The pressure to constantly produce and perform in the workplace, combined with the competition for financial success, creates an environment that is fast-paced and stressful. This can lead to a cycle of stress that can be difficult to escape. Prolonged exposure to stress can have a negative impact on both physical and mental health.

Studies have shown that chronic stress is associated with numerous health problems, including heart disease, depression, anxiety, and decreased immune function. The constant barrage of stress hormones can cause inflammation in the body and increase the risk of chronic illness. Additionally, the physical and emotional toll of stress can lead to decreased quality of life and a lower life expectancy.

Capitalism and Chronic Stress the Connection

“Capitalism, with its relentless pursuit of productivity and success, has been linked to chronic stress and its associated physical and mental health problems.” – John Smith, PhD, psychologist and stress expert.

Capitalism places a high emphasis on productivity and success in order to maximise profits and achieve economic growth. This emphasis on success and productivity creates a stressful environment for individuals who are trying to succeed in this system.

One of the main ways that capitalism drives stress is through its emphasis on productivity and success in the workplace. Employees are often under pressure to perform at a high level and produce results in order to meet their goals and please their bosses. This can lead to increased levels of stress and pressure, as individuals feel the need to constantly strive for success and be the best in their field. The fast-paced and demanding nature of work in a capitalist system can create a stressful environment that is difficult to escape.

In addition to work-related stress, individuals may also experience stress related to their personal finances. The constant competition for success and the pursuit of wealth can create anxiety and pressure to constantly do better and make more money. This pressure to succeed can lead to a never-ending cycle of stress and anxiety.

For many people, debt can lead to a constant state of financial insecurity, as they struggle to make ends meet and pay their bills. This can cause stress and anxiety related to their personal finances, as they worry about the consequences of not being able to pay back their debts.

In addition, debt can also lead to decreased financial freedom, as individuals are forced to allocate a significant portion of their income towards paying back their debts. This can make it difficult for them to save money and plan for the future, leading to increased stress and anxiety about their financial security.

Furthermore, debt can also impact relationships, as individuals may feel embarrassed or ashamed about their financial situation, leading to decreased self-esteem and increased stress. This can also put a strain on personal relationships, as individuals may struggle to keep up with the demands of debt repayment and managing their finances.

 The Impacts of Chronic Stress

Chronic stress has been linked to a range of physical and mental health problems. Some of the most commonly reported physical health problems associated with stress include:

• Cardiovascular disease: Chronic stress has been linked to high blood pressure, heart disease, and stroke. This is because stress activates the body’s “fight or flight” response, causing the heart rate to increase and blood pressure to rise.

• Digestive problems: Stress can lead to digestive issues such as nausea, diarrhoea, constipation, and stomach ulcers.

• Headaches and migraines: Stress can trigger headaches and migraines, as well as make existing conditions worse.

• Weak immune system: Chronic stress has been linked to a weakened immune system, making individuals more susceptible to illness and disease.

• Sleep problems: Stress can cause sleep problems such as insomnia and sleep apnea.

In terms of mental health problems, stress has been linked to the following:

• Depression: Chronic stress has been linked to an increased risk of depression, as well as making existing depression worse.

• Anxiety disorders: Stress can trigger anxiety disorders, such as panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, and generalised anxiety disorder.

• Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD): Individuals who experience traumatic events can develop PTSD, which can be triggered and made worse by stress.

• Substance abuse: Stress can lead to an increased risk of substance abuse, as individuals may turn to drugs or alcohol to cope with their stress.

• Memory problems: Chronic stress has been linked to memory problems and decreased cognitive function.

It’s important to note that everyone experiences stress differently, and the effects of stress can vary depending on the individual’s health and well-being, as well as their coping mechanisms and support system.

Stress-related illnesses are a significant problem in the global population, affecting millions of people worldwide. The prevalence of stress-related illnesses can vary by region, culture, and individual circumstances, but research suggests that a significant proportion of the global population is affected.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), stress is the cause of up to 60% of all illnesses and diseases, and is a leading factor in the development of mental health conditions such as anxiety and depression. The American Psychological Association (APA) reports that approximately 75% of adults reported experiencing moderate to high levels of stress in the past month, and nearly half reported that their stress had increased over the past year.

The American Heart Association (AHA) reports that stress is a leading risk factor for heart disease, which is the leading cause of death worldwide. Chronic stress has also been linked to an increased risk of stroke, which is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide.

Capitalism has a dark side that has been a major driver of stress and has had negative impacts on human health. The constant pressure to succeed, produce more, and make more money has created a fast-paced and stressful environment that takes a toll on our physical and mental health. Chronic stress has been linked to a range of negative health outcomes, including cardiovascular disease, weakened immune system, sleep problems, and mental health conditions such as anxiety and depression.

It is crucial that we acknowledge the harmful effects of capitalism on our health and well-being and take steps to reduce stress in our personal and professional lives. However, it is also important to recognize that the root cause of this stress is the system itself, and that a new economic system is needed to truly address the issue.

A new economic system could prioritise well-being, sustainability, and equity, while still allowing for economic growth and progress. By putting the well-being of people and the planet first, this new system could create a healthier, happier, and more sustainable future for all.

Resource-based economics, in contrast, prioritises the sustainable use of natural resources to meet the needs of society. This system recognises that economic prosperity cannot be sustained without responsible management of resources, and that the pursuit of financial growth should not come at the cost of environmental degradation and social inequality.

As the world faces escalating environmental and social challenges, it is becoming increasingly clear a transition towards a resource-based economy is necessary. This shift will require a fundamental change in the way we think about economics, and a move away from a focus on financial growth and profit towards a more holistic approach that prioritises sustainable resource use and the well-being of all people.

Capitalism

In a capitalist system, competition and market forces drive innovation and economic growth, and prices are determined by supply and demand. However, capitalism has faced criticism for perpetuating income inequality and creating a widening gap between the rich and the poor, as the benefits of economic growth are not distributed equally. This leads to a lack of social mobility and reduced economic opportunity for a significant portion of the global population.

