Off Topic Political Debate

That I can agree with. Most people try to improve their lot but are not about to start a revolution as you say

 

I think it is clear that the present economic order worldwide keeps people tied down serving a system that seeks to increase profit in the public sector and reduce cost in the state sectors.

It is not a necessity though. As I think Toby has put it people are basically serfs in another form in this order.

There is no need for this form of work ethic which came to the fore in the UK for example during the Victorian order and was given credence by associating with Protestant values.

The ruling powers always have used religion to justify inequalities.

People are kept in servitude too by a system of lifelong debt in the UK linked to house ownership via mortgages.

I am sorry if that makes me appear as a raging revolutionary leftie but we dont need to live like this.

I will even go as far as to say that we have got it very wrong as a human race if we think this is the best way to live and develop as a species.

 

Well put Yorkie. I agree we're not about to start a revolution (my knees wouldn't be up to it anyway) but there does seem to be a general air of resignation and getting on with stuff rather than having any huge aspirations right now. As always, I can only speak for my peers though

 

People are under a massive cosh working just to live. I remember when i first moved back to London in the early 80s at the start of the housing boom. I had barely enough to live after paying the mortgage and council tax and I had a half decent job in Education. My godson has virtually no chance of buying a house/flat in London,.... He has to pay high rent and can barely save a few pounds a month..... add in the cost of travel. He has a good job in banking too.

Is this really what life needs to be like?

I cannot tell you how much freer it feels now to have paid off all loans and to live on less but to live well.

I wont bore you all again with the Bhutan example. But in Bhutan personal happiness is valued above materialism... and who needs materialism when the environment is so good?

 

I do find that some of the options put forward to how the world system needs to change rather fanciful. If one wants things to run differently you have to change the entire world system of economics. The Chinese as an example have brought huge numbers of their population out of poverty by adopting an expansion of the free market that people in the west have used successfully over the years. If you wish to see all this change you have to look at world government, and that will not be popular in any country which wishes to have 100% of control in it's own hands. Trade is now carried out around the entire globe with countries relying on others to provide what they need. The UK imports lots of electricity from France because it has to cover spikes in demand. Turn all the street lights out at 10.00 pm as happens here to save on the demand, but what sort of complaints would there be about the increase in crime? As far as I can see many of us would like to see a different world order, but no one seems to have any idea about how you can have the transition from where we are today to this different condition.

 

Well put.... I am very aware that it all tends to fail in proposing a way forward. Perhaps major catastrophe or something of that ilk will force people to rethink.

The current relationship between Govts and multi-nationals perpetuates the status quo.

For me there has to be a redistribution of resources so that society is fairer. (This is no politic of envy as I dont want any thank you)

 

Under any system that I have known there are winners and losers. Maybe this just replicates the world since day one. The system as operated in the UK seems to satisfy the majority of the inhabitants so we carry on with the status quo. I think we have a workable balance between opportunity and safeguards for the most unfortunate. I do however believe the UK population has an unhealthy obsession with material goods and particularly buying on credit.

 

Worth noting too that we are now tied in to a global world order so any consideration re change needs to look at the big picture......

 

This is a great post - thought provoking and interesting.
Going to pop to the shops and buy some unnecessary material items before I think of how to reply

 

It seems to me that there are two facets. First is the world we are actually living in and second the world we would choose.
I cannot see how it would be possible to move significantly from the type of world we are currently in. Inequalities are so massive and if you were actually wanting to live in a world where say the richest were only twice as well off as the poorest I suspect everyone's standard of living would be not much better than a typical third world country today. The rich countries and corporations would never allow the adjustment needed - nor would the people in any of those countries - think how hard it is for the UK today to give 2% in foreign aid without howls of protest. Today's world too relies on wars and religions to keep it going. But having said that I totally agree that for most people - even in the rich countries life is mostly a form of servitude. Don't imagine the rich or bankers live any better lives either - to maintain their status amongst friends and family they are under enormous pressure to continue as they are. Does anyone imagine the life of a trader on the stock exchange floor is remotely pleasant. Sure they have ferraris and porches and consume caviare and champagne -but so what? To this day my best car was my little old mini that I had in my mid twenties - I loved that car. Champagne -big deal just fizzy sweet water with a bit of fruit in it. Things like that are meaningless without the social ooohs and aaaahs that go with it - but they are shallow treasure for shallow people.

The second facet is harder. It involves thinking what you would actually do with your life if you were born into a society where food clothing and shelter were automatically provided and where nobody cared who had a little bit more or less.This society would still have to find a way of creating that food, clothing and shelter and of distributing it - these are essential to life so come first. Let's assume goodwill on the part of everyone so that we all spent the amount of time we needed to in producing those items and also that doing this took up a relatively small part of your time.
What else do you do? Do you stroll around enjoying the scenery; do you sit meditating or discussing interesting things. If so - is that all?
If it is not then you will want to have other things - but these will necessitate work by someone to provide them. As soon as you get to this point you begin to encroach on today's world again - albeit in only a little way first. Without serious industry and investment you will not have the benefits of health and education services. Nor will you be protected if someone decides they want to bully you for any reason whether on an individual or collective basis. Suddenly you are talking about schools and higher education, health and welfare serives, utilities provision, police, fire crews and defence.
The hardest part of this second scenario was glossed over to begin with as provision of the essentials even for 8 billion people would be a massive undertaking.
I fear there is no utopia - either starting from where we now are or beginning from scratch.

 

Thanks for this Lenny....


Some comments re the remarks in bold above

I do agree that materialism for the sake of its own end is so limiting and shallow

A life with a better balance is probably what can be gained. People work so hard and so many hours and then rush around madly trying to get all the pleasure they need.

Work will always be needed.... but work that is more directly linked with fulfillment is so much more meaningful. The pioneers of the technological revolution saw robots and computers taking away the need to work such long hours etc.... But as a species we have just made ourselves do other questionable work in those long hours.

I would rather my hard work went into creating a better world for us all and if that is health and welfare.... yes!

Utopia as an external state is not probably achievable.!. but I enjoy working to make the world a better place.... we can all ... (I was on a course with the Finance Director of a Company in the construction industry some years back and his work aim was little different to mine: To make a positive difference for people..). Stockbroker, teacher, entrepreneur, Shop assisitant ; we can all do our bit...

 

A better balance is maybe an achievable ideal but only once people lower their material expectations. Once we had children my wife stayed at home - she was a house wife and proud of it. Americans call it "homemaker" sometimes to lessen the pejorative connotation of housewife but call it what you will we both believed in it (and had my wife been the major "earner" I would have happily swapped roles)
My children though return to work after having babies. They say it is different now - but it is not - we just went without things we could not afford as we did - and do - believe that children need a steady loving guiding parent in their lives. Nowadays it is about material things

 

Well that would be a great starting point.... that is how it was in the UK and other post-industrial countries up to the late 60s when the liberation of women as an economic force meant they went to work full time and the child care generation developed. My wife only worked part- time and that has been great... But she works long hours for three days a week.. and... enjoys it... so we both finally have a good balance in our lives...

 

Elsewhere the Protestant work ethic has been mentioned but this has changed into a 'consume ethic' or rather a 'lifestyle ethic' in which the focus has shifted more away from the process of work itself towards the 'rewards'. In the 19th Century people like Ford Maddox Brown and Thomas Carlyle were giving work itself (regardless how menial it was) an almost heroic nature. Nowadays people look more at the rewards (the big cars etc.), and are not really concerned how they were earned (if at all). Since the 80s the media of the UK. has helped this process by an unhealthy obsession with the lifestyles of so called prominent people (like the Victoria Beckhams of this World) who have become promis based on next to nothing.

 

I've just been to Tescos to sort out my mobile phone as the two year contract at £12.50 per month was up. My choice was to have a sim only at £7.50 per month or a brand new phone at £8.50 per month (2 year contract). It is obviously not as good as an iPhone but does the job for me.

The young assistant said there was tremendous pressure on school kids to have the latest £600 iPhone or else they run the risk of being bullied at school. One of the worst examples of consumerism.

 

Content with their lot means content in their situation which doesn't mean already reached their goal. Life has to be a series of goals and challenges to achieve at least in my mind. A system that stops striving is a system without any meaning but to exist which to me takes us below the intellect of most animals maybe the amoeba would provide the perfect example in the everybodys equal society?

 

I quite like some bits of the arab system where families are closer though also at times can resort to medieval values I can't abide. Prominent wealthy families build properties in a small community for family members withing a large plot. This takes away the beholden to banks as we are in the UK. I would far rather we were beholden to family trusts in order to supply future generations with a more rewarding life dedicated to work for work rather than work for profit though profit is an essential part, prefer it to be nice to have ie secure in knowledge basic needs are covered by the family.

 

Work for its own sake is no better than work for profit or reward in my book. The protestant work ethic was loathsome. Work is a necessary part of life because things NEED to be done and that requires work - but to hold it up as an ideal in itself is futile.
We should try to enjoy each moment of our lives and that ought to be true of most forms of work. Where work itself is dangerous such as down mines it should be an objective of society to eliminate the need for that by other means - finding alternatives to say coal - or finding machinery to do life shortening work.
A person who can be happy in whatever they are doing from moment to moment will never regret "wasting" time. On a personal note (sorry Cologne) I can say that when you are living with terminal illness then it is the ONLY way to live - there is nothing more annoying than the people who tell you that you have to be positive - but on the other hand you do in fact have to extract something good out of every moment you have. It is easy for people with expectations of years ahead - you can make plans and look forward to future events - when that is not the case then you need to be aware of today.

 

Maybe we should try to define what 'work' is Leo. I know it sounds obvious but what is the difference between that and 'play'. If the object of the thing is the work itself and not the 'reward' then it is work imo. I think a good doctor would rather save his patient and lose his fee, rather than the other way around - though ideally he would want both. If my only object is to move money from here to there - like in gambling on cards, then is that really work ? My own definition would be that something should be produced that was not there before and that this 'something' should also be usefull to others. The question of an objective criteria of how this work should be rewarded ie. on what basis - hours spent working, responsibility, usefullness, time spent training for something, etc. is just as interesting. Under what wharped sense of priorities can a footballer earn more in a week than a nurse in a year ?