Most Popular This Week
- Not to Worry, Rape Victims Who Want An Abortion: We Won't Charge You With Felony Tampering With Evidence, Just Your Doctor
- The Non Zero-Sum Society: How the Rich Are Destroying the US Economy
- The Right of the People, Even At the Airport
- To End Extreme Poverty, Let’s Try Ending Extreme Wealth
- The Poison We Never Talk About in School
- The Non Zero-Sum Society: How the Rich Are Destroying the US Economy
- Don’t Put a Fork in It: On the Perils of Genetically Engineered Salmon
- Don’t Buy Lies About Social Security
- UN Report: Israel Must Immediately Dismantle Settlements or Face ICC
- Five Possibilities for the Next Great Progressive Push
Popular content
Today's Top News
Path to a Peace Economy
David Korten presented the following speech on October 19, 2009 during a keynote lecture at the Economics of Peace Conference in Sonoma, California.
My subject tonight is the Path to a Peace Economy, based on ideas elaborated in my most recent book, Agenda for a New Economy, and the New Economy issue of YES! Magazine.
I start with a basic truth. A persistent pattern of violence against people, community, and nature is inherent in the institutional structure of our existing economy.
You don't treat a cancer with Band-Aids, and we can't resolve our current economic crisis with marginal regulatory adjustments. It is time to rethink and restructure.
Systemic Failure
Our economic institutions have been designed by Wall Street interests to secure personal economic and political power in the hands of members of a small ruling elite. They do it well. Unfortunately, it is the wrong purpose. We need a top to bottom redesign to put in place the institutions of a new economic system, a New Peace Economy, designed to share power and resources in a world that works for all.
So how bad is the failure of our current system? It is public knowledge. A brief review, however, is in order.
Economic Collapse
The Wall Street financial collapse has stripped tens of millions of previously middle class Americans of their jobs, homes, and retirement assets and plunged them into poverty and despair. The federal government and the Federal Reserve have responded by pouring trillions of dollars into the Wall Street financial institutions that created the crisis with minimal conditions and oversight, all in the hope that some of this money would trickle down as loans to the productive economy. The recipient financial institutions used the money instead to fund acquisitions that make "too big to fail" banks even bigger, pay dividends to shareholders who by market rules should have been wiped out in bankruptcy proceedings, award obscene bonuses to criminally culpable executives, and launch new predatory financial scams that create new systemic risks.
Wall Street says we have now weathered the crisis, which basically means the profits and bonuses of its most rapacious financial institutions have been restored. The jobs, homes, and retirement assets of ordinary Americans have not. To the contrary, job losses, bankruptcies, and housing foreclosures continue.
Social Collapse
This, however, is only the tip of the iceberg. In the absence of progressive tax and public service policies, the institutions of the old economy create an ever-growing wealth gap between the profligate few and the desperate many. This obscene injustice is tearing apart the social fabric of family and community essential to a healthy society. The resulting fear, insecurity, and sense of injustice fuel the forces of violence as expressed in terrorism, genocide, political deadlock, and high rates of crime, incarceration, and suicide. All are both consequences and indicators of a failed economic system.
Environmental Collapse
Now we come to the system's ultimate failure: environmental collapse. The rules and institutions of the Old Economy drive endless growth in wasteful and destructive forms of material consumption that deplete soil and water, disrupt climate patterns, and convert Earth's natural capital into toxic garbage, thus reducing Earth's capacity to support life, creating massive human displacement, and intensifying a violent competition for Earth's remaining resources that finds expression in bloated military budgets and wars of occupation.
Start with virtually any dysfunction or injustice in our society and it traces back to a failed economic system. Follow the money, and it leads ultimately to Wall Street.
A Failed Experiment
For some thirty years, we have been engaged as a nation and as a species in a social engineering experiment to test the claims of an extremist economic ideology known as market fundamentalism.
Ideology of the Sociopath
You've heard the sermon preached by its most fanatic true believers:
There is no public interest—only an aggregation of private interests, which are best served when we each pursue our individual greed in a marketplace unfettered by rules and other forms of government interference. Public assets must be privatized to increase their productivity and efficiency by selling them to the highest bidder. The faster we consume, the faster the economy grows and the wealthier we become as a rising tide lifts all boats.
Inequality is essential to social order and prosperity. It provides us with wealthy investors able to bear the risks of investing in the creation of jobs and a working class motivated by economic insecurity to work hard at those jobs at a globally competitive wage. There is no alternative. If a few get rich, instead of condemning them out of envy—which is a mortal sin—celebrate their good fortune, because as the rich get richer, wealth trickles down and we all get richer. In America, anyone can succeed who applies himself. Failure is a sign of a flawed character.
Is this story familiar? It is no mystery why this economic theology leads to ruthless competition, obscene accumulation, and reckless consumption that destroys the environment and tears apart the social fabric. It embodies the moral philosophy of the sociopath.
It is now time to acknowledge the lessons of this disastrous experiment. Markets do have an essential role in a healthy economy, but market extremism does not. It turns out that markets do need rules, there is an essential role for government, we all have more when resources are shared, and Jesus and the other great religious teachers were right. We are members of a community and we all do better when we care for one another and act with mindful consideration of the needs of others.
Wall Street as Operating System
The institutions of the economy determine how, as a society, we allocate whatever resources are available to us. In an earlier time, we organized ourselves into clans and tribes in which we cared for one another and allocated resources to secure the well-being of all. Resource allocation decisions were local and relationships were mediated by bonds of mutual caring and security. Money in the earliest human societies was unknown. In our current society, most relationships on which we depend for the basics of survival, including food, water, shelter, and health care, are mediated by money. This gives enormous power to those who control the creation and allocation of money. In our country, that would be Wall Street.
To use a computer analogy, the Wall Street financial system has become the operating system of the economy and the society. The values and priorities of Wall Street thus become the defining values and priorities of the larger society. Wall Street has one value—money—and one goal: to maximize financial returns to those who control the money system. Social or environmental consequences find no place in Wall Street decision making.
A Choice-Making Species
In a few minutes, I will take up the question of how we can change this. In the meantime, I want to put our situation in its deeper historical, evolutionary, and spiritual context. For the past 5,000 years, we humans have been living in a cultural trance of our own making that alienates us from the land, our true nature, and our place in the cosmos.
So who are we humans? From where did we come? And for what purpose? Here is how I understand the big story based on the data of science, the wisdom of indigenous peoples, and the teachings of Jesus and other mystics.
Hundreds of thousands of years ago, the Great Integral Spirit that expresses itself through what we know as creation embarked on a bold and risky experiment in reflective consciousness: bringing forth a species able to step back and to reflect on creation in awe and wonder and to participate as a conscious co-creator in the continued creative unfolding. We humans are that species.
Our reflective consciousness gives us the capacity to choose our future with conscious collective intent. It was a risky experiment, however, because the capacity for self-awareness gives us an ego that can run out of control if it forgets it exists only as part of a larger whole.
In our earliest days, we humans raised our children collectively in the clan, tribe, or village, initiating them to the ways of life and the need to care for our Earth Mother as she in turn cares for us.