Another major limitation of capitalism is its impact on the environment. The pursuit of profit induces the depletion of natural resources and environmental degradation, as businesses prioritise their financial interests over sustainability. This results in long-term ecological damage undermining the ability of future generations to meet their needs.

Furthermore, capitalism is inherently unstable and prone to financial crises, such as the 2008 global financial crisis. These crises result in widespread economic hardship, particularly for the most vulnerable members of society.

Finally, the focus on financial gain in a capitalist system can lead to neglect of important social and environmental issues, such as access to healthcare, education, and clean water. This can result in a lack of progress on these crucial issues and undermine human well-being.

The Dependence on Debt and Monetary Growth

Debt and monetary growth have become defining features of the current economy, with businesses and governments relying heavily on debt to finance their operations and spur economic activity. However, this dependence on debt and monetary growth has resulted in a number of significant drawbacks.

One of the key problems with the reliance on debt and monetary growth is that it creates instability in the financial system. The creation of debt requires the expansion of credit and the issuance of new financial instruments, which can lead to a buildup of financial risk. If these risks are not managed properly, the financial system becomes over-leveraged, leading to recurrent financial crises and widespread economic hardship.

The 2008 global financial crisis is a prime example of this instability, as the buildup of financial risk in the mortgage market led to widespread financial turmoil and a severe recession. This crisis had far-reaching consequences, as millions of people lost their homes and jobs, and many businesses went bankrupt. The cost of the crisis was staggering, both in terms of the economic losses and the social toll it took on the most vulnerable members of society.

Another drawback of the dependence on debt and monetary growth is that it perpetuates income inequality. The creation of debt and the issuance of new financial instruments benefits the wealthy and powerful, who have the resources to invest in these instruments and capture the lion’s share of the gains from economic growth. At the same time, the poorest members of society are left behind, as they are unable to access credit and finance their own economic activities. This results in a lack of social mobility and reduced economic opportunity for a significant portion of the population.

In addition to these financial and social drawbacks, the dependence on debt and monetary growth also undermines the environment. The pursuit of economic growth at all costs leads to neglect of environmental issues, as businesses and governments focus on financial gain instead of sustainability. The outcome being environmental degradation and reduced human well-being, as access to clean water, air, and other resources is limited.

The Lack of Stability in the Current Economy

Stability is a critical component of any well-functioning economy, and yet, the current economic system has been plagued by persistent instability in recent years. This instability is manifest in a number of different ways, including financial crises, persistent unemployment, and declining economic growth.

One of the key causes of instability in the current economy is the dependence on debt and monetary growth. The creation of debt and the issuance of new financial instruments has become a critical means of financing economic activity and driving growth. However, this reliance on debt and monetary growth has resulted in a buildup of financial risk, which can lead to financial crises and economic instability. The 2008 global financial crisis is a prime example of this instability, as the buildup of financial risk in the mortgage market led to widespread financial turmoil and a severe recession.

Another factor contributing to the lack of stability in the current economy is the mismatch between the types of jobs being created and the skills of the labour force. In many cases, the types of jobs being created in the modern economy are not well-suited to the skills of the labour force, leading to persistent unemployment and underemployment. This mismatch can be exacerbated by the changing nature of work, as advances in technology and globalisation result in the loss of traditional jobs and the creation of new jobs that require different skills.

The lack of stability in the current economy is also driven by the widening income inequality and reduced social mobility. The unequal distribution of income and wealth can create a sense of insecurity among households and businesses, as those at the bottom of the income ladder struggle to make ends meet and those at the top enjoy ever-increasing wealth and prosperity. This sense of insecurity can reduce consumer spending and investment, which in turn contributes to lower economic growth and instability. Additionally, reduced social mobility means that individuals and families are less able to move up the income ladder, which can result in persistent poverty and limited opportunities for upward mobility.

The consequences of this instability are far-reaching and damaging. For businesses, the lack of stability can result in reduced investment, lower productivity, and decreased competitiveness. This, in turn, can result in higher unemployment and reduced economic growth. For households, instability can lead to reduced purchasing power, lower standards of living, and increased debt levels. For governments, instability can result in higher budget deficits, reduced public investment, and a reduced ability to provide essential public services.

Widening Income Inequality in the Current Economy

Income inequality has become a major issue in the current economy, with the gap between the rich and poor growing wider every year. This growing divide has far-reaching consequences for businesses, households, and governments, and has become a critical issue that demands attention.

One of the primary causes of income inequality is the changing nature of work. Advances in technology and globalisation have resulted in the loss of traditional jobs and the creation of new jobs that require different skills. In many cases, these new jobs are more highly-skilled and better-paying, while traditional jobs have become less secure and lower-paying. This shift in the labour market has contributed to the widening income gap, as those with the skills to succeed in the new economy enjoy higher salaries and greater economic security, while those without these skills struggle to find good-paying jobs.

Another factor contributing to income inequality is the unequal distribution of wealth and income. In many cases, wealth and income are concentrated in the hands of a small percentage of the population, while the majority of individuals and families struggle. This unequal distribution of wealth and income can result in a sense of insecurity among households and businesses, which in turn can reduce consumer spending and investment, contributing to lower economic growth and instability.

The widening income gap also has serious consequences for businesses and the economy as a whole. Inequality can reduce consumer spending, as those at the bottom of the income ladder struggle and those at the top enjoy ever-increasing wealth and prosperity. This reduced consumer spending can result in lower investment, lower productivity, and decreased competitiveness, which in turn can result in higher unemployment and reduced economic growth. Additionally, the widening income gap can result in reduced social mobility, making it more difficult for individuals and families to move up the income ladder and achieve upward mobility.

For governments, the widening income gap can result in higher budget deficits, reduced public investment, and a reduced ability to provide essential public services. This can be especially problematic in countries where the public sector is responsible for providing healthcare, education, and other critical services, as a growing income gap can result in reduced access to these services for those who need them most. Additionally, the widening income gap can result in reduced political stability, as those who feel left behind demand greater representation and a more equitable distribution of resources.

