essence of both democracy and the market is choice. Both offer the citizen-consumer the right to adopt or reject options, whether candidates or commodities, politicians or products. To reelect or to vote out of power, to hire or fire, to change management or to shift investment — this capacity to change or reverse or alter or switch policies, people and products — is the principal feature of the culture of choice on which the consumerist consensus rests. It informs both our political system and our economic order. Both are rooted in pluralism, and what might be called (perhaps awkwardly) the principle of reversibility. We have come to believe that nothing is (out should be) forever. Everything can be exchanged or discarded. Such a principle, however convenient in the short term, cannot anchor a civilization. Indeed, it undermines the chief imperative of all previous civilizations: to endure. Whether ruled by religious orders or royal lineages, previous civilizations have generally acted under the sign of stewardship. Native Americans, to cite but one example, often spoke of organizing their society with the ‘seventh unborn generation’ in mind. Past leaders or rulers tended to think in terms of centuries, not in terms of quarterly earnings reports or electoral cycles.
Octavio Paz has said that ‘while primitive civilizations lasted for millennia, modern civilizations, which idolize change, explode within two or three centuries.’ Czeslaw Milosz worries that the nihilistic indifference resulting from the constant flux of change has left Western civilization running an exhausting race ‘between disintegration and creativity… hardly surviving from decade to decade.’
Nog voordat het de kans heeft gekregen om te rijpen door van zijn fouten te leren, is datgene wat gecreëerd is al gedateerd op het moment dat het verschijnt. Zodoende kan de mens zichzelf niet bijbenen, nu de mensheid wordt geconfronteerd met een ernstige systeem-crisis, die niet oplosbaar is door het toepassen van meer van hetzelfde. Wie dit niet beseft, begrijpt zijn tijd niet, realiseert zich niet dat de:
nihilistic, alienated consumer society might well trigger a revolt of considerabele force and populair appeal.
To avert this possibility, the market and democracy will have to be bound. They mus be circumscribed not by conservative values that preserve the part, but by conserving values that preserve the future. For example, the culture of choice must not be allowed to embrace processes that would irreversibly alter and transform the core of life itself, through tinkering with the coding of DNA, or by continuing to destroy the rainforests, which will ultimately strip the planet of its diverse genetic heritage. These essential processes of life must be regarded as a sanctuary, a sacred preserve of the essence of life.
If we are to salvage a livable world from the new one that is emerging and avoid the growth mania that may well make civilization itself the grand loser of the next millennium (de 21ste eeuw. svh) we must rethink the rules of political economy and the global balance of power… We cannot permit ours to become an age that pushes, and perhaps fatally transgresses, the limits of the human condition — a condition bounded in all previous civilizations by biological borders and what Ivan Illich has called the self-limiting ‘earthy virtue’ of place.
The great paradox of a global consumer democracy is that the right to pleasure and happiness, the right to choice in the present, may all be a toxic elixer we are forcing our children to drink. If man, the marginal parasite, turns the earth into a dead artifact, the dream of material pleasure will have murdered life itself. In order to survive the triumph of our secular ideals, we need a new definition of the sacred.