Over millennia, as our human consciousness was awakening and our capacities for self-direction grew, we learned to communicate through speech, master fire, domesticate plants and animals, and construct houses of skins, wood, stone, and dried mud. We developed the arts of pottery, painting, weaving, and carving. We undertook vast continental and transcontinental migrations to populate the planet and adapted to vastly different physical topographies and climates. We created complex languages and social codes that allowed for life in larger communities.
Then, some 5,000 years ago, something began to go terribly wrong. We turned from the ways of Earth Community and embraced the ways of Empire. It was a time of separation and forgetting. Community, partnership, and the celebration of life gave way to individualism, domination, and violence.
The few expropriated the wealth of the many. The masculine drove out the feminine. We continued to worship the Sky Father, but turned against our Earth Mother. We came to value the power to kill and destroy more highly than the ability to create and nurture life. Conquest became the measure of greatness. Economies came to be based on servitude and eventually money became the prime arbiter of human relationships.
Consider the dynamics inherent in a dominator system. With a few on the top and the many on the bottom, everyone is placed in competition with everyone else for the favored positions and the bonds of caring and sharing are broken. The creative energy of the species is redirected from securing the well-being of the tribe to advancing the technological instruments of war and the social instruments of domination.
The winners expropriate the available resources to maintain the system of domination. Positions of power are too often claimed by the most ruthless and psychologically damaged members of society. And so it has been for 5,000 years
If this discussion of Empire sounds familiar, it is for good reason. The kings and emperors have been replaced by corporate CEOs and hedge fund managers, but we are still living in the Era of Empire—and the basic dynamics still hold.
In the past 100 years, we humans have achieved technological mastery beyond the imagination of previous generations. Yet, lacking in the wisdom of place and community that is the heritage of indigenous peoples, the cultures we call mainstream have lost their way—forgetting what it means to be human and denying our connection to the web of planetary life. The time has come to rediscover our humanity and bring ourselves back into balance with our living Earth Mother. Creation has presented us with our final examination to determine whether we are a species worthy of survival. We must not, need not, fail.
When Money Rules
At its core, our current economic crisis is a spiritual crisis framed by this well-known scriptural verse from the Sermon on the Mount:
No one can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Matthew 6:24.
Mammon refers to wealth as an object of worship; the worship of a false god; a form of demonic possession; an evil force in opposition to Life.
Our worship of Mammon is the consequence of an illusion: the illusion that money is wealth and that making money is synonymous with producing wealth. The truth, as Wall Street has so dramatically demonstrated, is very different. Money isn't wealth, and it is quite easy to make lots of money without producing anything of value to the larger society. Money, the most mysterious of human inventions, a magical number of no meaning or existence outside the human mind, has displaced life as our object of sacred veneration and become the ultimate arbiter of human priorities. Money determines the fate of nations and shapes the boom and bust cycles of economic life. It allows some to live in grand opulence in the midst of scarcity, while confining others to death by starvation in the midst of plenty.
This is money as a system of power, a tyranny all the more complete because it is largely invisible to those it enslaves. To liberate ourselves from the tyranny, we must demystify money and recognize that it is a mere number created from nothing with a simple accounting entry when a bank issues a loan. As economist John Kenneth Galbraith once famously observed, the process by which money is created is "so simple it repels the mind."
When you take out a loan from a bank, the bank opens an account in your name and enters the amount of the loan in its ledger. That becomes a liability on the bank's accounts, offset by the corresponding asset of your promise to repay with interest. Two simple accounting entries, and money magically appears from nowhere. This simple fact makes banking a very profitable business and is the key to the ability of the institutions of Wall Street and its global counterparts to rule the world.
Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty, once famously said, "Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws."
That pretty well sums it up. In our current system, this control is centralized in and monopolized by Wall Street institutions that value only money and seek only private accumulation. From a societal perspective it is a devastatingly unwise and destructive arrangement.
Money, particularly money that is created out of nothing without any contribution to the creation of anything of corresponding value, is phantom wealth—it has no substance or intrinsic utility. Creating phantom wealth is a Wall Street specialty. They call it financial innovation. I call it theft.
A Real Wealth Economy
So what is real wealth? We might say it is anything that has a real intrinsic value: land, labor, knowledge, food, education.
Most valuable of all are those forms of wealth that are beyond price: Love, a healthy, happy child, a job that provides a sense of self-worth and contribution, membership in a strong caring community, a healthy vibrant natural environment, peace—none of which find any place on Wall Street balance sheets or in our calculations of GDP.
Pull back the curtain, as the financial crash has done, and the truth is revealed that Wall Street acquires its power by destroying real living wealth to create phantom financial wealth. Wall Street is more than immoral, it is an institutional manifestation of evil.
So what will the New Economy look like, and how will we achieve it?
Living Earth
We begin with a recognition that the old economy is based not only on the illusion that money is wealth, but as well the illusion that we live in a world of open frontiers with endless abundant resources free for the taking. We are only now as a species awakening to the reality that we are passengers on a living spaceship and must learn to live in balanced relationship with our local ecosystems everywhere, working with nature to reuse and recycle everything and to eliminate the release of any substance that nature cannot readily absorb and detoxify.
Spaceship Earth, our Birth Mother, is endowed with a wondrous self-managing, self-regulating life support system that has nourished us as a species through the years of our growing up. As a loving parent, she has absorbed the insults and injuries of our reckless adolescent behavior. Our numbers and the power of our technology, however, now exceed her capacity to absorb.
Defining Principles
We must now restructure our economic institutions to align with three foundational principles: Ecological balance. Shared prosperity. And living democracy. Let's take them one by one.
- Ecological Balance: It's spaceship management 101. We must bring ourselves into balance with Earth's life support system-the biosphere. This requires something you don't normally hear mentioned at economics conferences. We need to reduce aggregate human consumption, global GDP, starting with the most profligate nations. I'll say more about this later. Follow me closely here: We must simultaneously redesign our human economies to function everywhere as subsystems of the local ecosystems that comprise Earth's biosphere.
-
Shared Prosperity: As we act to reduce aggregate consumption, we need to recognize that Earth's bounty is the shared birthright of all living beings and learn to share it equitably to the benefit of all. The potential benefits of sharing prosperity go far beyond securing our mutual survival. According to a massive body of public health research, people in societies in which wealth and work are equitably shared enjoy greater physical and emotional health, stronger families and communities, less violence, and healthier natural environments than people in more unequal societies. Societies that are more equal are also more democratic and more resilient in the face of crisis.
This has important implications for those of us who live in the United States. UK social epidemiologist Richard Wilkinson observes that among the world's 30 richest countries we in the United States are number one in many things, including homicide rates, teenage pregnancy rates, rates of imprisonment, and numerous other social dysfunctions. We are also number one in the size of the income gap between our richest and poorest members. This is not a coincidence.
The reason is simple. Greater inequality means greater psychological and emotional stress and insecurity for everyone, including for those at the top. Great sharing means less stress and insecurity.