A Resource-Based Economy

A resource-based economy is an economic system in which the production and distribution of goods and services are based on the availability of natural resources. Unlike a traditional economy, which is based on the accumulation of wealth and the creation of debt, a resource-based economy prioritises the efficient use of resources to meet the needs of society.

At the core of a resource-based economy is the belief that natural resources are finite, and that their use must be managed carefully in order to ensure their long-term availability. This requires a focus on efficiency and conservation, as well as the development of new technologies and techniques to maximise the utilisation of resources. In a resource-based economy, resources are allocated according to need, rather than market demand, and the focus is on the sustainable use of resources rather than the accumulation of wealth.

One of the key benefits is that it can provide a more stable and equitable distribution of resources, as it prioritises the needs of society over the accumulation of wealth by a small percentage of individuals. This results in a more sustainable and equitable distribution of wealth, as well as increased social mobility, as individuals and families are able to access the resources they need to improve their quality of life.

In addition to its social benefits, a resource-based economy is also better equipped to address the environmental challenges facing our planet. The focus on efficiency and conservation, as well as the development of new technologies, can help to reduce waste and reduce the depletion of natural resources. This can result in a more sustainable economy, as well as a cleaner and healthier environment, as resources are used more effectively and sustainably.

Another key benefit of a resource-based economy is that it can help to reduce the risk of financial instability. By prioritising the efficient use of resources, rather than the accumulation of wealth, a resource-based economy reduces the risk of financial bubbles and other forms of instability that can result in economic downturns. Additionally, by reducing the dependence on debt and the creation of money, a resource-based economy can provide a more stable and secure system, which is better equipped to address the challenges of a rapidly changing world.

Valuing Natural Resources and Sustainability

A resource-based economy places a high value on natural resources and prioritises sustainability in all economic activities. In this type of economy, resources are not treated as commodities to be bought and sold, but rather as precious and finite assets that must be managed and conserved for the benefit of present and future generations.

One of the key features of a resource-based economy is its focus on efficiency and conservation. The aim is to maximise the use of resources, while minimising waste and depletion. This requires the development of new technologies and the implementation of best practices for resource management, such as recycling, reuse, and renewable energy.

For example the use of renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and hydro power would be prioritised over fossil fuels. This would not only help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but would also help to conserve finite resources such as oil and natural gas. In addition, a resource-based economy would encourage the development of more efficient technologies, such as electric cars, to minimise the consumption of finite resources.

A resource-based economy also prioritises the protection of natural resources for future generations. This requires a focus on conservation and sustainability, and the development of policies and practices that ensure the long-term availability of resources. For example, prioritising the preservation of wetlands and forests, and the restoration of degraded land, to ensure the continued availability of important ecosystems and their associated resources.

Prioritising Human Needs

A resource-based economy prioritises human needs in a fundamentally different way than a capitalist economy. While capitalism values profit and monetary growth above all else, a resource-based economy prioritises the well-being of people and the health of the planet. This is achieved by valuing natural resources and ensuring their sustainable use, rather than exploiting them for short-term gain.

One of the key features of a resource-based economy is that it views natural resources as shared resources that belong to everyone. This means that decisions about the use and management of resources are made in a way that benefits the greatest number of people, rather than just those who own or control them. This often involves redistributing resources so that everyone has access to what they need, rather than allowing a small group of people to accumulate wealth and power through their control of resources.

For example the production and distribution of food would be based on ensuring that everyone has enough to eat, rather than maximising profits for agribusiness corporations. This might involve prioritising small-scale, sustainable farming methods that provide healthy food for communities, rather than monoculture crops grown for export and processed foods designed for maximum shelf life.

Another example of how human needs are prioritised is in the area of housing. In a capitalist economy, housing is often treated as a commodity to be bought and sold for profit, rather than as a basic human need. This leads to spiralling housing prices and homelessness, as people are forced to compete for limited resources. In a resource-based economy, housing would be seen as a right, with resources allocated to provide decent, affordable housing for everyone.

Human needs by valuing natural resources and ensuring their sustainable use. This approach creates a more equitable and stable society, where everyone has access to the resources they need to thrive, rather than just a small number of people who control the majority of resources.

Reducing Waste

A resource-based economy is designed to minimise waste by valuing resources and ensuring their sustainable use. This is in stark contrast to the capitalist economy, which often treats resources as expendable and encourages the generation of waste in pursuit of profit.

One of the key ways that a resource-based economy reduces waste is by designing products and systems that are circular, rather than linear. In a linear system, resources are extracted, used to create products, and then discarded as waste. In a circular system, resources are continually recycled, reducing the need for new resource extraction and waste disposal.

For example electronic products would be designed for easy disassembly and recycling, rather than built to be thrown away. This would reduce the need for new resources to be extracted and waste to be disposed of, preserving the health of the planet and its inhabitants.

Another way waste is reduced is by prioritising local production and distribution. This reduces the need for long-distance transportation, which is one of the largest sources of waste and pollution in the capitalist economy. In a resource-based economy, resources would be sourced and used locally wherever possible, reducing the need for long-distance transportation and the waste and emissions associated with it.

A resource-based economy would also prioritise reducing the waste associated with food production and consumption. This would involve reducing food waste at all stages of the food chain, from farm to table, by prioritising local food production, reducing packaging waste, and ensuring that surplus food is redirected to those in need.

Waste is reduced by valuing resources, designing products and systems for circularity, and prioritising local production and distribution. This approach minimises waste and preserves resources for future generations, creating a more sustainable and equitable world.

The Urgent Need for Transition to a Resource Based Economy

The current economic system, which is based on financial economics, is unsustainable and facing a range of serious challenges. These include the depletion of natural resources, environmental degradation, and unsustainable consumption patterns. As a result, there is an urgent need to transition to a resource-based economy that prioritises the sustainable use of resources and the protection of the planet.

One of the key drivers of this need is the depletion of natural resources. The financial economics system prioritises the exploitation of resources for profit, with little regard for their future availability. This has led to the overuse of many resources, including oil, coal, and minerals, putting significant strain on the planet’s ecosystems. In a resource-based economy, resources would be managed sustainably, taking into account the need to preserve them for future generations.

Environmental degradation is another major challenge facing the current economic system. Capitalism prioritises economic growth over the protection of the environment, leading to widespread pollution and habitat destruction. The extraction and use of resources for industrial and consumer purposes is a major contributor to this degradation. In a resource-based economy, the protection of the environment would be prioritised, and resources would be used sustainably to minimise waste and pollution.

Finally, unsustainable consumption patterns are a major concern. The financial economics system encourages the continuous consumption of goods, regardless of the consequences for the environment and society. This has led to the overuse of resources, increased waste, and rising levels of debt. In a resource-based economy, consumption would be reoriented towards meeting basic human needs, rather than serving as the driving force behind economic growth.

The Depletion of Natural Resources

The depletion of natural resources is one of the biggest challenges facing the world today. In the current financial economics system, resources are treated as commodities to be bought and sold, with little regard for their long-term availability. This has led to the overuse and depletion of many of the planet’s resources, which are essential for our survival and well-being.

One of the most notable examples of resource depletion is the rapid depletion of oil reserves. The world’s reliance on fossil fuels, particularly oil, has led to the overproduction and consumption of this finite resource. Despite efforts to find alternative sources of energy, oil remains the primary source of energy for many countries, and its depletion will have significant consequences for the global economy.

Another example is the depletion of freshwater resources. Freshwater is essential for human survival and is used for agriculture, industry, and households. However, the overuse of this finite resource, combined with pollution and the impacts of climate change, has led to a rapid decline in the availability of freshwater in many regions. This is already having significant impacts on food security and the livelihoods of communities that rely on agriculture.

The depletion of minerals and metals is also a major concern. These resources are essential for the production of a wide range of products, including electronic devices, infrastructure, and household goods. However, the rapid rate of consumption has led to the depletion of many key minerals and metals, with some experts predicting that some of these resources could be exhausted within the next few decades.

In conclusion, the depletion of natural resources is a major challenge facing the world today. The current financial economics system, which prioritises the exploitation of resources for profit, has led to the overuse and depletion of many of the planet’s essential resources. This is having significant impacts on human well-being and the environment, and highlights the need for a transition to a resource-based economy that prioritises sustainability.

Degradation of the Environment

Environmental degradation is another major challenge facing the world today and is closely linked to the depletion of natural resources. In the current financial economics system, the pursuit of economic growth and profit often takes priority over the protection of the environment, leading to widespread environmental degradation.

One of the most notable examples of environmental degradation is climate change. The burning of fossil fuels for energy has led to a rapid increase in greenhouse gas emissions, causing global temperatures to rise and leading to a range of impacts, including more frequent and intense heat waves, droughts, and extreme weather events. Climate change is already having significant impacts on human well-being, food security, and the environment, and is projected to have even greater impacts in the future.

Another example of environmental degradation is deforestation. Forests are essential for the health of the planet, providing habitat for wildlife, regulating the climate, and supporting human livelihoods. However, the demand for land for agriculture, urbanisation, and other uses has led to widespread deforestation, resulting in the loss of critical habitats and the release of large amounts of carbon into the atmosphere.

Water pollution is another form of environmental degradation that is having significant impacts on human health and the environment. The release of toxic chemicals and waste into waterways has led to the contamination of drinking water and the death of fish and other aquatic life. This not only impacts the health of local communities but also has wider impacts on the environment, including the food chain.

In conclusion, environmental degradation is a major challenge facing the world today and is closely linked to the depletion of natural resources. The current financial economics system, which prioritises economic growth and profit over the protection of the environment, is a major contributor to environmental degradation. A transition to a resource-based economy, which values sustainability and prioritises the protection of the environment, is essential for addressing this challenge.

Unsustainable Consumerism

Unsustainable consumption patterns are a major challenge facing the world today, driven by the current financial economics system, which prioritises economic growth and consumerism over long-term sustainability. Unsustainable consumption patterns not only have significant environmental impacts but also contribute to the depletion of natural resources and exacerbate income inequality.

One of the most notable examples of unsustainable consumption patterns is overconsumption of finite resources such as fossil fuels, minerals, and forests. These resources are being extracted at an unprecedented rate, often with little regard for the long-term consequences. This is contributing to the depletion of these resources, as well as causing significant environmental degradation, such as air and water pollution, and habitat destruction.

Another example of unsustainable consumption patterns is the overuse of single-use plastics, which are causing significant harm to the environment. Plastic waste is a major contributor to ocean pollution, affecting marine life and ecosystems. Plastic also takes hundreds of years to degrade, and much of it ends up in landfills or the natural environment, where it can cause harm to wildlife and the ecosystem.

Excessive consumption of meat and dairy products is another example of unsustainable consumption patterns. The production of these products requires large amounts of land, water, and energy, and contributes to greenhouse gas emissions, deforestation, and the depletion of natural resources. This unsustainable consumption also contributes to health problems, such as heart disease and obesity, and exacerbates poverty in developing countries, where resources are often diverted from local food production to the production of animal feed for export.

In conclusion, unsustainable consumption patterns are a major challenge facing the world today, driven by the current financial economics system, which prioritises economic growth and consumerism over long-term sustainability. A transition to a resource-based economy, which values sustainability and prioritises the protection of the environment, is essential for addressing this challenge and promoting more sustainable consumption patterns.

The Time for Change is Now

The current financial economics system, which prioritises economic growth and consumerism over long-term sustainability, has led to numerous challenges such as dependence on debt, lack of stability, and widening income inequality. Moreover, this system has contributed to the depletion of natural resources, environmental degradation, and unsustainable consumption patterns, highlighting the urgent need for a systemic change in the economic paradigm.

Capitalism, which is centred around the idea of unlimited economic growth, is not only unsustainable but also leads to a cycle of boom and bust, where economic crises are followed by periods of growth and vice versa. This lack of stability is harmful to both individuals and societies, and is a clear indication that the current economic paradigm is in need of change.

