Wednesday 30 December 2009

Relationships: The space in which humanity resides

“Once the realization is accepted that even between the closest human beings infinite distances continue, a wonderful living side by side can grow, if they succeed in loving the distance between them which makes it possible for each to see the other whole against the sky.”

Rainer Maria Rilke

How we relate to each other and to the wider world around us must change, we seem as individuals to be becoming more and more isolated not only from each other but from the world around us. In the developed world an increasing number of people live alone and the bonds binding the extended family are weakening. Children spend increasing amounts of their time, alone in their rooms glued to gaming machines whilst adults either watch the television or if they are out and about are increasingly isolated in their personal bubble courtesy of the ubiquitous MP3 player. Marriage rates have never been lower and divorce rates never higher. When we are not idling away time as described above we are spending more time than ever before working. If this is the gift of the technological age, I for one wish we could give it back.

It is hardly surprising that our ability and willingness to develop deep relationships with the natural world is sadly lacking when we seem to be continually diluting the relationships we have with each other. Who we are is defined by the quality and substance of the relationships we form in our lifetimes; we are not remembered for what we had but for the impact of our having existed. I believe that we are living in truly emotionally impoverished times and that this is a direct consequence of our over emphasis on material possessions. The consequences of this are being manifest in increasing levels of stress, unprecedented dependence on antidepressant drugs and growth in suicide rates.

Climate change and the other impacts of excessive population and consumer growth such as water deprivation, energy shortages, species extinction, ecosystem collapse and famine do not respect national borders, cultures or theological perspectives. Addressing these issues will require all of us to work to together as never before; we must begin to learn to meet and celebrate each other in both our sameness and difference. If we are unable to rise above our bigotry and tribal allegiances the competition for ever scarcer resources will lead to unthinkable levels of conflict and violence. The degree of collaboration, collective commitment and cooperation required to really make the necessary headway to avoid the worst, will call for the development of unshakeable international relationships.

As a species Man seems to have related to the Earth not as a partner but initially as a provider and now simply a source of raw materials. It is incredulous to consider that $billions are being spent on research into terraforming. The notion that the powers that be are seriously considering where to build another Earth when we have ruined this one is absolutely disgusting. In our development of technology we are attempting to circumvent the very process of creation and evolution. We seem to have ceased to want to evolve as a species and to be hell bent on shaping the world or worlds to fit us; this is not only futile but flies in the face of the very miraculous process that brought us into existence in the first place. We have been around but for the blink of an eye and will be gone even quicker if we do not wake up to the fact that we are part of a bigger ever changing process called Life. Mankind in it’s present form will become extinct one day and that is as it should be, the question is when and whether we actually have the time and potential to evolve into something else. I believe we should be focussing our efforts on developing ourselves into a species that is sensitive to and supportive of the Earth and that we should seek to find happiness and fulfilment in our relationships with each other and all the things around us rather than to continue to attempt to exert power and control.

The relativity of reality

“Reality leaves a lot to the imagination.”

John Lennon

I agree with Plato who suggested that what most people saw as reality was akin to its shadow cast upon the wall of the cave of our own ignorance. It seems to me that we have forgotten what it really means to be a human being as opposed to a human doing. Ask someone who they are and they will more than likely tell you what they do for a living not the type of person they are or what they value. Our reality appears to be one of having not belonging; much of the world’s true reality and importance is by most, not only unnoticed but abused.

Wealth appears to be the cornerstone of our current reality but this is relative. One does not have to go very far back to find a time when home or even car ownership was the preserve of the wealthy, whereas now it is the norm. This does not mean that there is not an ever widening gap between the haves and the have nots, it is just that the vast majority of us in the developed countries have so much more than ever before. It is interesting to note however that people are as, if not more, dissatisfied than ever, which suggests that it is not what we have in absolute terms but relative to each other that concerns us. If this is truly the case we could all simply have less and still be as happy.

We need to understand that our perception of reality is shaped by what we value and what we value needs to support the good of all, not only all mankind but every other species and the ecosystem. In most cultures the primary indicator of value is expressed fiscally. People who do things in the world of commerce that have high perceived value, are financial rewarded; be that a CEO, an actor or even a sports person. If we truly want to draw back from the brink we could start by rewarding those who are contributing most in support of the desired change, perhaps with less obscene individual incomes and larger grants to be used in furtherance of their efforts on our collective behalf. I believe that most financially successful people today are more interested in the kudos that their success brings and not actually the money, the money just serves to make it visible to others. For this reason I see no reason why many of today’s successful people would not be equally successful in a system that put far less emphasis on commercial success and more on social and environmental sensitivity.

I cannot count the number of times people have told me that I am not living in the real world and that I need to see the world as it is. Well I do see it and I’m happy to say it looks far more inviting than that which many others tell me is their reality.

Monday 28 December 2009

Agriculture: An ecological tightrope

"The diligent farmer plants trees, of which he himself will never see the fruit."

Marcus Tullius Cicero

Global grain prices have doubled in the last two years, due to grain shortages in Australia and a significant increase in demand from China and India. In addition, arable land usage is increasing due to the burgeoning demand for bio fuels. Within Europe agricultural set aside, which fostered natural biodiversity, is diminishing rapidly. Agricultural farmers believe that a boom time is ahead and that output should be grown as quickly as possible to meet the increased global demand. This short term, economically dominated approach concerns me deeply.

It is undoubtedly true that agriculture has played a very important role in the development of man, providing surety of a food supply has afforded the opportunity to concentrate efforts on other things of which we might be proud but the our over population is also directly attributable to agricultural development and practices. Agriculture is responsible for the destruction of many rich and diverse habitats, soil erosion and water shortages. I believe that we must seriously re-evaluate the role agriculture plays and ensure that it is managed in such a way as to minimise its detrimental impact on the wider bio system.

I do not believe that simply producing more in response to an increase in demand is sustainable; everything we take out of the earth’s system for the consumption of man, ceases to be available for the remainder of the system. It has been calculated that, as a global population, we are already consuming approximately 1.2 times that which the earth can produce sustainably in any given year, so already, year on year; the earth is actually able to produce less and less. With our global population forecast to increase by yet another 50% by 2050, this situation can only get worse and the consequence will be starvation and water deprivation on an unimaginable scale. Instinctively, responding to fossil fuel shortages by replacing them with bio fuels seems fraught with danger, just how much land will be required to achieve this and what will the environmental implications be? For me the core issue is our excessive dependence on all types of energy, we should address this problem first and foremost and use the least damaging technologies to provide a stop gap whilst this is achieved.

It seems ironic to me that our response to addressing the problems caused by excessive growth in population and consumption appears to be to grow more! As Cicero suggests farming is a long term endeavour which spans generations, it is about the husbandry and stewardship of our natural resources. I feel we have over industrialised agriculture and that certainly in the developed world, the majority of the population has lost the ability to identify with the land and is therefore less sensitive to the negative impacts we are having on it. I also believe that the dominance of the supermarket chains has exacerbated these issues. One only has to walk around a supermarket to notice that the emphasis is on encouraging consumption rather than providing for basic food needs.

I believe that developing truly sustainable agriculture will be essential to our long term survival and collective well being.

The threat of competition

"Trying to be number one and trying to do a task well are two different things."

Alfie Kohn

I am deeply concerned by the competitive nature of western society; I believe it is implicit in almost everything we do and defines how, as individuals, we see ourselves. I believe that herein lies our seemingly endless desire to have more, implicit in this is that the more "stuff" we have, the more self worth we have. I know this is a huge generalisation and that there are many people whose values are not so shallow but I believe it is symptomatic of western society as a whole. From our earliest years we are encouraged to judge ourselves against the benchmark of others, as if there is a stereotypical "best" to aspire to. Whilst this may deliver satisfaction to those who are particularly good at something we choose to value, it devalues the majority. The inherent lack of self esteem that follows then leads to all sorts of dysfunctional behaviour in life, the most damaging of which, on a global scale, is the need to consume. I see this as a ‘need to feed’ the unrecognised and damaged unique individual that we are. This can lead to over consumption, addiction, or aggressive gain, at both the micro and macro level. As Alfie Kohn suggests, the underlying intent behind being number one and doing something well, can more often than not, be worlds apart.

As necessity is said to be the mother of invention, competition is often cited as the source of excellence. As Einstein reminds us, everything is relative, in a world that celebrates individual success and has a, to the victor goes the spoils mentality, this is undoubtedly true but this is the world of man not the real world. Whilst Darwin postulated that the natural world and its evolution was centred around the principal of the survival of the fittest, I believe he intended this to mean the best able to co-exist, to find an harmonious niche, not to dominate and conquer as seems to be the popular modern interpretation of his theory. I am not suggesting that we all need to be the same but that we should learn to celebrate and recognise the value of our diversity. Competition in some circumstances, can add to the excitement and joy to be had from an experience but should it should not be at the expense of the enterprise itself.

Much has been said by economic theorists surrounding how competition has furthered the development of mankind, if this is true why are we now facing the greatest crisis ever? A crisis that is of man’s own making and that I would suggest, is born out of his predilection towards competition. If we look at energy consumption alone, how much unnecessary energy is wasted in industry by companies competing for the same piece of business, which only one of them can actually win? This may make sense within our economic system but makes absolutely no sense in the context of our over exploitation of the earth’s diminishing natural resources and extreme climate change. As competition was the watch word of the industrial era; co-operation must become that for the ecological era. We have to construct an alternative to the economic model, one which fosters the behaviours necessary to avert the disaster that await us if we don’t.

Growth, Development and Sustainability

"One thing is clear to me now, ...... our values must be compatible with the exigencies of the natural world we live in and depend upon. They must implicitly recognise the laws of thermodynamics, energy’s role in our survival, the dangers of certain kinds of connectivity, and the nonlinear behaviour of natural systems like the climate. The endless material growth of our economies is fundamentally inconsistent with these physical facts of life. Period. End of story. And a value system that makes endless growth the primary source of our social stability and spiritual well-being will destroy us."

Thomas Homer-Dixon

I couldn’t agree more with this quotation, at the very root of the problems we are creating, is our seemingly insatiable appetite for all kinds of growth, the most damaging of which is economic. I feel it important to declare here that I believe that money is nothing more than a human construction, used as a token for the exercise of control over others and as such, can and should be repositioned to facilitate the changes necessary for the survival of our species. Money can attribute value but it is not a value in and of itself yet it can and should be used to do valuable things. The problem is not money but the economic system it enables. Beneath the economics lies the radical issue; that of human greed and the desire for power and prestige, whether this is a natural phenomenon or simply learnt behaviour is becoming irrelevant since our survival instinct trumps status every time. My question as to whether or not we are writing our epitaph or that we are indeed awakening, arises from the doubt I have about our willingness to put collective and generational survival above our individual short term desire for personal gratification.

WIn addition to economic growth other types of growth are cause for concern. Growth seems to be the watchword of our global community, when we speak of development it is invariably linked with growth, it's about becoming bigger, more influential, having more, all quantitative rather than qualitative terms. We seem to relate our very identities to how much we have compared to others, this leads to a deep splitting between individuals, communities, nations and most importantly from the rest of the ecosystem and biosphere. We seem to see ourselves apart, as the consumer of all things, here to have our needs met at the expenses of everything and everyone else. It resembles an addiction, the more you have, the more you want but the more you get the more fearful of loss you become, leading to an absolute need to continue to get more. This makes for deeply unhappy people who become increasingly unable to relate appropriately, this then leads to truly dysfunctional thinking and behaviour, in fact, one becomes deluded. I believe that collectively we have become deluded and have lost our true identities and our ability to relate appropriately to the world around us. If one looks back at some of the aboriginal cultures, irrespective of their origin, there is much to be learnt about how we might once again connect to the greater whole. I shudder every time I hear about the so called progress and aspirations of the developing nations and am reminded of the old adage; beware of what you wish for, you might actually get it.

Development of a different kind will be crucial to our future, we must use our innate ability as a problem solving animal to develop solutions to the problems we have created. These problems must include the point issues of dealing with today’s burning platforms such as climate change, environmental degradation and the population explosion but it has to be recognised that these are symptomatic of a much greater malaise which is rooted in our social and political structures, simply put we care about the wrong things and unless this changes we will continue to self destruct as any reformed addict will attest to. To achieve true sustainability Man must once again become a complimentary participant in the web of life and value the good of the whole above simply his own. If we were to achieve this we might actually begin to develop as a species rather than developing ‘stuff’ at the expenses of all around us. Sustainability is not simply about finding carbon neutral ways of continuing to do what we do, it is about becoming something that is not only sustained by but is sustaining of, the larger field of which we are a part.

Sunday 27 December 2009

The clarion call of climate change

"Therefore, send not to know for whom the bell tolls, It tolls for thee."

John Donne

"All across the world, in every kind of environment and region known to man, increasingly dangerous weather patterns and devastating storms are abruptly putting an end to the long-running debate over whether or not climate change is real. Not only is it real, it's here, and its effects are giving rise to a frighteningly new global phenomenon: the man-made natural disaster".

Barack Obama

That which follows was written some two years ago despite this I still feel it accurately reflects my current thinking on the subject. I decided to add this paragraph to accomodate the outcome of the recent Copenhagen summit COP'15. When I consider it's outcome I am struck by the extent of national protectionism prevalent in the accord, do those involved really believe that both the impact on and consequence of, climate change respects national boundaries or interests? Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the whole event was the increased presence of climate change naysayers amongst the protestors. If I was a conspiracy theoroist I might believe that the global financial crisis has somehow been exacerbated by those who fear a loss of power and priviledge should the people of the world begin to live more sustainably and consume less.

Whilst I believe climate change is a very important issue and threat, I fear it is a warning sound for much worse to come. It is now apparent that climate change is a reality and that our activities are playing the major part in driving the current changes. Climate change however has happened to greater and lesser extents throughout the history of the earth, with as significant consequences as those predicted today by bodies such as the International Panel of Climate Change (IPCC). The interesting thing to note is that life has continued to exist despite even greater changes than those currently predicted over the next one hundred years or more.

The issue for us is founded in our anthropocentric view of the world, we seem to believe that the earth exists for us, when it doesn’t, at worst it just exists and best it exists for itself. Man has existed on the earth for but the blink of an eye compared to the time in which it has supported other life forms and no matter what we do or how we evolve it is unlikely that we will still exist anywhere close to the time when life on earth is extinguished. I contend that the climate change we are causing, along with all the other ills we are currently visiting upon the earth are simply symptomatic of the earth recognising us as malignant, as we would a viruses, growing out of control and producing toxic by-products which cause other parts of the whole distress. The interesting point is that is where the metaphor collapses because whilst when the subject dies viruses can find another host, we cannot find another place like Earth. Even more important though is that the life on Earth is far more robust than us and is far less deterministic in its needs for existence.

Climate change is simply a piece of active feedback for the rest of the system to adapt to, for us as the quote from John Donne above suggests it is a warning, change or be changed! We have been gifted a certain kind of intellect, which offers increased within lifetime awareness and therefore offers us the personal choice to change, other species will simply adapt over generations or die to be replaced by another species better equipped to survive but rest assured whatever we do, life will survive. The question being asked of us is; will we adapt and change our ways or choose to cling on to our view that we own the world and die? Climate change is the Earth warning us that we are the authors of our own destiny, nothing more, nothing less.

There is an argument to be made for doing nothing, ignoring the warning, that’s what every other part of the system would do, except trying to compete for the least detrimentally affected places to live. We would then, at least for this generation, continue to be a consumer driven, strive for and get what you want species, which would then die back until our population levels were sustainable again, assuming we hadn’t changed things so much that we were unable to survive in the environment our excesses had created. I wonder however if that is why we have evolved to have a brain able to reflect on such issues. We seem through our greater consciousness to have been offered a choice of moving beyond ourselves and to consider the potential generations that follow us. With our intellect comes the opportunity to reflect on what opportunities life can offer, above the need to survive and reproduce. It seems to me that this is what the book of Genesis was getting at; with awareness comes responsibility, with desire comes consequence and with knowledge comes fear.

Each and every one of us has a choice to make, it surrounds a choice to care and a choice to take responsibility but this does not have to be at the expense of a rich and meaningful life. We are meaning making creatures; if we choose what we value and ensure that sits well with the rest of the Earth then all can be well. This will however require a massive shift in what we currently choose to value and identify ourselves with.

The complex connective collective context

"All things are bound together
All things connect
What happens to the Earth
Happens to the children of the Earth
Man has not woven the web of life
He is but one thread
Whatever he does to the web
He does to himself"

Chief Seattle

I believe that everything is connected in a complex network of relationships which, as suggested by Chief Seattle of the Suquamish native American Indians in the 1800’s, mankind and his activities are but a part.

The complex nature of these relationships will, I believe, necessitate a re-assessment of much of our thoughts around the impact of man both socially and ecologically. Traditionally we have based our structures and processes on a linear mechanical view of the world in which the definition of relatively simple cause and effect relationships gave us, we believed, the ability to predictably exert control. The advent of complexity theory and the understanding it has given, suggests that this is far from being true, this in turn has been born out by phenomena such as the current climate change issues, the growth in global terrorism and the impact and application of the internet. Not to mention the global financial crisis born out of the widely distributed and interconnect 'sub-prime' mortgage fiasco.

I have been particularly struck by the constantly changing position taken by leading scientists in almost every field. Historically science was based on a reductive thought process which sets apart object and observer and suggests that all can be understood if broken down into its smallest parts coupled with an understanding of the relationships between them. As a theory, this may be true but the number of possible parts and the potential different types of relationships between them make this all but impossible. Even if it were, I’m not sure what good it would do because anything we did with the knowledge would form new relationships which would then create an infinite number of new possible resultant outcomes. This is the nature of complexity in an interdependent system which is the environment in which we live. Mankind seems to strive for knowledge in a vain attempt to exert control, this is not only impossible but it is also highly undesirable. We are a part of a system which does not respect hierarchies, we are not the pinnacle of creation and it does not exist for our benefit. If man was removed from earth today there would be no ill effects to speak of, if anaerobic bacteria disappeared, life as we know it would all but cease to exist. Why do we believe we are so important? What gives us the right to act as if the world should revolve around us?

I believe that we all need to really understand the nature of the bigger system we live in, of which we are but a small, no matter how potentially devastating, part. We must realise that we need to co-exist in balance with all other things, both organic and inorganic since our system is deeply interconnected, interdependent and complex and therefore, not available to be controlled by any one of its constituent parts. The information required to guide a path towards balance is far more readily available than that required for any degree of control, the natural world readily offers up feedback of the kind required. Dwindling fish stocks tell us we are over fishing, eutrophing rivers indicate excessive agricultural run off, increased soil erosion highlights too much deforestation and increasingly adaptive and virulent diseases are a symptom of the over use of antibiotics. We must recognise that sustainability is not a good enough long term objective, we are out of balance in terms of both our number and our way of living, we must radically reconsider how we become a contributory member of our system, which inherently seeks a state of dynamic equilibrium. If we do not, be assured the system has negative feedback mechanisms which will operate to expel us.

Intuition tells me that we must significantly change our way of living in the world and that if we don’t, the next century or so will become mankind’s darkest and possible final hour.

Friday 13 November 2009

Marketing and the Media: The Sirens of consumerism

"Yes, I sell people things they don't need. I can't, however, sell them something they don't want. Even with advertising. Even if I were of a mind to."
John O'Toole

In the West all but the very few are fortunate to have their basic needs for food, shelter, warmth and safety met. We are consequently pre-occupied not by what we need but by what we want and what we want, is predominately influenced by marketing and the media. Both have been proven to very effective in moderating both our desires and behaviours. This in and of itself is not a bad thing; in times of great hardship when a collective effort has been required both have played a major part in mobilising people toward a common cause. For this reason my concern does not lie with either activities but with the predominate purpose to which they are being applied. The vast majority of marketing and media effort is directed at increasing our desire to purchase things and therefore to consume more natural resources over and above what we actually need.

One could see the media as simply a vehicle for the marketing messages but the media industry is massive and it uses marketing to perpetuate itself and as such is just as malignant. Everywhere you go in the world you will notice their footprints to a greater of lesser extent. If one pays attention to almost every type of advert underlying it is a message which attempts to get people to identify themselves with the product, they are really attempting to sell to your ego and not your rational mind. This is the case for almost everything from automobiles to toilet tissue. The people who are doing this are really very, very good at what they do and if we ever decided that we need to get the global community to change the way they view themselves in relation to the world at large, such people and practices would be vital to the cause.

Of all the current vehicles for the distribution of the current consumerist propaganda today, television must be the most potent. In many countries a license fee to own one still exists, it amuses me to see signs on people's doors requesting door to door salespeople not to call, whilst the inhabitants spend ever increasing hours, paying to watch the best salesperson of all, in not only their living room but now in many other rooms in the house. It is not just the adverts on commercial television enticing us to consume more but also the myriad of lifestyle programmes encouraging us to revamp our living spaces, wardrobes, gardens and just about everything else one could imagine. Furthermore with the advent of digital TV, marketeers can now target groups based on specific areas of interest which is proven to deliver a higher sales conversion rates.

Celebrities also concerns me deeply, not only because they are used as paragons of virtue, to convince us that if we only looked like them or bought the things they did, that we too would be better people but also because it is a sign of what we currently value as a society. The plethora of celebrity based magazines herald these people as idols, people to aspire to be like. If we all lived a celebrity lifestyle things would be many, many times worse than they are today and our demise would be absolutely unavoidable. Who we see as celebrities indicate what we truly value as a culture and contentious though it may be, I believe that suggests that what the majority of people really value, is money, and I find this incredibly sad. If we are to change, we must address this issue and I hope marketing and the media will one day play it's part in furthering this cause and in helping people become aware of the non-financial richness of life.

Time: The great task master

"Clocks slay time... time is dead as long as it is being clicked off by little wheels; only when the clock stops does time come to life."
William Faulkner

The ancient Greeks had two goods of time; Chronos being the god of the linear march of time, as marked out by a ticking clock and Kairos, the god of the right moment in time. Which commands the majority of your attention?

Whilst I’m sure scientists would disagree with me, I see time as purely a human construct and as such entirely relative. We may have devised a unit of time based on the time taken for a physical phenomenon to occur, as with the atomic clock but what dictates whether a period of time is considered long or short? Observing the world of modern man, so much of what we do is focussed around being time efficient and this it seems creates both unnecessary degrees of stress and consumption. Perhaps the only truly time critical event is finding sufficient food, water and shelter before its absence becomes uncomfortable. I find it ironic that although we have more and more time and work saving technologies, we seem to have less free time available than ever before.

If one looks at the work that goes on in business, before the advent of all the so called Information Technology work was done relatively efficiently. With the advent of IT one might have expected a significant increase in productivity but it seems that little has actually changed, yes more information is produced and analysed but because of the increase in speed of transaction afforded by IT, this information usually passes it sell by date before any conclusions can be drawn from it. It also appears that we have an innate tendency to mistake quantity, rhetoric and appearance for quality, substance and insight; "death by Powerpoint" and "vapourware" are all too prevalent in today’s business arena. Perhaps it is time for us to slow things down and be a little more considered before we act. In so doing we might actually begin to notice the opportunities to improve our lives that already surrounded us rather than rushing to develop or invent something else.

I believe we pay far too much attention to the passing of time and the need to do things quickly than in deciding how best to spend the present moment in time. This fixation has led us to be overly concerned about the length of our lives at the expense of the quality of our experience. In turn this I suggest has resulted in a reduction in concern for the nature of our relationships with each other and the things around us. I am left wondering if an objective assessment of our medical practices would question the resources and priority we give to life extension compared to the minimal attention given to social enrichment.

Before industrialisation our sensitivity towards time was linked to the natural cycle of the sun, moon, tides and seasons which reminded us all of our dependency on the natural order of things. Nowadays our perception of time is increasingly driven by the apparent urgencies of the commercial world. Whilst we cannot and should not attempt to control the natural world we can and should moderate the commercial one. The principal theme in this blog calls us to recognise the consequences of our fixation on economics and consumption, these are delivered by commerce which is a model we designed and can therefore redesign. There is no reason why a better system could not be developed which not only improved the qualitative experience of our lives but also increase the amount of non-work related time we can then choose how best to enjoy.

Returning to Chronos and Kairos, I believe that Chronos is telling us that our time is running out and that Kairos is calling us to action now, in this moment. The change can be instantaneous, as an individual all one needs to do is commit to a reprioritisation of what one values. Yes, it will take time, probably a number of generations to undo the damage we have done but the joy is in the journey, attending to what is truly valuable about life will continually yield rewards.

I am left wondering how different cultures and philosophies approached time and also have a desire to better understand the history of man in the wider ecological timeline.

The technological paradox

"It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity."
Albert Einstein

Would that Albert Einstein were still alive today, I feel sure that he would be a great help in unravelling the problems we have created for ourselves. Whilst the scientific approach has in a sense opened Pandora’s Box, technology has to date, represented its contents. Technological innovation was the father of the industrial revolution and capital gain its mother, their child I propose is ecological devastation. In its infancy let’s say the last 300 years the infant appeared to bring enhanced quality of life to all it touched but has this really been the case? What has happened to the social infrastructure, the family, is our quality of life better than it might have been without it? Don’t get me wrong, those halcyon days were not truly so but might we have taken a different developmental path, more supportive of social and ecological equality?

Certainly in developed nations, at the material level things have improved but I question if the qualitative experience of life actually has. We are a social animal but technology seems to have resulted in social fragmentation rather than integration. Now, more than ever, the outward signs of the haves and the have nots are all too clear. Technologies such as the Television, the Internet, mobile phones, MP3 players and computer gaming, whilst claiming increased connectivity on one level, actually isolate us from personal face to face interaction on another.

Technology has been the great enabler of our excess; through mechanisation, it has enabled the mass production of low cost consumables and intensive agricultural practices. The impact of technology on agriculture has been fundamental in both the support of population growth, the over exploitation of land, the migration from the countryside to cities and has resulted in the loss of our collective connection with, and sensitivity, to nature.

I see technology as paradoxical because on the one hand, physically, at least in the short term, it has made life easier but on the other, emotionally, I feel it has had a leaching effect. I find it astounding that millions of people around the world are choosing to live an imaginary life as an Avatar in cyber space rather than actually going out into the world and relating, not only to each other but to the world at large. This is Plato’s cave writ large and symptomatic of the scenario painted by the Matrix trilogy of films, it seems we are becoming a community of virtual ego’s just needing to be fed the right blend of fantasies to keep us compliant. I do not advocate abandoning technology but I do suggest we consider how we might use it to augment our lives rather than act as a substitute to reality and richness of them.

How important technology needs to be in the long term is debateable but it is clear to me, that we will need technology to contain and perhaps reverse some of the damage we have already done.

Science and the double edged sword of reason

“Science is the tool of the Western mind and with it more doors can be opened than with bare hands. It is part and parcel of our knowledge and obscures our insight only when it holds that the understanding given by it is the only kind there is.”
Carl Jung

I must confess to feeling extremely ambivalent about science; on one level it has contributed immensely to humankind, almost everything man made has been touched by the hand of science but on a more systemic level it has also been responsible for the global population explosion, over exploitation of natural resources and perhaps most damagingly a sense that we can control life itself. If we look at medical sciences alone, global life expectancy is two to three times longer thanks to the scientific revolution which at the level of the individual is seen as a good thing but without a compensatory reduction in birth rates, at a global level this is far from desirable.

At the root of the issue with modern science lies the reductionist principal which implies that everything can be understood by breaking it down into its constituent parts. This has led to a fragmentation and narrowing of the scientific field, into numerous focused disciplines each striving to make progress within its own field, without sufficient reference to the wider whole. An example of how this approach can be questioned would be the development of fertility treatments, on one level we are assisting an individual in propagating their genes but on another we are actually defeating the natural selection mechanisms which would seek to eliminate the underlying genetic defect from the human gene pool. The context in which we are developing this science is not only a world of over population but one in which there are numerous orphan children around the world who need loving parents and a home. This is just one example of where scientific reason can actually become irrational.

Science, in and of itself, is a search for understanding and as such is a very laudable pursuit. I suppose the true issues arise in the application of that knowledge. One cannot question a scientist for exploring things, assuming it is done ethically, but the scientist who develops its application must be held accountable. I believe it is should be incumbent upon every applied scientist to consider the wider implications and uses of their work.

Perhaps the most dangerous yet intangible aspect of science is the impact it has had on how we humans relate to and see ourselves in, the world at large. We have conquered every physical domain, we have the ability to control almost every disease and we have developed technologies which increasingly make us feel independent of the natural processes around us but truth be told, we have done nothing but delude ourselves, everything man has done scientifically in the last 300 years has set us apart from and made us feel immune to the natural order of things. Well, the time of reckoning is upon us and we are about to reap the whirlwind, the wholeness of nature is far greater than one species alone, particularly one who is arrogant enough to assume that it might actually control it. Everything we have done has had a consequence, it just that there has been a latency in response, but a response there will be and it will not be a positive one. Now more than ever we need scientists to turn their attention to the bigger picture, to collaborate across disciplines as never before and to convince the rest of us with a lesser understanding of such matters, of what we must do to minimise the human suffering that awaits us and to take the necessary steps to re-align ourselves with the natural order of things. We no longer need scientists to develop technologies and cures, we need their counsel and guidance as to how to live our lives, science was born out of philosophy and therein lies its true application and calling.

The influence of political systems

“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.”

Groucho Marx

Politics undoubtedly has a huge impact on everything that happens in the human world and will be instrumental to the achievement of any change in our collective behaviour. Unfortunately all political systems are to some extent or another undermined by the human flaw of self interest which influences us all. We like to think that governments act for the good of all but this is far from being the case and more often than not they actually serve the desires of a relatively small privileged few. Whilst in some cases this is the direct result of corruption more often than not it derives from a desire to give the people what they want. The issue being, that what we the people want has been manipulated by corporate marketing and the media to serve an agenda which further widens the socio-economic gap. Politics and economic are now more closely entwined that ever, no matter what fundamental political ethos a government advocates, they all now seem to be subservient to forces of market economics.

If we are to radically change our approach to living in the world, politicians must lead the way, they are not simply governors of our nations they must also be more strategic and long term in their thinking. When historians look back at the late twentieth and early twenty first century, how will they judge those who we entrusted with our future? It seems to me that even the most enlightened of them still defines the problem as continuing to achieve economic growth and development, whilst reducing the detrimental impact on the earth. The true leaders of future generations must focus on how to change the very course of mankind towards living in a harmonious and sustainable way which minimise our footprint on the earth. This will involve enormous cultural and sociological change and it will be a rare person indeed who can gain the support of the world’s citizens to take this challenging path.