- Living Democracy means exactly what it says: living democracy as a daily practice of civic engagement. In a living democracy, popular sovereignty is integral to the fabric of community life. Living democracies celebrate and affirm diversity within a framework of individual rights, community responsibility, and mutual accountability. Their political and economic institutions support local decision making within a framework of cooperation and mutually agreed rules.
Ecological Balance, Shared Prosperity, and Living Democracy: three foundational principles of the new living peace economies on which the human future depends.
A Familiar Alternative
Those of us who came of age during the latter part of the twentieth century were taught that we are limited to a choice between two economic models: the model of Wall Street capitalism or the model of Soviet communism. We in the West chose Wall Street capitalism based on the false claim that capitalism is the natural champion of democracy and market choice. Now we see the reality that when Wall Street capitalism has its way, our political choices are limited to politicians who serve Wall Street interests and our market choices are limited to those that generate the greatest Wall Street profits.
Living Market Economies
We're not supposed to notice that both capitalism and communism, as we have known them, are simply alternative models of elite rule.
We have another option that is rarely mentioned, a planetary system of local living market economies that distribute and root decision-making power everywhere in inclusive, democratic, place-based living Earth communities, much in the manner of healthy ecosystems.
Many of the features of this New Economy option are more familiar than we might at first realize. They bear substantial resemblance to the Main Street economies many of us knew as we were growing up in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s.
The America We Once Knew
Although we had not yet dealt as a nation with crucial issues of race, gender, and the environment, the market rules of that day protected the public interest as we then understood it. Strong labor unions secured worker rights and assured a living wage. Our middle class was the envy of the world.
Banks were local and strictly regulated. Anti-trust protected the public from the abuse of corporate monopoly power. Cities and towns had vibrant lively Main Street economies served by local independent businesses that were accountable to the community and honored community values. And imagine this: Many insurance companies, hospitals, and financial institutions were organized as nonprofit cooperatives accountable to their members.
Most manufacturing was domestic, much of our food production was local, and we had a positive trade balance. Few families needed more than one car and per capita energy use was modest by current standards. There was substantial non-market household production and the typical wage for one employed working person was adequate to support a family.
Wall Street Take-Over
From the late 70s onward, Wall Street market fundamentalists mobilized to roll back the rules to unleash a consolidation of corporate power and de-link it from public accountability. Their right-wing social-engineering experiment allowed Wall Street to colonize the Main Street economy, decimated the middle class, undermined democracy and sense of community, reduced our national happiness index, and brought financial, social, and environmental devastation wherever it has reached.
Markets can and do support individual liberty and the public interest, but only when they operate within a framework of appropriate market rules and are complemented and supported by strong, democratically elected governments that enforce these rules and assure the provision of essential public services and infrastructure.
Appropriate rules support local ownership, bar private monopolies except within a strong regulatory framework, secure cost internalization and balanced trade among communities and nations, and prohibit monopoly pricing, market manipulation, and financial speculation.
We hear frequent reference these days to a distinction between the Wall Street economy and the Main Street economy. The difference is crucial.
Wall Street is in the business of using money to make money for people who have money without the burden of producing anything of value in return. Wall Street creates money out of nothing, engages in predatory lending at exorbitant interest rates, and uses its control of money to hold the public purse hostage to its demands. It is best understood as a criminal syndicate engaged in counterfeiting, usury, tax evasion, fraud, and extortion rackets—and should be treated accordingly.
Liberating Main Street
The Main Street economy is comprised of local businesses and working people engaged in producing real goods and services to meet real needs and providing meaningful, secure, family wage employment for the people of their communities. It is the logical foundation on which to build a new real wealth economy of green jobs, responsible community-oriented businesses, and sound environmental practices. Although devastated by the predatory intrusions of Wall Street corporations, it is now in revival as communities all across the nation rally to declare their independence from Wall Street and rebuild the community-serving economies they once knew.
No Wall Too Tall
Bringing down Wall Street may seem a daunting challenge to some of you. To get ourselves in the right spirit, I want to share an inspirational song by Raffi that he recorded to celebrate the launch of Agenda for a New Economy at the Trinity Wall Street Episcopal Church last January. It's called "No Wall Too Tall." Get up and dance with me as you listen to the words.
How many of you here grew up on Raffi's music or have children who did? Raffi is currently devoting his life to an initiative he calls Child Honoring based on the simple truth that a world that works for all the children will work for everyone.
A Three Part Strategy
So how can we bring down Wall Street's imperial tyranny?
We the people, as global civil society, are engaging this challenge on three strategic fronts:
-
We are changing the defining stories of the mainstream culture. It is a simple but rarely noted truth that every great transformational social movement begins with a conversation aimed at challenging a prevailing cultural story. The civil rights movement changed the story on race. The environmental movement changed the story about the human relationship to nature. The women's movement changed the story on gender. Our current task is to change the prevailing stories about the nature of wealth, the purpose of the economy, and our human nature. YES! Magazine and my most recent book Agenda for a New Economy are useful tools for organizing the necessary conversations.
- We are creating a new economic reality from the bottom up as millions of people the world over are working to strengthen locally owned human-scale business and family farms, developing local financial institutions, reclaiming farm and forest lands, changing land use policies to concentrate population in compact communities that reduce automobile dependence, retrofitting their buildings for energy conservation, and otherwise moving toward local self reliance in food, energy, and other basic essentials. The Business Alliance for Local Living Economies (BALLE) is building a national support system for these initiatives.
- We are changing the rules: Current law and public policy largely favor the Wall Street economy to the exclusion of Main Street economy. We must work together to promote and support political action at local, national, and global levels to change the balance in the favor of Main Street.
A New Economy Agenda
I'm currently focusing my energy on the New Economy Working Group, a partnership between Institute for Policy Studies in Washington DC, YES! Magazine, the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies, and the PCDForum. We are working to articulate a comprehensive New Economy agenda. Here are five essential elements:
1. Implement Living Wealth Indicators as the basis for evaluating economic performance: Because we get what we measure, we should measure what we want. We currently evaluate economic performance against GDP, which is an indicator of the rate at which the economy is extracting useful resources from nature, converting them to saleable products, and disposing of them as toxic waste into our air, water, and soils—all for the primary purpose of making rich people richer. And this is what we get.
Stock price indices, another favorite indicator, measure the rate at which people who own financial assets are increasing their economic advantage over everyone else.
Imagine how different things would be if we designed and managed the economy to maximize indicators of the health and vitality of our children, families, communities, and natural systems—while simultaneously reducing environmental burdens by redistributing available resources from destructive and non-essential uses to beneficial ones that improve the quality of life for everyone, create meaningful beneficial jobs, and heal the environment.
We can end war and convert to a peace economy; reorganize our infrastructure to eliminate automobile-dependence; curtail advertising and redirect those creative and media resources to education; end financial speculation and redirect investment to productive sustainable enterprises devoted to meeting community needs. This list is just a start. It is about setting sensible priorities.