The suppression of the sacred comes from a denial of spiritual values and ideas that elevate humanity and teach that there are things that are more precious than life itself. That fact alone makes those things sacred,
aldus de inmiddels 78-jarige Franse intellectueel Jacques Attali, ‘vanaf mei 1981 bijzonder raadgever van president Mitterrand,’ en ‘in 2008 door president Sarkozy benoemd tot voorzitter van een denkgroep die economen en denkers uit verschillende richtingen samenbracht,’ waarbij ‘één van de rapporteurs van de conclusies de jonge Emmanuel Macron' was. Attali ‘gaf ook raadgevingen aan François Hollande,' de sociaal-democratische oud-president van Frankrijk. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Attali
‘De onderdrukking van het heilige komt’ inderdaad door de ‘ontkenning van spirituele waarden en denkbeelden die de mensheid verheffen,’ en de mens ‘leert dat er dingen zijn die kostbaarder zijn dan het leven zelf.’ Maar als gevolg van de verblindende verheerlijking van het materialisme is er een eind gekomen aan alles dat voorheen als ‘heilig’ werd beschouwd. Door de verafgoding van de materie met haar geloof in nut en efficiency als hoogste waarden, is de westerling een doodlopende weg ingeslagen, zoals momenteel op politiek, economisch, cultureel, militair en financieel gebied blijkt. Gezien het verlies van nagenoeg alle oorlogen na 1945, en de toenemende economische macht van Azië, kan zonder overdrijven gesteld worden dat het Westen, onder aanvoering van de Washington en Wall Street, een reus op lemen voeten is geworden, waarvan de
In the summer of 2007, as the military and political situation of Iraq steadily worsened, popular support of President Bush sank to its lowest levels. Unlike the classical totalitarian regimes of Hitler and Mussolini — which were toppled by military defeat and, most crucially, vanished shortly thereafter, leaving few traces — inverted totalitarianism will likely survive military defeat and public scorn of its leader. The system is not dependent upon his particular persona. That the system will survive his retirement, would survive even if the Democrats were to become the majority party in control of both the presidency and Congress, something that has not occurred since the Carter administration. Consequently, the fixation upon Bush obscures the real problem. The political role of corporate power, the corruption of the political and representative processes by the lobbying industry, the expansion of executive power at the expense of constitutional limitations, and the degradation of political dialogue promoted by the media are the basics of the system, not excrescences (excrementen. svh) upon it. The system would remain in place even if the Democratic Party attained a majority; and should that circumstance arise, the system will set tight limits to unwelcome changes, as is foreshadowed in the timidity (vrees. svh) of current Democratic proposals for reform. In the last analysis the much-lauded stability and conservatism of the American system owe nothing to lofty ideals, and everything to the irrefutable fact that it is shot through (doordrenkt. svh) with corruption and awash in contributions primarily from wealthy and corporate donors. When a minimum of a million dollars is required of House candidates and elected judges, and when patriotism is for the draft-free to extol and for the ordinary citizen to serve, in such times it is a simple act of bad faith to claim that politics-as-we-now-know-it can miraculously cure the evils which are essential to its very existence.
Net als tijdens de ondergang van het Pax Romana is het Amerikaanse Rijk momenteel vergiftigd door corruptie in de vorm van nepotisme, opportunisme, conformisme, oorlogszucht, en nihilisme, ‘de griezeligste van alle gasten,’ zoals Nietzsche het laatste omschreef. Zelfs de mainstream media die tot taak hebben de macht te controleren, zijn een vitaal en onmisbaar onderdeel in dit corrumperingsproces. Hoe totalitair het huidige neoliberale systeem is blijkt wel uit het feit dat, in de woorden van Sheldon Wolin:
At the critical moment when a volatile economy and widening class disparities require a government responsive to popular needs, government has become increasingly unresponsive; and, conversely, when an aggressive state stands most in need of being restrained, democracy proved an ineffectual check. A public fearful of terrorist attacks and bewildered by a war based on deceit is unable to function as the rational conscience of the American state, capable of checking the impulse to adventurism and the systematic evasion of constitutional constraints. A politics of dumbed-down public discourse and low voter turnout combines with a dynamic economy of stubborn inequalities to produce the paradox of a powerful state and a failing democracy.
But is it only democracy that is failing? Every day brings fresh evidence that American power is being challenged throughout the world, that its imperial sway is weakening, that its global economic hegemony is a thing of the past, and that it has been sucked into an unwinnable and interminable ‘war against terrorism.’ Is failing empire the opportunity for a democratic revival, or does that failure leave intact the tendencies toward inverted totalitarianism?
A democracy failing in what ways? What was democracy supposed to bring into the world that was not there before? A short answer might be this: democracy is about the conditions that make it possible for ordinary people to better their lives by becoming political beings and by making power responsive to their hopes and needs. What is at stake in democratic politics is whether ordinary men and women can recognize that their concerns are best protected and cultivated under a regime whose actions are governed by principles of commonality, equality, and fairness, a regime in which taking part in politics becomes a way of staking out and sharing in a common life and its forms of self-fulfilment. Democracy is not about bowling together but about managing together those powers that immediately and significantly affect the lives and circumstances of others and one’s self. Exercising power can be humbling when the consequences are palpable rather than statistical — and rather different from wielding power at a distance, at, say, an ‘undisclosed bunker somewhere in northern Virginia.’
