There’s little doubt in my mind that the three-legged stool economic model is flawed and needs replacement. Setting economic concerns as a priority above the environment when the environment is the grounds for all is irrational and adopting this never-ending growth model has had catastrophic consequences.
It has led to our elected people becoming the marionettes of the corporate king makers who pull their strings. It has led to abuse of the environment that we all rely upon for survival and it has led to systemic abuse throughout or societies. It has led to a sense of entitlement that ought not to exist at all.
When I read this article in the Orion magazine I agree whole heartedly with Derrick Jensen’s observations and his conclusion.
I’M CONTINUALLY stunned by how many seemingly sane people believe you can have infinite economic growth on a finite planet. Perpetual economic growth and its cousin, limitless technological expansion, are beliefs so deeply held by so many in this culture that they often go entirely unquestioned. Even more disturbing is the fact that these beliefs are somehow seen as the ultimate definition of what it is to be human: perpetual economic growth and limitless technological expansion are what we do. — The Tyranny of Entitlement: A lesson in limits
It seems obvious to me that until we recognize that the crisis in the way we humans govern ourselves is due to viewing ourselves as being separate and apart from the environment that sustains all, no real changes will be made.
What’s your opinion?
Matej
January 31, 2011
I agree with you. The concept of perpetual economic growth should be replaced with the concept of sustainable development. To do so, society should first reject the notion of gross domestic product (GDP) as a relevant indicator. Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel laureate economist, has written about how GDP is a poor indicator of economy as it does not measure the degradation of the environment and hence depreciation of natural capital.
What you measure is what you will strive for. If you think that GDP increase is a good thing then you will strive for economic growth and neglect sustainability.
timethief
January 31, 2011
The entire article resonated for me.
“And what, then, is gross national product? It is a measure of this conversion of the living to the dead. The more quickly the living world is converted into dead products, the higher the GNP. These simple equations are complicated by the fact that when GNP goes down, people often lose jobs. No wonder the world is getting killed.”
Lisa
January 31, 2011
I believe in capitalism, but if there is a good chance that what someone is doing is going to pollute the environment or kill off endangered species, no thank you. There are people in the USA who want to drill off our shores even after the oil spill and people who want to drill in the arctic wildlife preserve, not caring if they cause animals to go extinct. Unless they make much more strong precautions, I don’t think it’s worth it.
timethief
January 31, 2011
Life ultimately depends upon (clean air, land, water ….) and once a forest is gone or a lake is gone, etc. it’s gone forever — no tree farm or manmade lake can restore the ecology. The planet and our cultures are controlled by elites of power mad individuals and corporations defending their limitless rights to profit from conversion of the living to the dead.
“The power of the few to exploit, enslave, and destroy the many is the sick theme that runs through the history of civilization. Throwing off this yoke has been what the great Liberators (like Jesus) have been about from the beginning. When will we get the power mad few off our back? And how? That is the basic Koan of human history. If we do not solve it, they will destroy the Earth and most or all life on it.” — mike k on Jan 08, 2011
Nick Grimshawe
January 31, 2011
Perpetual economic growth is not sustainable on this planet for sure,it is possible if we can migrate industry into outer space, a vision that would free this poor over burdened planet and give it a chance to rest and recover. Since we haven’t got to the point of the science fiction vision we need to find a way to live in harmony here. In that regard, there are many trends a foot, like the 100 mile diet, and others that point us in the right direction.
For me, it’s as simple as growing some stuff in my garden using organic methods. Now it we all did that…
timethief
January 31, 2011
@Nick
I don’t support feeding the notion that it’s okay to allow an elite few to become planet destroy and base our economic sys and socities on that. I’m not against space developemnt. But without addrssing the root cause of our problem moving off planet may amount to exporting the never ending growth cycle.
When it comes to garedning we’ve been on that track for years. Aside from producing an abundance of food, gardening is therapeutic and joy-filled. I love it and hope others will join us and also make room for growing things in their lives.
Love and peace,
TiTi
Sandra Lee
February 9, 2011
I agree that perpetual economic growth is not sustainable. Seeing the inconsistencies in our thinking can help us go to the root and unwind them. The solution is to not participate – as much as feasible – in the system. But most people don’t really know what that means. Education is of paramount importance.
Thanks for illuminating this issue so clearly.
timethief
February 9, 2011
@Sandra Lee
We sure have a long way to go because the entire monetary system is based on debt. money = debt (that’s not backed by gold or silver or any commodity reserves). Good video here. >
Education is required but most North Americans and Europeans like us have as much information as we need right now to act to change their lifestyle and reduce our individual footprint by dropping out or participating less in the consumer driven model. My husband and I had enough information to do so over 30 years ago. However, there is a strong sense of entitlement and most people do NOT WANT to make the big changes that include giving up living an affluent lifestyle. Let’s hope that changes.
Thanks for commenting. I have been preoccupied with not one but now two family members who are facing very serious health issues. It’s hard to see those I raised who are a decade younger as ‘terminal”. It’s hard to face the reality of impermanence and let go of my attachments to the desire that they outlive me and my aversion to them passing over first. . SIGH
Love and Peace,
TiTi
nothingprofound
February 10, 2011
TT-since I can no longer shout you, I want to express my concern here for your health. I hope you’ll be feeling better soon.
timethief
February 10, 2011
Thanks.
Jean
February 13, 2011
I guess we each have different definitions of personal sustainable living. I no longer sew clothing, because I’ve become a lazy bum. But still remain car-free for past quarter century and will continue when I move to a new place…a few blocks away. It might sound like hard living to move alot of my stuff by your bikes but am hoping it will be a simple adventure.
I have noticed since living in my new home city that alot of people situated in the downtown area where there’s way more immediate access to local transit, shopping, etc., still think I’m nuts not to have a car. Very different from Vancouver, BC or even Toronto where there is a ton of people who use the subway system because they don’t have a car.
But what can one say…the local economy is ruled by the energy industry. Change can take an awfully long time.
I don’t really live a consciously environmentally sustainable life. I just live a frugal life which some folks find hard to believe but in the end, my possessions will be SO modest compared to many folks. At the end of our life, our possessions are severely reduced. I think of my dearie’s mother in nursing home before she died: she had 1 closet of her clothing and chest of drawers with her stuff at nursing home. That was all.
I’m not sure if Gulf of Mexico oil spill taught many folks anything. At least here, drivers continue to get angry over congested roads when they are the cause… Hmmm, yea.