2. Create a Real Wealth Money System: Last night Don Shaffer spoke of redirecting the flow of money from global to local financial markets and moving from complex, opaque, anonymous, short-term financial relationships to direct, transparent, personal, and long-term financial relationships. This defines our charge for redesigning and restructuring our systems of money creation and allocation.
Our existing Wall Street financial system centralizes the power to create and allocate money in an interlinked institutional system of mega-banks, hedge funds, private equity funds, the Federal Reserve, and captive regulatory bodies operating in secret beyond public oversight and accountability that I earlier described as a criminal syndicate.
The Bush and Obama administrations both pumped literally trillions of dollars of bailout money into the corrupt Wall Street financial institutions responsible for the current economic mess. Note here the essential difference between the bailout money and the Obama stimulus money. Bailout money goes to Wall Street financial institutions in the hope that some of it will trickle down to Main Street in the form of loans. Stimulus money bypasses Wall Street and directly funds the creation of productive jobs to create beneficial goods, services, and public infrastructure projects.
So imagine that instead of a bailout for the corrupt banks that caused the crash, the government had taken them over, broken them up, and spun off the pieces as individual community-based financial institutions—community banks, savings and loans, and credit unions. Some might be organized as private for-profits. Others as nonprofits or cooperatives. Some might be owned by state or local governments. All would function as properly regulated, community accountable public utilities.
Now imagine that the trillions of dollars that went to bailing out Wall Street banks had instead been added to the stimulus package to directly help homeowners facing foreclosure, create new jobs, and to fund education, health care, and public infrastructure. Further, imagine that the recipients of the stimulus money then deposited a portion of it as savings in these community financial institutions to be continuously recycled as low interest or no interest loans to grow local businesses, expand home ownership, and finance public investment. How different things might now be.
Here is a really radical idea: Let's federalize the Federal Reserve and make money supply management and banking oversight transparent and publicly accountable federal functions. Why should the federal government borrow and pay interest on money created with an accounting entry by private banks, thus condemning our children to perpetual debt slavery to private banks and foreign countries, when it is within the means of the government to make the accounting entry itself?
3. Share the Wealth: As noted earlier, we all do better when we share the wealth. So let's do it with:
- Income and employment policies that assure every person who needs employment access to employment that provides a living wage.
- Progressive taxation and public services policies that continuously recycle wealth from those at the top who have more than they need to those at the bottom who have less than they need.
- Land use and regional development policies that limit sprawl and support compact multi-strata development that prevents geographical division by class and race.
-
Ownership policies that eliminate the class divide between owners and workers by encouraging every owning person to do productive work and every working person to be an owner.
4. Favor Businesses Organized as Living Enterprises for which the primary business purpose is to serve the community and profit is a means, not an end. Cooperative, worker, and local public ownership models sensibly and appropriately link business interests to community interests. We can and should make them our favored enterprise models.
5. Change the Global Rules to Support Local Control and Regional Self-Reliance: Current global economy rules and institutions that put the economic rights of global financiers and corporations ahead of the economic rights of ordinary people, place-based communities, and even nations. They have it backwards. The rules and institutions of living peace economies properly support democratic self-determination at local, regional, and national levels, keep trade fair and balanced, favor local over global businesses, and facilitate the sharing of information and beneficial technology.
The goal is to shift the economic system's defining value from money to life, its locus of economic decision making from global to local institutions, its favored dynamic from competition to cooperation, and its primary purpose from growing the individual financial fortunes of the few to building living community wealth to secure the health and well-being of everyone. It is ours to so choose and create.
How to Engage
You will find further information on everything I've covered here in Agenda for a New Economy. Buy a copy, download a discussion guide from davidkorten.org, and organize a discussion group to engage your friends, colleagues, and neighbors in an exploration of the new economy alternatives.
People are always asking, "What else can I do?" I recommend YES! Magazine as the place to start. Each issue is filled with stories of possibility and ideas for action. Visit the "Path to a New Economy" section of the YES! website.
Part of growing up human is putting aside the ways of our childhood to embrace the more inclusive values and responsibilities of adulthood. Our time has come to grow up as a species coming of age on a small planet. This is the larger challenge before us. In a very real sense, it is about growing up spiritually to recognize and accept our place within the larger scheme of creation.
As we engage this challenging work in its many dimensions, we must constantly remind ourselves that we are privileged to live at the most dangerous—but also the most exciting—moment of creative opportunity in the whole of the human experience. We have the power to turn this world around for the sake of ourselves, our children for generations to come, and the continued creative unfolding of life on Earth. We are the ones we've been waiting for. Thank you.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


79 Comments so far
Show AllI am inspired by David's ideas. I am also frustrated that few people other than 'the choir' may hear them. I would like to see this information broken down into small clips that I could share with my friends, like the "Story of Stuff" that was popular on Facebook. Money isn't wealth -- so true! The Business Alliance for Local Living Economies (BALLE) -- great! Returning to regulation and progressive taxation -- yes! Redefining what we measure to get the kind of world we value -- please! I believe most people would prefer to live in the kind of world David describes, I know I would.
It's time to abandon that Old Time Master-Slave ideology. Burn your Bible.
Some of us, thankfully, never had a Bible. Others might enjoy it as a mildly interesting novel.
The bible is not the problem. It's the thumping of the bible that's the problem.
"It's the thumping of the bible that's the problem."
Well put!!!
Thankfully many of us do have a bible and it provides fairly good guidance on questions of what you should and shouldn't do.
Frankly the only problem comes when someone takes it as the "literal" word of God which it obviously cannot be. Too many interpretations over the years, too many changes in language, too many mistaken interpretations of scripture based on faulty historical knowledge, etc.
A novel it is not.
"Money...a magical number of no meaning or existence outside the human mind"
Money does too exist outside the mind. It is a straightforward medium of control, much closer to a gun than to a dream. There is nothing strange, mystical, or magical about it.
Certainly, the billionaire and the pauper both know, at a very gut level, that money exists entirely outside the mind.
The only question is, why have we as a society ceded so much power to it?
We changed the robber baron mentality once we can do it again.
capital economics is fetishization, quite literally in the model of the 'secret arts' of manipulation. It is a sub-culture (in that it is not in reciprocity with natural life, but is rather a vampiric dynamic - that is incontinent on a massive scale)
happy halloween 24/7
YES! YES! YES!,
further, we need to change our ideas about what is valuable, in our country, the only way we think we can get anything is to take it from someone else. In reality, we create more by sharing. Anything real, love, ideas happiness etc, grows by sharing. I believe that you only have what you give, instead of the american way which seems to be that we only have what we take from someone else, leaving 'the other' with less. So much of our culture is just insane to me now.
By far one of the best article I've read on here. And I second Korten, the New Economy issue of Yes! Magazine is amazing, I read it a couple weeks ago.
