An optimist -- and I am still an optimist -- will argue that in spite
of forgone opportunities, the USA could help create a more civilized
and sustainable world.
On the technical side, it would need to advance
* education,
* research, and
* innovation,
This effort should advance the education, research, and innovation
needed to produce a sustainable world. In particular, the US
government should spend $300 billion or so per year on solar thermal
towers, solar voltaic cells, yeast able to survive a higher
concentration of alcohol, enzymes to convert carbohydrates to
hydrocarbons, and the like.
We know that the US government can borrow (or raise thorugh taxes) and
spend $300 billion per year since it has borrowed far more than that
recently.
On the social or political side,
* it should retract from the `Jacksonian tradition' in American
politics. Overtly, that tradition is committed to preserving
American interests and honor. Covertly, in current practice, it
implies torture, repression, and corruption.
Instead, it should combine the other three traditions,
* the Hamiltonian, which is concerned with American economic
well-being;
* the Jeffersonian, which focuses on protecting American democracy
in a perilous world;
* the Wilsonian, which strives to promulgate American values;
and push for
* more competition in US elections; less gerrymandering, fewer
people who feel themselves forever excluded from making possibly
valuable votes;
* more honesty in government;
both of which imply reciprocal accountability, since fairness and
honesty tell us that the dishonest and incompetent will be excluded.
At least one group should push for
* a conservative admininstration that recognizes that it protects
itself and its supporters by protecting the environment. (A
progressive administration would do the same; but think of
conservatives.)
The analogy is that lions do not only fight other lions, they do not
eat all their prey. Lions preserve their environment.
Property law enables weak humans to enlist a government to fight other
humans, to control their own private property. The essence of
subsidiarity is that decisions be kept as close as possible to their
enactments. Thus, an agriculture economy is more successful with
government-protected private farms than with huge latifundia. In a
economy with airplanes, potential bombers and highjackers are
prevented by alert and aware airline passengers who are willing and
able to defend themselves.
Likewise, environmental law enables weak humans to save themselves and
their property from dangers they cannot fight alone. No single human
can prevent a drought, a heavy snow, or a harsh rain from hurting him
or her, his or her land. No one can stop breathing certain kinds of
poisoned air (the rich can save themselves from other kinds of poison
by filtering their air).
Conservatives must protect and preserve their environments.
Otherwise, they are not conservative; they are short-sighted and
irrational spendthrifts.
Similarly, for the long run, a conservative or progressive government
needs to provide the legal base for a economy based on the two legs of
* von Neuman replicators that can manufacture material objects
cheaply. (Inorganic replicators have been built, but none have
invented and built replicators that can manufacture from raw
materials; indeed, this work may take another generation and
considerable funding, although some group might succeed tomorrow.)
And a
* sufficiently low population that material resources can be
expanded without much trouble.
With von Neuman replicators that manufacture, human governments no
longer need many people for conventional war. The cost of that kind
of military action drops. The ancient need for large numbers of
people vanishes. You can survive with a small population.
At least you can survive so long as most people preserve the society
-- groups can, as usual, infiltrate and destroy it -- and so long as
they make sure it is resilient against disruptive attacks.
For both the short and the long run, a government needs to provide the
monies for education, research, and innovation and laws that provide
for reasonable accounting.
We are hurt by unaccounted costs, which economists call `external
costs' since they do not appear without law.
Without a legal base to form the institutions, sensible practice lacks
motivation.
--
Robert J. Chassell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
http://www.rattlesnake.com http://www.teak.cc
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