I would call this politics with a big P, truly furthering the development and evolution of mankind. What I see in the world of politics today is that of the small p variety, little more than horse trading; squabbling about access to mineral rights, fish stocks, carbon quotas, the positioning of national borders and the dominance of one dogma over another. The image of Nero fiddling whilst Rome burned comes to mind. I notice with some amusement how the UK government boasts of reducing carbon emissions whilst neglecting to mention that this has been achieved by the off-shoring of almost all its manufacturing capacity. In fact, with the increase in UK consumption of factored goods the actual true global carbon emissions attributable to the UK is rising significantly albeit in places like China and India. Politics today and perhaps since it first began, seems to be a game of smoke and mirrors but that will no longer do, mother earth has spoken and it is time for the children to go to bed and the grown ups to go to work. I have absolutely no doubt that the people with the necessary, vision, wisdom and courage exist to take up this mantle but I suspect none of them are listed amongst the political throng of today.

Democracy is held up by many as the ideal model for a political system but I find it somewhat floored, in as much as it assumes that the mass populous knows what is best. Collective thinking is so often a compromise and is typical founded on the popular beliefs of the time, which is fine when things are stable but when significant changes in direction are called for, the collective inertia can be devastating. Most democracies have a 4-5 year electoral cycle which is little more than an endless beauty pageant, the winner being the most charismatic proponent of what people want to hear and believe, leaving little hope for the election of anyone who actually aspires to change anything very much. The power of our longing for the security of the status quo cannot be underestimated. I wonder if we shouldn't consider a two tier approach to global politics where there is a global government for global issues and national governments subservient to it, responsible for the governance of individual nations within the wider parameters designed to protect the global interest. How this could be achieved, I do not know but we must recognise that the greatest issues facing us in the twenty first century, do not respect national boundaries and as such, the attention to them cannot be moribund by national or corporate entrenchment.

I wonder if my expectations from politics and politicians are too high, perhaps politics responds to change elsewhere and is simply the executor of greater ideals whose time has come.

Tuesday 10 November 2009

Economic myopia

This is my first attempt at a blog so please bare with me......

I had attempted to write a book with the title 'Growth' Stuff and No-Sense: Will this be our epitaph or our awakening?' but trying to keep a track of the latest developments in the interconnected web of disciplines associated with humankind's activities has proved to be beyond me. In these increasingly complex and often turbulent times, I thought it might be more sensible to try blogging as a way to express myself, as and when I feel that I need to. It will immediately become apparent that I am no expert, I simply offer my thoughts and opinions for your consideration.

I thought I'd start with a observation or two surrounding the 'credit crisis' , 'economic downturn' or 'financial depression' that is so often spoken about. The fundamental problem, as I see it, is that financiers, business people and politicians alike all seem to be suffering from a ubiquitous misapprehension that money is 'real' rather than a system we originally designed for ascribing and trading things of, true value. To illustrate we are told that between 1997 and 2007 the World experienced unprecedented stability of year on year growth however in the same period the productivity of the Earth in terms of actual biomass (the stuff of life) fell year on year, couple this with an exponential growth in the human population then the money side of the equation is not only inverse but disproportionate to the experience of the majority of the World's population.

Small wonder that there was a 'bubble' waiting to be burst. What now concerns me is that the response of the 'good and great' in the World is not only to prop up those who led us here in the first place but also through quantitative easing to pump more money into the system to convince those who elected them or will pay their bonuses that things will soon be back to normal again, if only those with the least money in the economy are prepared to foot the bill through increased taxes over the next decade. This all relies on the myth that the development of a society and the experience of life is predicated on the consumption of non essential goods, when in fact it actually leads to the fragmentation of society, undermining of actual self-worth and the gradual yet inexorable destruction of the planet which actually sustains very life itself.

Why are governments trying to build their way out of this situation? Unemployment continues to rise as does the gap between the 'have's and have not's'. This was and may still be a key opportunity in our history to change not only how we relate to the planet but also to each other. What better time to eliminate waste, to develop truly sustainable process and to employ those out of work on projects associated with ecological solutions? If we are going to spend money let's spend it on addressing the cause not the symptoms.

My contention is that those with most influence over the global economy have developed acute myopia with a huge scotoma covering the contribution economics might make in undoing the immense damage post-industrial man has visited upon the Earth. The Earth's system of which we are but a small part, is complex and interconnected resulting in bounded instability, cause and effect thinking cannot cut it anymore, we must ensure we take a multi-disciplinary approach to understanding and moderating the impact we have, economics will undoubtedly have to play a part but as a servant not a master.

I do not consider myself to be an evangelist quite the opposite, this to me is a fundamentally pragmatic view, assuming that the desired end result is a future for humankind on this Earth. Rest assured the Earth will only tolerate our abuse for so long before it's inherent feedback systems remove the irritation, namely us.