It is past time to stop regarding money as wealth. I have little money, working as an intern for 17% more than the federal minimum wage, but I think my job is very important and I pour my heart and soul into it, and I enjoy it more than I have ever enjoyed any job. I have little money, but I make sure to reward those farmers who are dedicated to farming in a sustainable, eco-friendly, and/or organic way by purchasing their fruit, vegetables, meat, and processed products whenever I can. I have little money, but I donate what little I can to those causes and entities that I believe make a difference, from Greenpeace, to Link TV, to my alma mater where I came to political and social justice consciousness. I have a family I love and that loves and supports me, and does everything it can to help me succeed after I have helped myself. I have great friends that I would do anything for, and that would do anything for me, even after I annoy the hell out of them on FaceBook because I miss them so.
I am dirt poor, with no money left two weeks after each paycheck, and in fairly high credit card and student debt. But I am far wealthier than any schmuck who works on Wall Street ever could be.
Your assessment of your wealth, if you'll allow me to say so sir, is correct.
I'm sure that this is a great essay by Korten, whom I've read and admired for many years now. But he really should stick to what he is able to talk about best.
The "metaphysical foundation" he treats us to in this piece is - to say it as politely as possible - shockingly 19th-century in its puerile human-centeredness.
Korten writes, "Hundreds of thousands of years ago, the Great Integral Spirit that expresses itself through what we know as creation embarked on a bold and risky experiment in reflective consciousness... We humans are that species."
NO, Korten, we are not the central species, the heart and meaning of "creation". Take a look at some of the trees of life at http://www.zo.utexas.edu/faculty/antisense/DownloadfilesToL.html for an update to the 21st century. We are clearly only one of many conscious creatures here on earth and no doubt throughout the cosmos.
Spare us, please, your juvenile and anachronistic metaphysics, and stick to what you do so well, mapping our road to a future that serves all the people in a sustainable manner.
Great Article.... too long but worth it.
Now, Let's end War....
A grand vision by David Korten. So grand that I cannot wrap my mind around it all. Everything from the rejection of the Earth Mother to the end of Wall Street. If David's speech is a map, then it is a map of the Earth done from twenty thousand miles away. I wish we could talk about things at closer range--with careful explanation and discussion.
How about a discussion of one topic--say, alternatives to money? Then we could bring up local currencies, barter, cooperatives, charity and volunteerism. Have a nuanced discussion--Can a money exchange be a good thing in that it puts a value on something that needs to be valued explicitly? When is volunteerism appropriate--is it an appropriate response to poverty? How do some organizations--churches, for example--take advantage of charity and volunteerism? This one topic--money--could become a topic that could be explored for days and something might come out of it.
Grand visions come and go, but a carefully defined plan that addresses a specific problem can last forever. That is what we need.
How about a discussion of one topic--say, alternatives to money? Then we could bring up local currencies, barter, cooperatives, charity and volunteerism. Have a nuanced discussion--Can a money exchange be a good thing in that it puts a value on something that needs to be valued explicitly? When is volunteerism appropriate--is it an appropriate response to poverty? How do some organizations--churches, for example--take advantage of charity and volunteerism? This one topic--money--could become a topic that could be explored for days and something might come out of it.
Grand visions come and go, but a carefully defined plan that addresses a specific problem can last forever. That is what we need.
--------------------------------------
Very well said. The only objection I have is that design is well-known to be an iterative process, so in a practical sense a 'carefully defined plan [that] can last forever' ranges from undesirable to impossible. By all means let's plan, but at the same time resist the idea that a plan can or should last forever. It will have done its job if it lasts long enough to replace it.
Yep, "lasting forever" is definitely hyperbole. I suppose my reason for posting this piece is that sometimes I get tired of impotent visionaries setting forth fluff that is commented on and praised to the skies and then put in a drawer to rot. I like writing that is more practically oriented, stuff that "cooks the beans," that leads somewhere.
I like precision in language. I like ideas that are elucidated. I like evidence for statements. I like to address opposing arguments. I like pieces that answer the question "So what?" The heavy hitters on the Left--Noam Chomsky, Dean Baker, Stiglitz--do these things almost every time they write. That is why I pay more attention to them and less to writers who can create a stir among their co-believers, but are barely understood outside that small and somewhat limited circle.
Thank you David Korten for summing it up well and discussing where most economists never touch it. My favorite parts of this article were system collapse, building the economy from the bottom up, and where he talks about allowing money to rule. A global economy doesn't have to be bad but without local economies to balance things out, a global economy such as this one can be too centralized and destructive. For a long time, putting whole sale volume sales over quality driven production has shown no regards for environmental, social, religious, and even economic destruction itself. The current economic system is not only dog eat dog but it is also companies slitting their own wrists to prop up their "values" with no regards to the fact that going desperate for temporary propping up results in major economic crashes and meltdowns we have been witnessing for the past 20 years.
I find Korten's reference to Mammon very interesting and I believe he has a strong understanding similar to Chris Hedges. Both of them however need to include Mars and for one very strong reason. Everytime a major economic collapse takes place Wall $treet and the big corporations in general imitate the behavior of Mars when they smell defeat looming on the horizon. In a society where Mars rules, when an upper class criminal is about to be held accountable, not only will he commit suicide but he will also engage in his last moments of economic bullying in dragging others into his defeat. If we are going to defeat the monied elites, we cannot allow them to drag us into their hole when they collapse. We must LET THEM FAIL and step out of the way.
The killjoy feeling you are talking about is what they want to do when they delude themselves into believing that they have made up lost ground by dragging others into their losses. They want to feel victorious even when they themselves are losing. There's a lot of training in shameless thinking that's going on in both schools and in the military itself. When people can learn to accept defeat and grow up and correct their mistakes, then the path to a peace based economy is easy.
It's already wrong enough for someone to take their own life away and not do the honorable thing of accepting their just punishment. It's doubly wrong to drag others into their defeat regardless.
I suggest people read the "Chalice and the Blade" by Riane Eisler. She wrote on this very stuff over 30 years ago and used the very terms Mr Korten uses such as "The Dominator Model".
She spoke of the much more peaceful co-existence that thrived over much of the world some 5000+ years ago citing the Archaeological record.
In this period women and men were seen as full equals. They lived in a cooperative model as full and equal partners.
She then spoke of the "Dominator" Model. That being the invasion of the Warrior tribes who saw Power as stemming not from the NURTURING and respect for life but from the ability to TAKE life. Also to how these more warlike tribes who relied on violence and worshipped death then demonized those they displaced.
It a very good read and I am sure Korten gets many of his ideas from that work.
This should not be so much as a redefinition. We WERE there once. It more a GOING back to the original definitions of Community and Civil society which has been turned on its head for the past thousands of years by those that follow "The Blade".
Sioux Rose
GW NORTH: And to the astrologer, these behavioral models and their respective sets of priorities each resonate with the archetypal expressions linked to Venus and Mars. My using the adage, "Mars rules" explains how the dominator influence, that of self over society, macho maleness over nurturant femaleness, and a pervasive IMBALANCE has taken the place of HOLY union and its endlessly creative processes of synthesis. The lack of symmetry is at the root of much that ails us.
Well said. I think we are of like minds on these issues.
I know you like to cite Greek Myth so to that Rianne Eisler refers to an old Greek Play that speaks to this change in power structure.