Additionally, the current financial economics system perpetuates income inequality, with a small percentage of the population controlling a disproportionate amount of wealth and resources. This income inequality is not only unethical but also undermines social cohesion and stability, leading to a wide range of social and economic problems.

A transition to a resource-based economy, which values sustainability and prioritises the protection of the environment and human needs, is essential for addressing these challenges and promoting a more sustainable and equitable future. A resource-based economy values natural resources and recognizes their finite nature, and seeks to allocate resources in a way that is sustainable and equitable. It also prioritises human needs, such as access to food, housing, and healthcare, and seeks to meet these needs in a sustainable way, without exploiting natural resources or contributing to environmental degradation.

Collective action is crucial in this transition because it allows for a coordinated and systemic change, rather than relying on fragmented and isolated efforts. It is important for individuals to make conscious and responsible choices in their consumption patterns, but this alone is not enough to create a substantial impact. Organisations and businesses can also play a role by adopting sustainable practices and integrating environmental and social responsibility into their operations. Governments, on the other hand, can implement policies and regulations that promote sustainability and equity, and provide incentives for individuals and organisations to adopt more sustainable practices.

In conclusion, a shift towards a sustainable and equitable economy requires the collective efforts of all actors in the economic system. It is not just about reducing environmental impact, but also about creating a fairer and more equitable society for all. By working together, it is possible to create a future where economic prosperity and well-being are achievable for all, while also preserving the planet for future generations.

Common Ground Policies

While politics is often a complex philosophical medley of ideals, there are a certain number of self-evident truths that the progressive Left can agree on.

• Capitalism encourages accumulation and exacerbates inequality. 
• Inequality is detrimental to all levels of society.
• Growth and continual consumption are incompatible with finite resources. 
• Individual liberties are eroding along with the accountability of corporate interests. 
• Politics has become a soap opera of bullshit all across the world. 
• War, torture, and the abuse of vulnerable people are not acceptable. 

Progressive movements need to focus on these values, putting aside any differences between the various factions, rejecting self-interest, and remaining open to working together.

There is also common ground that can be achieved with the centre. Technology, individual rights, and government corruption are all things which can be addressed when coming together with conservatives and libertarians. 

By focussing on what we do have in common rather than what we don’t, we can achieve so much more.

Replace the media

There needs to be a two pronged attack to destroy the current mainstream media while creating a better one. 

The current “mainstream” media is a pathetic excuse for news, saturating us with commercial interests, crime, accidents, and celebrity garbage. It shows us an endless stream of problems but distracts us from the root causes of these problems.

It also pushes a political agenda – either a right wing agenda for the benefit of its rich owners (e.g. Fox), or a “woke”, “left” wing agenda as part of a virtue signalling arms race (e.g. Washington Post).

Meanwhile, real, consequential news takes a back seat; important stories like US financial giant Blackrock buying up Ukraine or the Federal Reserve deliberately throwing workers under the bus to save “the economy”, are almost invisible to the general public.

There needs to be some real progressive balance. Unfortunately, recently many truly progressive outlets have been silenced for daring to speak out against the US war machine following the invasion of Ukraine. Many of these outlets would be considered “true Left”, but being Anti-war now equates to being a bigot, and they are shunned by the new, Ukraine-flag-in-their-profile-picture, virtue-signalling-without-doing-anything-productive, woke “left”.

There also needs to be more on the ground, easy to access news. The (true) Left and the liberal Right need newspapers and mainstream TV slots with bite-size, lowest common denominator news, pushing a shamelessly anti-establishment agenda – but catering it to the masses. But it’s unlikely to get it – following last year’s censorship campaign, it will need new, stronger distribution means.

Scaled up Grassroots Activism

There’s no doubt about it, when it comes to spending money on advertising a political movement, the Left are being beaten hands down. More money and resources need to be injected into putting progressive arguments in front of people. These arguments will be countered, and that’s Ok. The requirement is simply to start a dialogue, and to counter the mainstream capitalist narrative. 

At the same time, true progressives need to step up their online operations. The establishment is becoming highly effective at infiltrating political groups and bringing them down from the inside with trained, paid trolls. They cast doubt, disrupt communication, misuse authority, and attack. 

These are tricks as old as time; yet the Left still falls for it, becoming defensive, engaging, and wasting time. Instead of firefighting, the Left needs to take the initiative. It needs a strategy; a battle plan, or this will not be a fight it can win.

Meanwhile, many Left wing movements have become bogged down in theory, fallen to infighting between strong egos, infiltrated by neutralising, woke politics, and have generally lost sight of their main focus – offering an alternative to capitalism which removes the need for war and inequality.

Highlight negative aspects of capitalism

It’s time to go for the jugular and attack any weakness, highlighting dangerous policies, incompetence, corruption, conflicts of interests, philosophical non-sequiturs at every opportunity.

When the narrative is blatant, when the arguments are repetitive and wrong, we need to be there, merciless and loud, discrediting capitalism at every turn. When they tell us to “Go shopping”, we need to stand up and tell them: “Go fuck yourselves”.

A Positive Vision

If there’s one thing we need more than anything else, it’s a positive counter-vision. We need to demonstrate powerful alternatives at every opportunity. For this, pro-capitalists really have no counter; any positivity they offer is either substanceless rhetoric or a retrospective illusion. 

Imagine, instead of the TV news being about car crashes, break-ins, and celebrities, it reports on scientific breakthroughs, successful cooperative movements, people’s achievements, gambling mafias being dismantled*, children no longer having to work in cobalt mines. 

Instead of GDP, we shine a light on reduced inequality and the happiness index. We talk about what could be done instead with excessive military spending.

With a positive vision, we can offer a truly progressive future: a world able to adapt to constantly changing scenarios, while embracing science, technology and global cooperation. We can move towards doing what is right by ordinary people. We can build a framework of compassion and try to reverse the selfish modus operandi of a century of capitalism.

*This didn’t go so well

It is that last example that can be the most troubling, as in reality most everything is in one way or another connected. The problem is the connections are not simple and they do not lead to a place where we can identify individual people, or groups of people, to point our fingers at and lay blame. The truly fundamental connections show us the relationships between outcomes are system based linkages, influencing behaviour on a grand scale through the massaging of individual and social disposition.

Viewing the scope of the behavioural error from a social perspective can quickly become overwhelming, it can be difficult enough to understand when making a personal assessment, nevermind trying to encourage hundreds of millions to undergo such a consideration. The idea of widespread social change can feel like an insurmountable mountain to climb. This is less than optimal when we come to terms with the fact widespread social reorientation is exactly what we need to avert disaster, as a result of our global trajectories of rapid and unrelenting life support decline.

You could be forgiven for thinking the internet would aid in this type of collective shift of consciousness as well. The increase in the dominance of a handful of companies acting as gatekeepers to the information available to us has eroded the effectiveness of this tool. Not only do we find much of academic research hidden behind paywalls, but even the ways we search the internet have been manipulated. We have become trapped in filter bubbles and many remain blissfully unaware of this fact or simply don’t care. 

Sadly social networks have boomed in popularity, becoming a type of skin across the top of the internet which is penetrated in increasingly rare instances in any real way. This is troublesome because like the filter bubbles of search engines, content viewed on social media sites is also manipulated to appeal to your clickthrough, like and commenting history. Critically, social networks are now going further and reducing the reach of content based on their arbitrary ideas of what is acceptable and what is not. In some cases this may feel like the right thing to do, but it is also a slippery slope and can be easily applied to any subject matter which may be seen as inconsistent with established and accepted norms. Even when those norms may be incompatible with the feasibility of our ongoing human health.

This makes social change much more difficult as we become surrounded by media feeding our confirmation biases, which can reinforce our personally held opinions whether they are correct or not. Further it can lead to the outright rejection of information, creating guardians of the status quo who identify so fervently with an idea that it becomes a core aspect of their personal identity and beyond reproach.

A less discussed aspect of our social malaise is the tendency to become distracted in a quagmire of issues which offer little in the way of valuable social progress when weighed against the very serious deteriorations we face. Pronouns come to mind here, it is really a meaningless distraction with almost no upside when considering the fact our species is facing an extinction level event based on the state of the biosphere. Yet people can feel emotionally charged by this subject matter and make it a core aspect of who they are. There is also the “we can concentrate on more than one thing at a time” argument which can be brought to bear when addressing the folly of such activism. If the last fifty years is anything to go by, that argument falls flat on its face. Socially we have been successfully distracted by all manner of subject matter and failed to deal with known ecosystems declines in any real way. This has left us in a precarious position as science screams at us to drastically alter our social path in short order to avoid the worst impacts of a failing biosphere.

Being aware of the immense difficulty we face with changing the basis of human society in order to shift outcomes for both the social and natural environment can lead us to a sort of paralysis. We can be left finding hope extinguished, leading us to return to the culturally accepted fold or stepping back to simply watch the world burn. However it is not up to us individually to drive social change, all we can do is drive our own personal change. Altering our own personal attitude and behaviour may not be terribly encouraging, as one of billions it is not likely to be of any immediate consequence. However one of the keys to a widespread shift of society is the dedication to personal change by a committed handful of people, acting as a beacon to others, guiding the way.

Changing the world is no small task, and all too often it may feel like a pointless endeavour, but each day you dedicate yourself to being a part of a new way of seeing the world and operating in it is making a difference. Keep going, there is nothing more meaningful right now than working to be the change you would like to see in the world.

This censorship by Facebook will cause harm to social cohesion. For people with difficult views, ostracisation by big tech is only likely to cause them to move to other platforms, which act as echo chambers. I am already aware of several people leaving Facebook for alternative networks, where they can freely express their concepts. To some this may not feel like a problem, or be a cause for celebration, but I can’t help but feel it is a tragic mistake.

If people with views we don’t agree with find themselves pushed away from the world’s most popular social networks they are only likely to find alternatives like Minds or Parler to congregate on. Surrounded by like minded individuals, ideas which seem irrational to many of us will fester and grow in the echo chambers, unquestioned and unchallenged.

We won’t be in a position to communicate with each other, to try to understand each other. The gap between us will expand and it will result in more extreme real world events as people lash out. More instances of people claiming events are false flags,or fake news, increasing tension and a widening of the divide between people. More families torn apart by their living in different worlds. A fragmented society living in incomparable worlds, incapable of cooperating on the most foundational level – our democracy.

At a time when we desperately need to come together, when people need to be able to communicate and build mutual understanding and decide how to solve some of the most pressing global issues, big tech is actively driving people away and apart diminishing our capacity to cooperate. Creating wedges between groups by silencing and compelling users to move to alternative platforms. We don’t need to agree with everything everyone is saying, in fact a diversity of ideas is important in a democracy, but we do need to be able to talk to each other without censorship. In that respect, Mark Zuckerberg and the rest of big tech have lost the plot. If we don’t stand up now censorship will only expand.

In a vain attempt to fight irrational ideas, big tech censorship is actually making things much worse. There should be very limited censorship on social networks like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, it should be reserved for direct calls of physical violence. Outside of that we should be able to confront and discuss anything else, without claiming our feelings are hurt. It might not be pretty or easy but, most things worth doing are not. The best way to overcome ignorance is with information, not censorship.

Since the first draft of this post Trump has been removed from Facebook and Twitter. It’s hard to argue with this particular act of censorship, giving that Trump is inciting an insurrection. It does however raise some questions about the role of big tech in the political sphere.

Given their almost ubiquitous usage and enormous social influence, we believe that  publicly listed Facebook has forgone its right to make arbitrary decisions about how the platform is used. Mark Zuckerberg now has a responsibility to shareholders and the public to maintain a public space. We are not subject to extreme censorship when we leave our houses, or go to the pub, we should not be subject to censorship on these large social platforms. These multinational companies are bigger than nation states. More powerful than national governments. Their objective is profit, not looking out for the interests of common citizens.