What is at stake today is the choice between the two forms of politics, Superpower and democracy. The contrasting nature of those two forms was best revealed by the invasion of Iraq. Beyond those stark and familiar facts about the war — the poor planning that preceded it, the hapless attempts to administer the country following the fall of Saddam, the sacrifice of American lives to a shameful cause, and the incalculable harm done to the country and its inhabitants — there was the political loss of nerve among Democrats, the press, and the punditry, a failure so profound as to call into question the health of the political system as a whole. That failure extended to all but a minority of the citizenry; the vast majority waved an occasional flag and then, when possible, heeded the advice of their leader to ‘fly, consume, spend.’
While there are many lessons to be learned from the war’s debacle, there is one that is crucial to any future which democracy, especially participatory democracy, may have. It concerns the primary importance of truth telling and the destructive effects of lying.
schatte in 2002 dat als het huidige tempo van vernietiging van de biosfeer door mensen door zou gaan, de helft van alle levende soorten op aarde binnen 100 jaar zou zijn uitgestorven. Belangrijker is dat de snelheid waarmee soorten momenteel uitsterven naar schatting 100 tot 1000 keer hoger ligt dan de gemiddelde uitstervingssnelheid die tot nu toe in de evolutionaire geschiedenis van het leven op aarde is waargenomen, en wordt geschat op 10 tot 100 keer sneller dan welke eerdere massale uitsterving dan ook, aldus Wikipedia.
https://nl.frwiki.wiki/wiki/Extinction_des_espèces
Op 15 maart 2022 zette het Wereld Natuur Fonds uiteen dat:
A mass extinction is a short period of geological time in which a high percentage of biodiversity, or distinct species — bacteria, fungi, plants, mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish, invertebrates — dies out. In this definition, it’s important to note that, in geological time, a ‘short’ period can span thousands or even millions of years. The planet has experienced five previous mass extinction events, the last one occurring 65.5 million years ago which wiped out the dinosaurs from existence. Experts now believe we’re in the midst of a sixth mass extinction.
What’s causing the sixth mass extinction?
Unlike previous extinction events caused by natural phenomena, the sixth mass extinction is driven by human activity, primarily (though not limited to) the unsustainable use of land, water and energy use, and climate change. According to the Living Planet Report, 30% of all land that sustains biodiversity has been converted for food production. Agriculture is also responsible for 80% of global deforestation and accounts for 70% of the planet’s freshwater use, devastating the species that inhabit those places by significantly altering their habitats. It’s evident that where and how food is produced is one of the biggest human-caused threats to species extinction and our ecosystems. To make matters worse, unsustainable food production and consumption are significant contributors to greenhouse gas emissions that are causing atmospheric temperatures to rise, wreaking havoc across the globe. The climate crisis is causing everything from severe droughts to more frequent and intense storms. It also exacerbates the challenges associated with food production that stress species, while creating conditions that make their habitats inhospitable. Increased droughts and floods have made it more difficult to maintain crops and produce sufficient food in some regions. The intertwined relationships among the food system, climate change, and biodiversity loss are placing immense pressure on our planet.
Why should we care about mass extinction?
Currently, the species extinction rate is estimated between 1,000 and 10,000 times higher than natural extinction rates—the rate of species extinctions that would occur if we humans were not around. While extinctions are a normal and expected part of the evolutionary process, the current rates of species population decline and species extinction are high enough to threaten important ecological functions that support human life on Earth, such as a stable climate, predictable regional precipitation patterns, and productive farmland and fisheries.