In this play Orestes murders his mother for the murder of his father. His father before him had been responsible for the death of one of Klytemnestra's daughters whom he had offered up in sacrifice.
A jury makes a Verdict of not Guilty on Orestes when they demonstrate that he was NOT related to his mother because in essence the mother is little more then a womb in which the males seed grows.
The Play basically concludes that female daughters are property of the Father to dispose with as they wish and Mothers are not really parents. It an overthrow of the old tracing of descent through the mother shifting it instead to the father.
This all the consequence of the indo-european invaders who displaced the original peoples of Greece to impose their own sense of "Order" by the blade.
Hesoid also speaks of the Golden age before their arrival suggesting that the God Ares was not worshipped in ancient times. That he was a foreign god brought to that country by the invaders.
Sioux Rose
GW NORTH: I actually dated a guy named Orestes in Puerto Rico many moons ago, but didn't know this myth. Yuck!
In Greek mythology a similar transposition of power, via biological lineage, is seen in the Goddess Athena who denies that she was born from a mother. Instead, she claims to have emerged from her father Zeus's head. I just finished a major book that links the astrological signs with stories from myth and I chose the Athena female for the sign of Cancer. Whenever this forum gets inflamed by those who mistake my comments on Yin and Yang, Venus and Mars, for EXACT expressions of men and women (as opposed to powerful archetypal imprints), the men who feel they must go on the defensive produce examples of warrior women like Margaret Thatcher, Hillary Clinton, etc to prove that women can do war, too. These women are "from the mold of Athena," and in denying their mothers, they nullify their bonds to matriarchal standards, those that come from feelings. Instead, by identifying with the HEAD of Zeus, they THINK like men, place logic and that all-important pragmatism first and foremost, and are able to turn away from the slightest empathy for what their decisions cost others.
The beauty of the 12 tribes concept, originating from the ancient Zodiac with its 12 signs--is that there is no singular RIGHT model for male or female identity. I believe that this understanding could be not only helpful, but liberating in showing that all girls are not destined to be a Barbie Dolls, nor all boys a GI Joe soldier. In fact, as the new age wrestles from the quagmire of 4000 years of past conditioning, separating the genders exclusively into polarized camps of identity, shifts. And now the chance for a much wider pool of acceptable human norms and expressions emerges. The Mercury person, for instance (this planet being gender neutral) is the thinker, the one who never loses their thirst for learning; and as a result, remains youthful.
I thank you for sharing a fascinating myth that explains much! Aries/Mars is part of the pantheon of Greek and Roman mythology. Most of the archetypes I work with come from those schools of ancient thought. It intrigues me when stories generated from different regions reflect similar lessons, concepts, and archetypes. We are all part of the "great circle." And it has NO sides. The circle and its esoteric messages presents the path(s) to peace among tribes, reconciling what has been long taken for irreconcilable.
Some excellent thoughts and some unrealistic ones, but in any case...way too long.
Money is simply a medium of exchange without any credible faults on its own. When greed and acquisitiveness appear it is not money thats wrong.
Walden's Pond is not the type of life for everyone so I'd say its more a case of moderation and sharing than anything else.
Yes, about the length... and about money as means for exchange - no inherent quality of its own actually, unless we revert back to something like chia seeds :-)
Recognizing the human aspects of the equation includes realizing that all/any of these systems are human constructs in the first place, and as such we, being humans, could simply choose to construct them any way we like.
We use to require the system to be backed with gold, but now it's not really backed by anything. Do you think we could require the Fed to put a deposit on hold with the "Public Trust" for every dollar it issued, you know, like a collateralized credit card?
"Do you think we could require the Fed to put a deposit on hold with the "Public Trust" for every dollar it issued, you know, like a collateralized credit card?"
My belief is that the FED is out of control when it comes to money. The only folks "spending" money faster than this administration is the Fed. I only thought that the Republicans under Bush had lost their minds.......these people are insane. They have no desire to stop the bleeding, its not hurting them.
I'm reading a bio of Teddy Roosevelt. I wish Obama would read it.
The same thing happened almost exactly 100 years ago but Teddy is dead now.
A good speech, David Korten, and if your ideas were followed we'd be a giant step closer to leading reasonable lives.
I see your plan as a healthy extension of Keynesian economics with many positive social considerations, and it is probably the path we'll have to follow to extricate ourselves from the soup we're in. But it is not the ideal.
If your plan were successful, you would have succeeded in taming capitalism, not eradicating it, so we'd leave ourselves open to the same conversion of 'reasonable capitalism' to 'savage capitalism' that began in the 80's and is at its finest today, at some time in the future.
Capitalism cannot be trusted, once tamed, to remain tame.
If your plan is successful, capitalism will gnaw away, like a sneaky rodent, to undermine the egalitarianism that you have established, trying once again restore the greed and elitism that you have defeated.
Every positive step you mention is an element of socialism, but you give no credit to socialism. You don't even mention the word.
Your plan is probably a necessary step, like worker cooperatives, in a smooth, peaceful transition from capitalism to socialism, and for that reason I'd support it, even though it fall short of the ideal.
In some of his articles, Korten seems a bit too pollyannish for me, but there are few people with as comprehensive a vision, and for that I forgive him everything. This is a fine speech/article.
"When Corporations Rule the World" should be *required reading* for all cd'ers who haven't read it.
What Korten proposes here is not just as it should be, just an alternative, but a map (in draft form, no doubt) of our survival.
drosera is correct that we need to work on the details. (I was involved in local currency a number of years ago, btw, but we need to be systematic on all levels as much as it goes against our free-and-easy grain. That's our big challenge.)
Korten's speech points in the right direction, but a deeper analysis of the current economic system is vital. For instance, he says, "Our economic institutions have been designed by Wall Street interests to secure personal economic and political power in the hands of members of a small ruling elite." Absolutely true, but could it be that there is something inherent to the capitalist system that requires a financial elite that behaves like Wall Street?
My purpose is not to criticize his vision, which I admire, but to suggest that his economic prescriptions don't attack the real problem. The economy of the 50s, 60s and early 70s seems like a golden age in hindsight, but there were some very concrete political reasons why "the market rules of the day protected the public interest." Unfortunately, he doesn't examine these reasons.
The corporate elite did not gladly acquiesce in strong labor unions because they were concerned with the public good. They were forced into it, kicking and screaming, by powerful social movements that wouldn't take no for an answer. The features that he uses to illustrate the wonderful economic climate of that time were the result of these same democratic forces. They did not arise naturally, but were the result of long, hard struggle by leftist activists. The right-wing forces that Korten bemoans were equally active in the 50s and 60s, but they weren't as free to enforce their ideology because of these opposing forces.
The distinction he makes between the Wall Street economy and the Main Street economy is a false one. Moreover, this distinction obscures the real forces at work in the Great Recession. The distinction contrasts the "real" economy of producing goods to satisfy people's need and the "false" economy of financial speculation. In fact, the whole point of capitalism is ever expanding financial circulation leading to higher profit margins. When the crisis hit, trillions were not poured into ensuring a vigorous manufacturing sector, but into the financial system. This was not some wicked Wall Street plot, but the very nature of the capitalist system. Obama and his economic advisors are correct, Main Street can't survive without the financial circulation provided by Wall Street. Too much of the "left" wants to live in the illusion that we can have capitalism with a human face.