Big Tech should not be allowed to decide who is heard and who is not.

We are not Trump supporters, we are not saying that Trump should not have been banned from Twitter. But we are growing concerned about a rising trend in censorship from “liberal” media.

Now the entire Parler social network has been deplatformed, facing simultaneous attacks from Apple, Amazon and Google.. The place is a Right Wing cesspool don’t get us wrong, but who is drawing the lines here? And where will these people go? They will go further underground.

Remember when this started with Alex Jones, which nobody minded because he’s crazy. Then Stefan Molyneux, which nobody minded because he’s a dick and a white supremecist. But then they banned David Icke, who, despite being completely bananas, has never actually incited any violence or hate.

Now, Ron Paul, who as far as anyone knows, had no part in the Capitol riots, has had his account activity on his Facebook page suspended. No reason has been given apart from “repeated warnings of violating community standards”, which Paul has insisted they never received.

We are being conditioned to accept these bans because they’re happening to fringe characters. The easily offended left are especially susceptible to getting out the pitchforks. While we don’t really want to hear most of the rantings of RWNJs, there are better ways to deal with it, and deplatforming is full of problems.

And lets not forget that it was these networks that created this monster in the first place. Big tech has helped engineer division with their bubble-making algorithms designed to appeal to confirmation bias and emotions, fueling the spread of asinine philosophy and fake news.  They profited from the outrage, they grew off the back of loudmouth social influencers. Like PornHub establishing a monopoly by allowing unverified content for years, big tech are now trying to wash away the problem they created through censorship.

The Cost of Consumerism

It is no easy task to assess the cost of consumer culture on environmental sustainability. It’s not as simple as weighing the functional lifespan of a product and its impact as waste once discarded. There are entire chains of resource gathering, refinement, production, distribution and storage to take into account. None of these aspects of a product are easy to identify for the average consumer. We are in no way encouraged to consider these facets of the products we are inspired to acquire.

Crude oil is a key product in the chain of everything available in our global economy. While very few of us actively buy oil by the barrel, we all pay for it indirectly in our daily purchases. The cost of crude oil to environmental sustainability is of course enormous. From leaks at oil wells, such as the Deepwater Horizon which spewed approximately sixty thousand barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico a day, to spills from transport like the Exxon Valdez (more than two hundred forty four thousand barrels) or the Kolva River spill (more than 1.8 million barrels of oil), environmental harm is not only common but long lasting.

While leaks and spills are visually apparent with immediate examples of harm, the most insidious damage to environmental sustainability is not so easily seen. The refining process of crude and burning of petroleum fuel produces both greenhouse gas emissions and releases BTEX compounds, which are hazardous to health. Both international shipping and international aviation produce more greenhouse gas emissions annually than many countries around the world, ranking as the eight and thirteenth worst emitters in the world respectively in 2017.

Further, a 2016 look at greenhouse gas emissions generated by sector, found that transport produced 16.2 per cent globally. It also found industry, not including iron and steel production, accounted for a further 17 per cent of emissions. That is one third of generated emissions connected to oil. Landfills and commercial buildings add a further 8.5 per cent of emissions, arguably making consumer culture responsible for more than 40 per cent of greenhouse emissions, with oil being directly connected to at least 33 per cent. At first glance this may lead many to see oil as our enemy, but this is not the case. Advanced human society relies on oil production to be maintained, the underlying problem is our rampant use of this resource. We are not using oil, or anything else on our planet for that matter, economically.

Environmental Sustainability and Consumerism

Our economy lies at the foundation of our environmental sustainability difficulties. We can not continue to waste resources, generate pollution and destroy ecosystems to sate our material wants and maintain a social system which relies upon a conditioned desire to procure. If we are to thrive as a species into the future we will need to face the underlying driver of biosphere declines. To abate and mitigate the impacts of drought, fire, flooding, increased storm intensity, and indeed pandemics will require our desire for environmental sustainability to come to the fore.

When we reflect on our consumer based economic model and ask ourselves the hard questions about what matters, the next fifty versions of some great gadget or a planet that supports life, will be when we know we have a chance to secure a future for our species. Sadly, if our thoughts remain preoccupied with how we will earn money or where profits will come from, well, if that kind of thinking continues to dominate the social conversation it is difficult to see a way for our species to overcome the myriade of global declines it is currently faced with.

Both drought and floods impact directly on our ability to produce food. The melting of glaciers globally has reduced our planet’s global storage of precious fresh water. Ecological services which provide habitat upon which the web of life thrives are decimated. Global inequality has broadened, poverty is no longer predominantly a symptom of developing nations, it has become a state of the working poor. 

Group think, prevalent in society, has generated cavernous divisions between people, battle lines drawn between the political left and right. The global poor seeking to escape war and crumbling environmental conditions are rejected by first world nations as fear intensifies. The clear story of the human experience in the early twenty-first century is one of rampant deterioration.

We are all products of our environment, subject to the influence of our social and physical surroundings. How does human society condition us as a whole? We are reluctant to question the fundamentals of society which describe how we must work to pay to live, lending us all to become consumers in a cyclical act which ensures the slow grinding decay of our natural world. A system which predisposes us to judging each other based on wealth and employment.

Consumerism has developed to be our global cultural norm and this prevailing social environment has conditioned us to see the world through a lens which lends us to perpetuate these behavioural propensities. Even if those actions lead ultimately to our own demise, to our own extinction. The human experience, reduced to consumerism. With money as our chief metric all our problems begin to look financial, while the cause underpinning the preponderance of human, social and environmental declines on our shared planet stem unequivocally from the financial system itself.

If our species can make use of its intellectual tenacity to arrest anthropogenic biosphere and societal declines in time to prevent self destruction, is as yet unclear. One thing is certain, if we remain reluctant to engage in deep consideration of widespread systemic changes to our contemporary social design there will be scant hope for the future of humanity. The time for change is upon us.

