From: Michael Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I think the MAI is an attempt to wedge the gears of any possible
>democratic governance before it become clear just what 100% free flow
>of capital means. What it really means is....I think I feel a rant
>coming on and I want to keep this short. :-)
I do not understand why people assume that justice can only by
served by a so-called democracy. IMHO, there isn't a chance of
a snowball in hell that any kind of "democratic governance" can
lead to anything but total disaster. Moreover, I see no a priori
reason why an autocratic government can not produce at least as
much justice as our present plutocratic government.
Does anyone want to discuss any of the following items?
=================================================================
Current assumptions:
#1. The scientific community is correct -- that we have now
exceeded the carrying capacity of our planet, and that
continued "business as usual" will result in a global
population crash in less than 35 years -- billions may die
untimely deaths. [ http://dieoff.org/page5.htm ]
#2. The expected crash is the WORST possible outcome for
societies all over the world. World governments must do
whatever is necessary to avoid the crash.
#3. Once carrying capacity was exceeded, political questions
have "right" and "wrong" answers. The "right" answers will
tend to delay the crash, the "wrong" answers will tend to
hasten the crash.
The "right" and "wrong" political answers can only be
determined by scientists working collectively, utilizing
modern technology. What point is democracy if scientists
already know what the answers MUST be? [1]
#4. America's political system is "structurally" defective.
"Government by popularity contest" can only elect idiots and
liars. There absolutely no way that idiots and liars can
solve the colossal problems that confront our civilization
today.
#5. We need to base public policy on explicit measures of
progress, such as the GPI. (This is often discussed, so
I won't get into it here.) [ http://dieoff.org/page11.htm ]
#6. We need to HIRE our policy-makers based upon an explicit
system of merit. Why don't we require all policy-makers to
have a degree in either general systems theory or ecology?
Moreover, they should have demonstrated good track records
in local government before going on to national or global
government.
Bureaucrats could hire the best man or woman for the job
based on explicit measures of merit -- to hell with popularity
contests!
#7. Political theory is merely the rationalization of economic
theory, with our present form of democracy serving as the
rationalization of laissez-faire capitalism. Thus, in order
to change our politics, we must first change our economics.
To see the outlines of the new economics (and your new
political future as well), read the publications of the
International Society for Ecological Economics (ISEE).
Many ISEE publications are available from Island Press:
http://www.islandpress.com/
#8. Metaphysical[2] beliefs are irrelevant except to gauge the
emotional impacts of various policies on the public.
------------
[1] Although no one rants and raves against democracy as much
as I do, read Kaplain's recent article at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/97dec/democ.htm
[2] metaphysical: A priori speculation upon questions that are
unanswerable to scientific observation, analysis, or
experiment.
e.g., political, neoclassical economic, and moral theories.
