Posted on 05/10/2005 7:59:52 AM PDT by dead
For some, the Western model offers a better world for all; to others it spells doom, writes Jeremy Seabrook.
IT IS OFTEN claimed that electoral apathy in the Western democracies comes from the absence of any big issue separating mainstream parties. But no such consensus exists globally. Western countries may shrink from acknowledging it, but the world is in the grip of an epic confrontation between those who believe in the capacity of capitalism to bring plenty, peace and progress to all humanity, and those equally convinced that only disengagement from its destructive dynamic offers the hope of planetary survival.
The ideological divide cuts through traditional political allegiances. On one side are the supporters of corporate interests, unreconstructed socialists and many "progressives". They point to the conquest of disease, increasing longevity, the comforts of life extended to more people than ever before. On the other are the anti-globalisers, as well as an unknown number of the world's poor, who ask only for sufficiency and security. They have some uncomfortable allies, particularly traditionalists whose faith forbids humanity to defy God by interfering with the integrity of creation. In defence of their position, they cite the sicknesses of excess, the contamination of the resource base, and the baleful impact of industrialism upon climate, ecosystems and biodiversity.
In the first view, it is unthinkable that the onward march of capitalism should be halted; in the second, inadmissible that the ravages of globalism should continue unchecked. It is the exclusion of this most significant ideological fissure of the age from our politics which makes our elections so sterile.
For the West, the desirability of exporting its model to the rest of the world is self-evident. The proof appears overwhelming - people are everywhere voting with their feet, besieging the entrance to the global hypermarket. In the eyes of the West, the collapse of socialism is a cause for celebration - nothing now stands in the way of the benign doctrines of globalism.
But limitless economic expansion in a finite world and the unleashing of boundless human desire upon a dwindling resource base do not necessarily lead to the social and economic enfranchisement of humanity. It may lead to intensifying competitive violence and wars over resources - land, water, oil.
The political alternative to this sweep of industrialism across the world does not appear in one single form. It is filtered through other ideologies, which have rushed into the vacuum created by the waning of social hope carried by socialism. If secular creeds are powerless to raise up the poor, other-worldly beliefs must be invoked. Religious fundamentalisms are also a form of resistance to global industrial society; and Western abhorrence of fundamentalism is less a revulsion against medieval superstition than a reaction to the most wounding critique of its obsession with economic growth.
The materialism preached by the West is not seen by those who resist it as a pragmatic means of bringing material succour to needy peoples. It appears as a quasi-mystical quest to tear through the fabric of the planet. In other words, the secularism claimed by the West is no such thing. It is built on an arbitrary act of faith. The cosmic wager made by this belief is that human ingenuity will always be equal to the consequences of its own actions; that science and technology will overcome global warming, resource depletion and over-consumption.
The war of these ideologies has long been engaged. If it remained apparently subordinate for so long, this is because conflict within Western societies - local contests between capital and labour - was a more pressing concern. But with the settlement of that old dispute, the assault upon indigenous peoples, the self-reliant and other bearers of ancient and sustainable life-ways has been renewed. These are being compelled into the "benefits of civilisation".
Many struggles in the contemporary world are a refraction of this. The hatred of religious fundamentalists for Western claims of secularism, and the contempt of Western reason for obscurantist tyranny, is the most vibrant and violent. Resistance to the industrial model lies in poor people's demand, not for economic growth, but for enough for their sustenance.
Obscuring the major fault line of globalisation permits the West to promote its version of progress to the world. Perhaps it is no new thing that majorities can always be won for belief in miracles. But which would be the greater wonder - the extension into perpetuity of the Western model, or the ability of people to lessen their dependency on material resources and strengthen their reliance on human resourcefulness? If both seem implausible, this is because the truly millennial struggles are only just beginning to define themselves.
The Guardian
What is he specifically proposing as the alternative to the western style of capitalism?
Oh yes, he's offering the economic model that allows all the citizens of earth to live healthy clean lives, unspoiled by pollution or avarice, where medicine food and clean drinking water are available to all, and nobody fights over scarce resources.
You know, that economic model.
Who is this idiot ? Human resourcefulness without resources ? Sure, like we're all Jesus making bread out of nothing.
Where do they teach fools like this to be journalists ?
You no....like Star Trek the next generation....they have replicators.
"know"
The economic model encapsulated in John Lennon's song "Imagine" is really kewl. Don't know why he never got the Nobel Prize.
Resistance to the industrial model lies in poor people's demand, not for economic growth, but for enough for their sustenance.
To see the lie inherent in this statement, walk around any Thai city, then fly to Laos, Burma, Vietnam or China. One you arrive in one of these people's paradises, go to a poor neighborhood (90 % of any city). Compare it in terms of obvious signs of hunger, disease, hopelessness. . .
Enough said. This is why Chomsky of popular among Backpackers, Academics, Religious Totalitarians, etc..
These jokers want to take us back to the caves and mud huts. To the dysentery and smallpox and malaria. To the 70% infant mortality and 40-year life expectancy. They hate humanity, and their own existence. They seek only self-immolation, and to take everyone else down with them.
Maybe the "benefits of civilization", starting with antibiotics, are to be purposefully withheld from the objectors. Let them re-grow their prehensile tails [unless they already have them] and go live in the trees.
Socialism/Communism doen't work. Case Closed.
So he thinks we should all live in the Garden of Eden??? That's the only place I can think of like that.
It is probably the case that no particular theoretical system will ever dominate forever. The American Industrial Revolution peaked in 1895 and appears to be over unless we can come up with something that others cannot easily emulate. At least what we have is not a Chinese knockoff of a hyperluxury car without a motor, so we can possibly maintain economic supremacy for quite a while longer if we don't completely suffocate our creativity in red tape and anchor babies.
"This is why Chomsky of popular among Backpackers, Academics, Religious Totalitarians, etc.."
Funny how none of these people actually live in the "paradise" they want to bring about.
He forgot the part about the hundreds of thousands of people demanding that they be allowed to immigrate to Cuba and North Korea each year, and those who overcome cruel barriers to enter those paradises illegally.
I believe that was taken care of here...
"The proof appears overwhelming - people are everywhere voting with their feet, besieging the entrance to the global hypermarket"
I guess he's advocating snuffing out human desire....
That never really worked well in the past.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.