> Public financing of elections would help more than anything else, but
> "economic growth" is still the only kind of future people can imagine. No
> one will willingly forego "economic growth" even though universal physical
> laws tell us that "economic growth" can only end in "crash".
>
Public financing of parties are no solution, as only those already
part of establishment would get support - the experience of countries
that already have this system, same time wouldn't stop a few fascist
millionaires to get their part elected through their massively
financed media campaigns (e.g. in Italy, Germany, and Hungary;
in Hungary the millionaire playright reached with his fascistoid
party the 5%, now he can pocket the state political financing, too)
The "economic growth" is just a public relation phrase since
the monetarist era of regan/thatcher who were into that
mysterius, never-yet-surfaced trickled down effect.
Don't be so sure that Mr Sixpack buys it.
By the way, the recent decades of "growth" did not mean
extra industrial capacities in the "developed" countries,
I've seen data, that the capacities used are at 70s level, in the UK
even lower.
The "growth" figures are heavily massaged I guess, and includes
all sorts of financial futures/bogus figures.
Eva
> ------------------------------------------
>
> In the past, I have noted that Tainter's histowork suggests that when we
> become too complex for our energy base our civilization will collapse.
> Prigogine reached the same conclusion coming from an entirely different
> perspective: non-equilibrium thermodynamics.
>
> "According to Prigogine, systems contain subsystems that continuously
> fluctuate. At times a single fluctuation or a combination of them may become
> so magnified by possible FEEDBACK, that it shatters the preexisting
> ORGANIZATION. At such revolutionary moments or 'bifurcation points', it is
> impossible to determine in advance whether the system will disintegrate into
> 'chaos' or leap to a new, more differentiated, higher level of 'order'. The
> latter case defines dissipative structures so termed because they need more
> energy to sustain them than the simpler structures they replace and are
> limited in growth by the amount of heat they are able to disperse. "
> http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ASC/DISSIP_STRUC.html ]
>
> Our "economicalpolitical" system is a positive-feedback system: corruption
> begats corruption, and power begats power until the system "bifurcates". At
> that point, our "economicalpolitical" system MUST either leap to a higher
> level of order (increasing complexity) OR it will disintegrate into chaos.
> In other words, to survive these bifurcations our civilization must utilize
> ever-increasing amounts of energy.
>
> Again, I have noted that global oil production is expected to "peak" in less
> than ten years. We face a long period of ever-decreasing amounts of energy.
> Thus, it seems that the coming "peak" in oil will serve two functions. (1)
> The economic shocks will initiate "bifurcations" in industrial societies
> around the world. (2) The lack of energy will insure that these societys
> will disintegrate into chaos.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
