After an absence of some months - the consequence of starting graduate school in late middle age - I hope to be back for at least a while. With the presidential campaign behind us, we're entering into the truly important part of America's political cycle - the time when citizens can consider starting something new as an alternative to the two major parties. I hope to be a part of that conversation - and that movement.
The following is this week's contribution to the (Chester) Village News.
I'm writing this on the morning after Thanksgiving. Before the mood fades, I'll murmur a quick
word of thanks for The New York
Times. In an era of dying print dailies,
the Times continues offering excellent
national and international news; extensive reportage on the arts,
entertainment, and books; great sports coverage (including hometown coverage of
the lamentable Jets); and the best op-ed page in print.
One factual item in this piece comes by way of Nicholas
Kristof, a Times columnist with far
more time and access to research than a full-time grad student writing for a
county weekly. The argument of this
piece, however, is my own. Complaints
should be addressed care of the Village
News.
A week before Election Day, the irrelevance of American
politics came home with a vengeance. By
hitting America's media center - Manhattan - SuperStorm Sandy declared, in
terms impossible to ignore, the clear and present danger presented by our rapidly changing climate. An issue which never arose during the
presidential campaign forcibly established its priority on the nation's agenda.
Of course, not
everyone - not even everyone in the devastated areas of New Jersey and New York
- will concede the "inconvenient truth" of what the scientific
community has been telling us for decades.
But then, there were people in Britain and America arguing that Hitler was "just another
politician" as his armies captured Paris.
So long at this planet has humans living on it, we will
always have our deniers and our cranks.
The rest of us have serious work to do.
Global climate change is one of several enormous challenges already
reshaping the world in which we live.
Peak energy is another such challenge. Despite the discovery of new deposits of oil
and natural gas - and the deployment of radical and reckless technologies to
extract petrochemicals from tar sands and deep rock - the rapid rise of demand
in East and South Asia guarantees that demand will outstrip supply, resulting
in rapidly rising prices for conventional forms of energy.
In our own country, there's a worrying increase in the
disparity of wealth. In a recent column,
Kristof cited statistics indicating that
the top 1% of Americans now control more wealth than the bottom 90%.
Think about that because, like me, you're very likely in
that "bottom" 90%.
The prosperous and growing middle class - which propelled
America's rise to global power in the mid-20th century - is seriously at risk. If the rich and powerful maintain control of
our political system - and continue using that control to change the rules to
benefit themselves and their heirs - we're at real risk of losing the America
we have known.
And then, of course, there's the rise of China as our global
economic, political and military rival.
None of these trends - climate change, peak energy, the
endangered middle class, or the rivalry of China - was inevitable. Even now, none is absolutely
irreversible. But the way forward will
require us to re-examine many of the assumptions we grew up with - whether we
grew up in the 1950's or the 1990's.
We could start by recognizing the need to redefine the way
we think about economics.
Almost without exception, Americans identify with
capitalism, broadly defined. But
capitalism has not always meant what it means today. When Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations, he described capitalism in terms of "free
markets" - which, by definition, meant a system in which many small
enterprises competed for customers and dollars (or, for Smith, shillings,
pounds and guineas).
Published in 1776, Smith's magnum opus described an
emerging system which could increase wealth and improve society's ability to
provide necessities and basic comforts to people still living in agrarian
poverty.
In 2012, capitalism has evolved into a system - not for
providing people with necessities and
basic comforts - but for marketing to consumers
an endless stream of new, "improved"
and essentially unnecessary stuff,
most of which will shortly end up in closets, attics, storage units - and
landfills.
The creation and transport of this stuff - mostly from Asia - enriches a few large corporations, while
funneling increasing numbers of Americans into part-time retail jobs without
benefits.
Under modern capitalism - "consumer capitalism" -
America no longer makes things and grows rich.
It borrows in order to buy things, and grows poor - while enriching our
global rivals.
In the process consuming vast amounts of energy, thus
contributing to global climate change.
The challenge facing us is to develop a new capitalism based
on thrift and sustainability. Our politicians
gave us no opportunity to vote for this change at the polls, but between now
and Christmas, we have an opportunity to vote with our dollars.
Think about that before you go online or rush off to the
mall.
Every dollar we spend is a vote for a certain kind of
future. What sort of future will you be voting for?
