What is Your Vision of a Positive Future

Lori - Post-scarcity

|Y-m-d H:i:s

My vision of a positive future would contain the following features:

1. Vindication of the idea that prosperity is NOT a prerequisite for democracy,
or at least of the idea that unlimited growth is not a prerequisite for ending
extreme poverty. All that is needed for proof of concept is a counterexample; a
country that is both poor and free. I had high hopes for Costa Rica, but
eco-tourism is so annoyingly trendy...

2. Travel and migration as a right rather than a privilege, that is, NO ONE is
illegal, ANYWHERE. It appears working class residents of the global north are
in for an inevitable market correction. If so, let it be mercifully quick. If
the principles of so-called free trade are to be its parameters, let it not be
subject to entry and exit barriers, ignorance of the outside world, asymmetric
mobility of capital relative to labor, deregulation by treaty and other
instruments of economic duress.

3. Some reduction in human population. Hopefully not due to a die-off (as per
your poll question "What impact will climate change have on human
population?"

but due to empowered individual choices concerning family
size. Critics of the latter harp incessantly about a future in which fewer than
ever workers will be supporting more than ever retirees. I'm skeptical of this
claim, as I am of claims of the existence of labor shortages in general, given
the fact that virtually all industries are less labor intensive than they used
to be, and in my experience people compete over jobs, not the other way around.
Retirement prosperity ultimately depends more on the size of the GPP (gross
planetary product) than on the size of the workforce. Hopefully, of course,
simple dignity will depend less on prosperity in the future.

4. In the spirit of #3, the obviation of work through automation and by bringing
about a 'post-scarcity' state of affairs. Automation seems to imply what you
term extra-biological power, which I'm sure raises questions about
sustainability. I assume you are not opposed in principle to extra-biological
power, as you "propose a starting point for development of a human purpose
as being to expand the scope of human consciousness and, to the degree that
extra-biological force exceeds human biological bounds, apply that force for
benefit of the entire body of life." I suggest coupling such applications
to reproductive self-restraint.

Bob Guyer - How do you view scarcity?

|Y-m-d H:i:s

Hi Lori, my name is bob. Thanks for the thoughtful vision statement.

It seems clear to me that unlimited growth will create scarcity in the long run
through accelerated consumption of our ecological base. It sounds like you see
population control/reduction as part of the way scarcity will be put behind us.
I guess scarcity is somewhat dependent on how we would define its opposite.
Readily available food, water, shelter, and human companionship would be on my
list of things that could be too scarce. Good sanitation has been one of the
things that helped increase life spans and I would feel a scarcity if that goes
away. Could you tell me more about scarcity and your vision of post scarcity.

On your number 1 point I agree, I see the pairing of growth economics and the
idea of democracy as unnecessary, they are separate ideas. The economic growth
advocates have paired the two for marketing reasons in my opinion. Economic
growth as a result of the industrial revolution has happened in all countries
that have industrialized regardless of political system. I don't know much about
Costa Rica so I can't comment about that, but I do know that when you measure
the happiness of a population increased economic growth doesn't seem to
correlate with increased happiness after a point.

Point 2, I haven't thought much about national and other human social borders
except that the idea of semi-permeable boundaries could be applied artfully. I
worry that if all boundaries were fully permeable that there would be more
change than people could tolerate, but this is probably just my own limitation,
not a justified criticism of your idea.

Point 3 and 4. I don't buy the fear that reduced population will result in a
young worker shortage that will have terrible consequences either, I think it is
a popular notion generated by a large scale corporate point of view. One way or
another the number of people will have to match up with the number of us that
our environment can sustain over a long period of time.

Its better in my eyes that we take charge of our reproductive lives and decrease
population growth, but I have a hard time thinking to far beyond that. I have 3
kids, planned 2, and I just love them. I can't imagine how it would feel to not
be able to have kids.

You are right I don't object in principal to the power we have developed but I
am sure we don't have a clue as to how to use it without eating up our
environment to our own detriment. Having this power is a natural outgrowth from
our ability to collect information culturally over time, in my view it all
depends on writing. Objecting to the fact we have created this power is like
objecting to our ability to talk, think and write it down.

I like your vision. How we get from where we are to a future that is positive
for human individuality and social life and constructive relative to our impact
on our habitat is a big question. I think individual action only gets us so far,
I think we will need big changes in our political, economic, systems.

UR Part of It

What is Your Vision of a Positive Future