to be the solution, do they?
Since we have not yet answered the question about storing generated energy, it seems pointless to talk about some scenarios but I nevertheless like to do that.
Instead of jogging outside or riding a bicycle and simply letting the generated energy evaporate into nothing, would it be possible to use human physical power to generate energy for a laptop, a computer or a kitchen appliance, for example? What if you first had to pedal five kilometres for an oven dish? Then this food intake would become more meaningful again, because the physical effort made sure that this food was cooked in the oven.
What if you had a bicycle unit in your apartment that would translate my muscle power into a stronger force, i.e. that could mechanically increase the pedalling of the pedals. And as soon as the torque threatens to decrease, I would only have to pedal a little again. Would that be possible?
Why can't you network a dance club with a household and harness the energy waves of two hundred club visitors and dancers that hit the floor? Couldn't a gym be set up next to a school where those who operate the equipment and use their energy on the bikes and treadmills provide light and electricity for the school?
What vectors would you need to feed human energy into a grid? Would it be possible to wirelessly divert the energy generated on a surface by a running, jumping, swimming or climbing person? How much electricity could be produced by an individual and how much by many people at the same time? What would be generated if thousands of people in a stadium would stomp simultaneously on the ground?
Would that result in people changing their behaviour and thinking when they create a causal relationship between their own movement and their electricity?
What surface would be needed if, for example, racehorses were running on a track? Would one grant animals a larger habitat and release them into the vastness of a landscape if their movements generated electricity? What would happen if a herd of three hundred animals fell into a sudden gallop?
Is there such a thing as free energy from solar radiation? Have we done enough research to be able to say that energy is much less harmful to the environment than it is today?
Hello @erh.germany ... free energy cannot exist without a money-free system because monetarism will just monetize anything we can think of. And competition makes it impossible reduce the costs, unless slave wages are rampant. But the next step is automation, that will fuel joblessness by the million. Monetarism makes society think in circle because profits must be achieved, but once we understand the nonsensical -- delusional -- aspect of profit, then things begin to fall into place. And YES, there are wonderful inventions waiting for being developed but which are in the vaults of the top 1%, so that they can remain in control of the means of production.
:-) ... Oh, I greatly failed to give some inspiration.
There might me a time when money doesn't play a role any more. And it might not.
People might come up with what unites us beyond monetarism as we all share the same planet. Everyone knows that cooperation and peacefulness are the only way to go, even the 1 %.