What's deceptively seductive about this approach is that it supports the central task of the ruling ideology, which is to impose a narrative which places the blame for the meltdown not on the system itself, but on the abuse of the system by "corrupt" bankers and corporate executives. That's why the nightly denunciations of "Wall Street greed" actually help prop up the system. This is part of the "purging process" necessary to a healthy capitalist system. In this way, the system itself is protected as well-meaning liberals try to regulate it into health. The underlying message is that the capitalist system, while far from perfect, corresponds most closely to human nature, and as such provides us with the least bad of the various alternatives. Radical change will only make things worse.
And that is the ideology that is so rarely challenged by the left. We must indeed "change the prevailing stories about the nature of wealth" and measure wealth by the vitality of our children, the quality of life, and a thriving natural world. But this cannot be done by dreaming about the "local" economics of the 50s and 60s. Capitalism converts Earth's natural capital into toxic garbage because that's the fastest way to maximize profit. Once that monster enters the radar screen, then will the waiting at last be over.
Sioux Rose
BOYD: Excellent analysis. What is your solution? If there is no political will on the part of those in power to contain the greed of Wall st, or place effective controls into place, what is it that you feel would help restore the types of programs/balance active 50 years ago?
Thanks for your good words, Sioux Rose. Actually, I take a different viewpoint from David Korten. I don't see the 50s and 60s as an economic model that we should try to emulate, as golden as those years might appear in hindsight. The key to my posting was here: "The distinction he makes between the Wall Street economy and the Main Street economy is a false one." While admiring his vision, I don't think that Main Street can survive without Wall Street as long as capitalism continues. By "capitalism", I don't mean "markets". Markets have been with us since human history began as far as we can tell, but capitalism is another animal altogether. Capitalism depends on self-augmenting financial circulation and can't exist without financial institutions such as Wall Street to propel growth. In fact, capitalism itself requires constant growth which is why it is incompatible with the sustainable ecological practice that David and I both advocate. In order to sustain its current rate of growth, it must seek the easiest opportunities to make the fastest and largest profit. This is not due to "greed", but is the nature of the system. My major point is that many on the left think that capitalism can be transformed into a friend of the Earth, but I think this is self-delusion.
The problem that you describe of thinking we can tame capitalism to serve needs of all people may just be the lack of a term to describe the economic system we want. The terms capitalism and communism have been pretty discredited, and the right-wingers are working on making socialism into the next four letter word right now.
Any system can be made to work for the common people. Capitalism is somewhat dead but its supporters are working hard to revive it unlike supporters of communism in the past. If the left can expose the right for its own hypocrisies of supporting socialism, then the word can be saved. It's working in New York and socialism isn't being touched by most Republicans in the state.
They've been working on making socialism into a four letter word since the 50s, zmann, but they haven't pushed as hard on that as they did on 'communism', which they rightfully connected to the USSR.
I see 'communism' as a political system - one way of obtaining socialism. Democratic socialism (participation in elections) is another way.
I see socialism as an economic system, not a political system, in opposition to capitalism, and a system with very favorable social consequences.
We now have, for the first time in history, a senator who is a socialist - a democratic socialist - Bernie Sanders from Vermont -
and though he runs as an Independent, he'll be proud to confirm he's a socialist if you care to ask him.
And there are members of the House Progressive Caucus who's politics are as far left as Sanders, but who are not anxious to announce themselves as socialists for fear that the DLC will cut their political throats.
Democratic socialism is the political system being used successfully to replace capitalism with socialism in many Latin American countries today. This replacement is a gradual process, with the socialists doing a lot of compromising, attempting to avoid bloodshed whenever possible.
I guess my point is that 'socialism' is becoming, of its own weight, a more and more respected word in reality, and that is why the neocons are working overtime to discredit the dreaded 'S' word, as you say.
Sioux Rose
BOYD: Thank you for the response. I am of the same mind as you on this one. It would be wonderful if prosperity became a concept less attached to THINGS, particularly expensive status objects, like those that require the decimation of precious ecosystems, and instead began to attach worth to the intangibles, like good friends, free time, health, loving relatives, time to pursue one's talents and hobbies, etc. In other words an ethos that saw "wealth" in terms of the Grace of a simplicity that fulfilled the inner being/spirit, as opposed to a constant chase after all the appendages that testify to one's "image" in a pro-market world order.
Many of us understand this, however, if it became a more universally respected concept, nature could breathe easier, and ultimately, so could we.
Unfortunately we hear a lot about socialism from the right who criticize the banker bailouts as "Socialism".
Can one sell socialism in this reality?
So now you have to convince the majority of America that socialism for everybody, not just the "too big to fail" giants is the way to go. It sounds good to me but I am also a realist, not a mass mind deprogrammer.
The reality is that all systems are mixed. And if you insist on a Pure Socialism, you won't see it because systems evolve and you will never get a majority to impose a pure single system on America.
Your Ideal is an Ideal. OK, fine but an Ideal doesn't deliver the needs of our people.
a socialist web site or media will try to sell it for sure, but they are already believers and they don't change the system because Socialism has been demonized by the ruling class who keep it for themselves and call it "Free Market Capitalism".
South America is doin a good job changing and the world is turning to more aspects of Socialism now in getting away from the Wall street model.
My take on Socialism in America is an expansion on what a poster said a few days ago:
"There are two kinds of people, those who know they are Socialists and those who don't.
In America, those that don't know get it for themselves while those that do know just talk about it."
Brainwashing of the majority is hard to overcome.
America needs a new direction and a better system, but Americans expect a new way forward and a new name for it while Socialism is a worn out word with too much baggage and since all systems are mixed we need a new better mix.
I don't want to discourage your Ideal at all, but reality like evolution rules even revolution.
"My take on Socialism in America is an expansion on what a poster said a few days ago: There are two kinds of people, those who know they are Socialists and those who don't."
Thats one of the best one-liners I've ever seen on CD.
I think what s/he meant is that those who understand socialism need no convincing of its value and accept it, but those who are afraid of the word and reject it (because of negative propaganda) would certainly embrace it if they understood what socialism is really all about, because it covers all their needs.
"In America, those that don't know get it for themselves while those that do know just talk about it"
Could you expand on that, please? I'm not sure I understand your meaning.
"What's deceptively seductive about this approach is that it supports the central task of the ruling ideology, which is to impose a narrative which places the blame for the meltdown not on the system itself, but on the abuse of the system by "corrupt" bankers and corporate executives. That's why the nightly denunciations of "Wall Street greed" actually help prop up the system. This is part of the "purging process" necessary to a healthy capitalist system."
I second Sioux's opinion, Boyd - an excellent observation.
As you point out above, just one of their many tricks to preserve the capitalist deception.
