Empires and economic structures have been developing and descending throughout the history of mankind – but never the less we like to convince ourselves, that we are in charge of development since most of the elites more or less stopped to believe in supernatural powers and divinities.
Mankind as such could even be much more in charge of its own destiny in this time and some centuries to come.
Luckily we are not ants obeying a common instinct – but – at least partly – constructing our own perception of ourselves and our society.
But, we as a species, appear not to be united by reason.
On that ground - we try to do the right thing – not what’s right, but just what’s right for me as an individual. Here and now.
Within the last thirty years most westerners have accepted the idea of being almost completely independent individuals – capable to take care of ourselves - as long as we have got the financial means to do so. This virtual independence gives individuals the possibility to act without regarding traditions, family-rules, religion and even our beloved ones.
On the other hand the nuclear family, on the basis of mutual attraction, has gained first rank as t h e compensation for the demolition of "tribal" empathy by liberalisms construction of independence.
Hippies and libertines of various political believes in their time denied the nuclear family as the stronghold of our emotional demands. But obviously sexuality and its emotional connotations within and around family life are today commonly regarded as the last resort of positive feelings without ratio in the phase of nest-building. As soon as the nuclear family is an established one - devotion is regarded as unusual and out of fashion.
The rest – that means all the other aspects of life – are ruled by the “logic” of earning and consuming in growing emotional and practical isolation.
Changing employer/employees as a rational routine makes comradeship and friendship in working life almost impossible. Cutting down on personal, professional meetings and making them virtual also contributes to isolation in the name of cost benefit as well as using subcontractors instead of own staff. As all that might keep profits and personal earning up for some (though rather limited) time, it seems the only route to follow. Obviously it’s absurd to point out China, India or Brazil as examples to follow, when you regard living conditions for the poor in those countries – nevertheless many of our leaders do so, to explain the necessity of “stealing” from the poor and giving to the billionaires as an attempt to keep the system going.
Besides all that agony we can see and take part in a popular motion towards collective responsibility in opposition to the established rule of capitalism.
But without an established big scale alternative those efforts for the time being are aimless in front of of the disastrous increase of social injustice.
Our unorganized opposition has yet no alternative to offer. Not to pay taxes as to punish the system may very well end up with a collapse of Greece – but where to go from that point?
The end of growth
Whatever we might try as a species – the resources of our earth are limited – but our greed is not (yet).We can still make a lot of sensible and encouraging efforts to save mankind as such for some millenniums to come by redistributing wealth and reorganizing our way of life.
But to believe in a system, where ecologic stability and zero-growth mean crisis - instead solution - is sick:
A collective deadly mental disease. (PB 08-12-2011)