If we do not course correct, we will continue to lose life-sustaining biodiversity at an alarming rate. These losses will, at best, take decades to reverse, resulting in a planet less able to support current and future generations.
https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/what-is-the-sixth-mass-extinction-and-what-can-we-do-about-it
Als de huidige dwingelandij van de al decennialang rijkelijk gesubsidieerde Nederlandse boeren ook maar iets aantoont is het dat de ‘suppression of the sacred comes from a denial of spiritual values and ideas,’ in dit geval door de boeren die hun financiële belangen vooral door het Christen Democratisch Appel hebben laten beschermen. De boeren en hun CDA, die beiden de schepping van hun luchtgod aan het verwoesten zijn, voelen zich daarvoor geenszins verantwoordelijk, hetgeen opnieuw demonstreert hoe vervreemd de ‘Verlichte’ mens is geraakt van zijn directe omgeving, van zijn nageslacht en van zichzelf. En omdat de mens vervreemd is van het leven zelf, is niets meer ‘heilig.’ De al eerder geciteerde John Horvat, vice president van de ‘American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property and the author of Return to Order,’ schreef in 2017 hierover ‘The Desire to Be Ordinary,’ waarin hij opmerkte dat:
There is nothing sacred anymore because sacred things impose respect. People are expected to see the sacred as special. People should admire, honor, and serve all that is sacred.
It is a sacrifice that most today are unwilling to make. Instead, they want to be ordinary, and they want to surround themselves with the ordinary. To their minds, the comforts of being ordinary far outweigh the nobility of heroism. A sacred duty triggers no sympathetic resonance in the hearts of those that have opted for the unbridled pursuit of material happiness. An I-don’t-want-to-be-a-hero mentality prevails.
Ironically, those who reject the sacred have no problem elevating their ordinariness to the status of something sacred. They are all too willing to turn profane pleasures into sacred entitlements. Thus, sports, entertainment, choices and consumption are considered sacred. Tragically, even some sins are made ‘sacred’ and untouchable.
However, as society decays, even these ordinary things turned sacred begin to come under attack. Even the mild exclusiveness that these ordinary pleasures entail proves intolerable to those who hate the sacred.
https://www.crisismagazine.com/2017/nothing-sacred-anymore
In zijn geprezen boek The Crisis Of Our Age uit 1941 — heruitgegeven in 1992 — zet de Russisch-Amerikaanse geleerde Pitirim Sorokin uiteen dat:
Whereas the medieval chroniclers viewed the whole of human history as the realization of an inscrutable divine plan, our historians view it mainly sub specie (in het licht van. svh) of the New Yorker or Esquire, of the Freudiaan libido, of Marxian economic factors, of Paretian ‘residues,’ and other biological, economic and cosmic forces. The entire pageant of human history turns out to be nothing but an incessant interplay of cosmic rays, sunspots, climatic and geographic changes, and biological forces (drives, instincts; conditioned, unconditioned…) — forces in whose hands man is as but clay, and which stage all the historical events and create all the cultural values. Man himself, as an embodiment of super-organic energy, of thought, of consciousness, of conscience, of rational volition (wilskracht. svh), plays a negligible role in the unfolding of this drama. In our ‘scientific’ histories he is relegated to the back stage as a mere plaything of blind forces — a plaything, moreover, stripped of virtually every element of attractiveness. While he is deluding himself with the belief that he controls his own destiny, he is, in fact, but the puppet of a blind biological evolution that dictates his actions and thus directs the course of his history.
With the degradation of truth, man is dragged down from his lofty pedestal as a seeker after truth, as an absolute value. to the level of an animal who tends, by means of various ‘ideologies,’ ‘rationalizations,’ and ‘derivations,’ to exalt his greed, his appetites and his egoism. When he does this unwittingly, he becomes a simpleton; when he deliberately resorts to such rationalizations, appealing to ‘truth’ and other high-sounding names, he becomes a downright hypocrite who employs ‘ truth’ as a mere smoke screen in order to justify his ‘residue’ complexes. In either case the result is disastrous to the dignity of and to the cause of truth and science.
All this facilitates an explosive upsurge of man’s elemental forces and leads men to treat their fellows, individually or in groups, as mere material atoms, electron-proton combinations, or biological organisms. If man is only an atom or electron or organism, why stand on ceremony in dealing with him? (We do not hesitate to scotch (doden. svh) a snake or crush an atom!) The halo of sanctity having been stripped from man and his values, human relationships and socio-cultural life degenerate into a savage struggle (witness the endless succession of wars and revolutions!) whose issue is decided by sheer physical force. In this struggle, many values are destroyed — among them those of sensory science, or materialistic truth, itself.
Meer hierover de volgende keer.
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten