20 September 2012

Capitalism, Libertarianism and other myths

I obviously agree with the ability to say to a boss or any authority figure 'no, it's not my choice' or even 'no it's not my need'... And yes, I sound a bit like a Buddhist on cranky pills.
To me the KEY issue is a little more fundamental to the continuation of life and the under pinning moral imperatives.
I look at it like freedom of speech we nominally have that right to express our views BUT it's the HOW we use/abuse that right that is determined by greater imperative(s)that is the important defining factor.

ergo we have the right to jump on a plane buy BS products for PERSONAL conditioned illusionary happiness. The question is SHOULD we do so with out regard to the truth and the reality of the larger imperatives (as per the previous paragraph)

One should never forget the most irrefutable fundamental truth of everything....In *closed* environment (societies and the EARTH) EVERYTHING effects EVERYTHING else.
I have given the examples of traffic flows along highways and through malls that when taken in CONTEXT of the WHOLE one minor action has cumulative effect leading to seemingly disproportionate consequences. I'd STRONGLY RECOMMEND everyone Read "Critical Mass... how one thing leads to another" by Philip Ball. This book clearly demonstrates this principal with everything from electrons to you name it.
The problem with commonly touted Chaos theory is the Massive Misinformational, over simplistic "butterfly effect".
Back to the prosaic one person buying an Iphone 5 because it's cheap or even free with a encouragement to spend more on The cell.
Firstly 'your' individual decision is insignificant even to Apple they want millions of insignificant individuals to decide for a myriad of JUSTIFICATIONS although the key motivator is the deliberately stimulated (Cromagnon/Neanderthal Emotion/instinct) want. The Emotional temporary pay off makes the decision ... polluted reason JUSTIFIES it.
Apple do this to make a profit... they have NO regard or interest in the 'externalities' read consequences. Argue what you what you will on the emotional level but the moral reality is that " can the world afford the CUMULATIVE effect of 80% of the world's resources (read ability to support the continuation human existence) by 20% of the population (i.e. the 'developed world/ western world)?
You pick the major philosophy/religion all have a similar thrust ....biblically speaking "yes YOU are your brother's keeper"... Yet again I also repeat It isn't that you indulge your emotions ...an inherent human trait, but HOW and by how MUCH.
There in lies the inherent flaw in the much admired Libertarianism and or Capitalism (not exclusively)as they are practised today they are predicated on Absolutes and were formulated BEFORE the science of everything relates/effects or leads to another. However both these philosophies tend to focus on the individual ignoring or treating the self (the individual) gratification as the sole purpose/objective of life relegating all other factors as 'externalities' and therefore irrelevant , having no effect on the 'self' . Which in a closed environment and under the first law of thermodynamics ...impossible if not wantonly inane.
I don't dispute the 'right' to anything merely caution about the dismissal of The MORAL DIMENSION what is now 'myopic focus' on the use (abuse) of that right in isolation of the indisputable cumulative effect.

No comments:

Post a Comment