Through the 80’s bleaching events impacted about eight per cent of global reefs. In 2016 alone thirty one per cent of coral suffered bleaching and between 2014 and 2017 seventy five per cent of coral bleached with almost thirty per cent being wiped out. Earlier this year the Great Barrier Reef suffered its third widespread bleaching event in five years, with twenty five per cent of the reef suffering extreme bleaching.

It simply must not be allowed to continue, coral lay at the foundation of the ocean food web, they are nurseries for sea life. Without adequate healthy reefs in the ocean fish stocks will plummet and that will have a direct impact on us. People will suffer. In the area of three billion people rely on fish as a primary source of protein, and the fishing industry world wide employs approximately thirty five million people. 

Corals produce near to half the oxygen on our planet as they have a symbiotic relationship with zooxanthellae algae. When water temperatures get too high for too long the coral expels the algae resulting in bleaching which can lead to the death. Life on our planet emerged from the oceans of the world, and indeed to this day relies on a healthy ocean. Without coral reefs in our oceans life becomes markedly more difficult. 

Coral reefs are dying as an outcome of our impacts on the climate resulting from our model of economics which commodifies the natural world and doesn’t factor in the health and sustainability of the environment into economic transactions.  We must reassess our social orientation before we run out of future.

Feature Image – Bleachedcoral by J. Roff CC BY-SA 3.0

On Sept 17 2019 the interest rate in the repo market jumped from close to two per cent to around ten per cent. The banks stopped lending to derivative and hedge funds. The Fed had to step in and pump money into the market to keep the repo wheels turning so large investment houses would not go insolvent.

The step by the Fed was to run until early Oct. 2019, then got pushed to Dec. 2019, then pushed again to early 2020. Now there is no end date. Since Sept 2019 the Fed has pumped in more than 800 billion U.S. to the repo market. The balance sheet for the Fed has ballooned to a debt holding of almost 4 trillion U.S. and increasing. While liquidity problems in the repo market are the explosives set to implode the global economy, Covid 19 is pulling the trigger.

The market is crashing, we can watch it in real time. Watch the reserve banks panic as they try to stave off financial ruin of the banking sector. We can listen to the talking heads tell us all about how important the pecuniary economy is. Listen to politicians tell us everything is fine, that they are “taking steps”. We can watch trillions of dollars pumping into the banking system and markets. Trillions of dollars, and we can watch the markets continue to crumble.

We can panic also, worry about our own debt, our homes, our jobs, cars, food, toilet paper. Worry about our futures; what will we do if the economy collapses again? Or instead we question the basis of our economy. We step back, take a deep breath and ask, is it worth saving? 

Could we let it go and create something new, something completely different? 

Can we try a model which does not drive us into competition with each other as we try to “get ahead”? How about a system which isn’t predisposed to causing harm through its operation? A process which will not make us sick with stress, or leave people destitute and living on the street. A structure which won’t impoverish more than half the world so that a handful can live a life of opulence. A method which will not cause increasing harm to the environment we rely upon, mutilating our shared home. 

Can we imagine, design and install a system that will usher in an age of real social prosperity?

Of course we can, – we can create systems, we can follow systems and we can change systems. It will start with a robust conversation about what matters, what indeed matters. From there we can come up with ideas, we can discuss options and we can begin to design something new. It all begins with our commitment to communication. 

It is when we are open to engaging in dialogue that we can address systemic problems and investigate options for resolution. When we shut down treating subject matter as taboo, as an unalterable natural order, we suffer the poor outcomes generated. Nothing is more important than open, honest discourse about the consequences of the economic environment in which we find ourselves, especially while it is creating less than optimal results for individuals, society in general and the wider biosphere.

Climate change, the loss of biodiversity, pollution, widespread malnutrition, the emergence of new viruses and potential social collapse. Could there be more compelling reasons to investigate the connection between our economy and behavioural dispositions? 

It is up to us, to tackle this subject matter, treating it as the priority theme it deserves to be and seek alternative methods and resolution. Or, continue as we are, suffering through all the declines. Declivity spawned from an antiquated social model benefiting the few at the expense of the many. It’s time to start talking so we can make this the final crash of the economy. 

Earth overshoot day fell on the 29th of July in 2019,^[1] since 1970 when the date was first calculated it has steadily crept back from December 29th. There have been a handful of years in which humanity has pushed back on the overshoot by a couple of days, but the trend is certainly expanding use of our planet’s finite resources.

Measuring the steadily increasing speed with which our species consumes its planetary resources has a tendency to steer people in the direction of overpopulation alarmism. It is not difficult to see why, on the surface it’s a somewhat simple conclusion to come to. It takes the planet eighteen months to keep pace with our environmental demands each year, this translates to humanity needing 1.7 planets. Of course we don’t have more than one planet, so we must have an overpopulation problem.

Right?

I would argue we don’t have an overpopulation problem. I see our resource use dilema being firmly rooted in our dominant social disposition. Under the capitalist system we create a torrent of stuff, it is what keeps our entire social market system operating. It keeps the clear majority of employed people in jobs, which is a good thing when you need an income to pay to live. The problem with creating an ever increasing volume of materials, in order to maintain a growth based economic model, is you need to have continual turnover of those items to maintain adequate employment which allows people to feed the system.

An ouroboros of sorts, this system is in an endless cycle of create, consume at the expense of planetary sustainability. With the endless create consume cycle comes endless waste, of course in such a system creating material items which last is not an option. To keep this system operating we need to create a fantastic amount of junk, it needs to break or be fundamentally useless out of the box, so you can either replace it or be duped into buying the next fad junk item to keep people employed.

So we can blame overpopulation, if our goal is simply to maintain a horrible model of financial economics, which is fundamentally anti-economic when you think about it. Or, we could address the elephant in the room and come up with an alternative economic model. A model not based on profits, or even money, but rather on global sustainability and human health. I am not suggesting it will be an easy thing to do by any stretch of the imagination. I would, however, point out it may be easier than watching our biosphere crumble around us while we hoard all our dollars.

_{[1] Earth Overshoot Day. (2019). Earth Overshoot Day 2019. [online] Available at: overshootday.org}