Another was FDR's activities in the '30s - moving capitalism just far enough left to save it, then entering a war to make it bloom. Now they're feverishly wrapping up the undoing of FDR's leftist activities while extending their exploitation to its global outer limits.
Thanks for the support, port_lookout. The tactics we see practiced in the corporate media by, for instance, Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow - and believe me, I delight in their denunciations - actually serve several purposes in maintaining the ruling ideology. On one level, it gives more credibility to the rest of the news because we identify with the news caster. They also provide the illusion of real diversity which increases credibility as well. On another level, they act as a safety valve for our rage, which otherwise might overflow into the kind of activism that is threatening to corporate interests. As long as we're only told to write stern letters to our Congresspeople, the ruling elite is perfectly safe. And, finally, such denunciations are very effective at diverting anger from the system as a whole to scapegoated individuals such as Bernie Madoff or Wall Street bankers. Personalizing what is actually a systemic problem focuses on personal failure as the root cause of economic dysfunctions. It helps people blame themselves for bankruptcies and foreclosures which are the result of profit-making decisions by distant institutions. It is a very subtle but effective form of propaganda whose subtext is that the system as a whole is OK, so if you aren't succeeding, it's probably your own fault. That's part of the ideology I was trying to highlight in my posting.
Sioux Rose
BOYD: Another fine analysis! Bravo. I'd love to see people like you, Rich M, GW North and others on the talk shows. If true progressives and persons of vision ever had a chance to inform (or awaken) the American public, some of those presumed million sheep would quickly turn into quite a different animal! Perhaps an elephant stampede headed towards the Capital? (The comedy screen version shall be directed by the unusual artistic partnership of Mel Brooks and Howard Zinn. Michael Moore will be seated in the back with a large container of popcorn.)
I'll definitely buy a ticket for that one!
Boyd -- You touched on some of the "pollyannish" content of Korten that I was speaking of. However, although I don't have a copy of the book in front of me, I believe Korten delineated the points in your fourth paragraph at length in "When Corporations Rule the World". A good part of the book involved distinguishing between "markets" and "capitalism". He's more sophisticated than he appears here.
I don't know exactly what you'd call Korten (he believes in cooperatives on all levels). Perhaps he's not always consistent, but he's not an enabling "liberal". He's not a capitalist. It's clear from his work. He has some very important things to say in bringing the analysis of economics beyond the industrial stage. He's not "rigorous", which can be frustrating, but he knows it is time for us to act, and I believe in this he is correct.
I'm glad to hear that he makes the distinction between capitalism and markets. We constantly hear about the distinction between the "real" economy of producing goods to satisfy people's need and the "false" economy of financial speculation. But I think this distinction is deceptive and actually works to the advantage of those now in control of this economy. Unless we are willing to confront capitalism itself with its need for constantly expanding profit margins financed by credit, then regulation will simply be thrown out at the earliest opportunity just as the regulations from the 30s were thrown out during the Clinton administration.
However, I hope you're right that Korten not an enabling "liberal." Too much of the "left" wants to live in the illusion that we can have capitalism with a human face while the planet burns.
"Unless we are willing to confront capitalism itself with its need for constantly expanding profit margins financed by credit..."
That's exactly what Korten's earlier book is about.
Peace? With conservatives conserving war, racism, crime, lies, superstition, fear, jingoism, violence, plutocracy, etc.??
The author is correct on the basics of greed and materialism but he fails to discuss who has benefited the most from the age of oil, women. Hey, let’s perpetuate some stereotypes about the peaceful, loving, nurturing female and the violent, bestial male. Naturally I’m not buying it — plenty of women voted for Bush, and plenty of men didn’t vote for him. Probably the strongest and clearest anti-war voice in 2004 and 2008 was Ralph Nader, and hardly anyone male or female voted for him. Go figure. For the record, both my sisters voted for Bush, while my brother and I being in hopelessly red states voted for Ralph.
There’s something else the author is missing which is the real reason why there won't be a peace economy anytime soon. Some women love these knuckle dragging warmongers. I happen to live near an Army base. They’re the grunts and cannon-fodder — yes, there’s still a cavalry in the Army — the lowest of the expendable lower-class and working-class males. Since unlimited immigration has knocked the hell out of wages for unskilled labor, they don’t have a lot of good career choices. Quite a few haven’t made it back from Iraq. And you know what? Everyone of them has a wife. I saw the stories on the local news as they trickle in. Yes, it may come as a shock but women actually want these Neanderthals, and what’s worse — they breed with them like mad! The same could be said for other thuggish and gang-leader types. Peace lovers like me are losers according to them and that's why I chose to be a bachelor !
There are also quite well documented instances during WWII of women publicly shaming men who wouldn’t fight, goading them to own up to their male responsibilities to fight.
I’d also note that it was feminists who were raising a big stink before 9/11 about the Taliban in Afghanistan and what they did to women, effectively egging on the warrior types in this country to be “real men” and do something about it. Nowadays, these same feminists are quietly supporting bombing Afghanistan because their Obama boy is in power.
The more things don’t change the more they stay the same.
Maybe wars end when it’s the anti-war activists and conscientious objectors who attract the hot babe groupies. But I’m not holding my breath because I know that the average woman is just about as unevolved as the average man is. And when I go to the malls I can’t help but think we wouldn’t be having all these resource wars if women would just stop buying so much STUFF, most of which takes more petroleum to make.
Peace economy? Not a chance until the oil runs out.
Martian Bachelor -- I think you are missing the point. Korten is not saying leave everything to women. He's saying that a principle of life that is generally termed the "feminine" principle is unbalanced in relation to the "masculine" principle. We could easily call them something else - yin/yang...included in every individual.
But it is not necessary, in my opinion, to be fully conscious of the dual principles to see the necessity of what Korten in calling for.
I'm not against leaving good women in charge. With regards to feminine principle, sometimes I come across women who make it sound just as dangerous as masculine principle and then I don't know what to say.
I agree with the fundamentals Korten discusses but I get concerned about consumer spending as it relates to war. Women's hosiery and clothing generally require more oil compared to men's clothing. Another thing is cosmetics. Most cosmetics come from petroleum and that either comes from drilling or going to war with a nation rich in petroleum to get it. That's not to say that male hosiery doesn't exist or that there are no male cosmetics. They exist but are still not so frequent. If there were organic substitutes that women bought instead, then I couldn't blame them for the reasons we wage resource wars for oil. I still can't believe that most women chose Obama or Mccain over Nader or Mckinney while I voted for Nader.
I apologize if I sounded too harsh on women. I grew up meeting more macho gals and those who weren't macho expected too much macho from guys or else. That was where I got the bad feeling that women were pushing for the wars we wage. I haven't had pleasant encounters with army wives either. Some of them who knew I was a single male purposely hyped up their husbands' serving credentials.
I just don't see the path to peace economy until everyone changes the products they shop for. In the last two years, my place lost 5 local mom and pop stores to a couple of known giant retailers who are known supporters of the military. Maybe Korten's essay could provide the road to reversing that trend.