---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Great Transition Network <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:46 PM
Subject: The Church of Economism and Its Discontents (GTN Discussion)
To: [email protected]



>From Gar Alperovitz <[email protected]>

-------------------------------------------------------
We may agree or disagree with use of the term “economism,” but Richard
Norgaard is certainly right to underscore the essentially religious nature
of traditional economic thinking—and the need to transcend it. Also that
transcending will require the introduction and affirmation of a contending
formulation of equal, indeed, greater power. This, of course, is what Pope
Francis emphasized (to a degree) in his recent Encyclical, starting from
the framework of Roman Catholic Christianity. The great Jewish theologian,
Martin Buber, opened similar and in some areas even more powerful themes in
his less commonly cited works. The judgment is also at the heart of growing
modern interest in “commons” philosophical formulations. And certainly
other formulations that attempt to reach to broader philosophical or even
religious understandings are likely to emerge as the pain of market based
capitalism deepens.

One part of this work is necessarily at the level of ideas, theory, and
grand conceptions: I agree. Another critical part, however, forces much
more careful attention to the nature of economic institutions that
challenge existing ‘religious’ economic paradigms and also begin to develop
institutionally supported practices in support of a new direction.
Importantly, these also require moving beyond current formulations in many
areas. At the local level, for instance, worker-cooperatives are now much
in vogue—efforts I certainly support and, indeed, have been involved with
and helped develop for many decades. However, many such institutions
working in competitive market conditions can easily be forced to
externalize costs in ways destructive of the environment. If there are
economies of scale available, despite the best of intentions, they will
often be forced to expand, and to undercut competitors, even though their
internal ‘commons’ principles might suggest other hopes.
Nor do such efforts necessarily produce general equality. (Worker co-ops in
the oil industry are likely to have interests and incomes different from
those working in co-ops in the garbage collection industry.) Again, I am a
strong proponent of cooperatives; and commitment to larger cooperative
principles and culture can go a long way to mitigate such problems—but,
unfortunately, not all the way if market conditions put the institution
under economic attack, or if conditions generate different competing
institutional interests.

To fully come to terms with the larger framing that Norgaard opens up, at
some point we are clearly going to have to undertake institutional
explorations involving a larger and more encompassing “community” approach,
one that inherently includes all of the community (not just the workers in
one firm, cooperative or other)—i.e. non-workers, the elderly, the young,
stay at home care givers, and many others. The principle is that of
inclusion. It is also one in which “externalities” of any enterprise are
“internalized” by structures representing the entire community. Among many
other issues, how diverse interests can be brought together institutionally
without stifling creativity then becomes itself a critical issue. The
challenge facing cooperatives suggests only some of the questions large
scale economic institutions will have to deal with if we are to move beyond
“economism”—and if what replaces it is to be sustained by institutional and
community practice.

Put another way, the development of new forms of community-inclusive
efforts at all levels—neighborhood, municipality, state, region, and
nation—are likely to be necessary complements to the development of a new
“religion”—or in Karl Mannheim’s famous formulation—a meaningful “utopia”
that can challenge the reigning “ideology.” Fortunately, practical
experimentation in diverse areas is underway in different parts of the
nation and the world, experimentation which can only benefit from the
larger philosophical (religious) direction Norgaard urges.

Gar Alperovitz

***************************************************************

Friday, October 30, 2015

>From Paul Raskin <[email protected]>

-----
GTN Friends:

I write to launch our NOVEMBER DISCUSSION, which will consider Richard
Norgaard’s new GTI essay, “The Church of Economism and Its Discontents.”
Please read it at
www.greattransition.org/publication/the-church-of-economism-and-its-discontents,
and consider commenting.

Is orthodox economics akin to a secular religion? Are we living in the
“Econocene”? Is there a way out? Norgaard, a founder of ecological
economics, argues yes, yes, and maybe. In so doing, he guides us further
into the terrain of alternative economics we’ve explored recently in our
discussions of GTI pieces by Herman Daly, Giorgos Kallis, Peter Barnes, and
John Bellamy Foster.

I wonder, though:
* Is economism still a monolithic ideology? Or are critical currents within
the economics mainstream increasingly questioning its reductionist
framework and false predictions?
* As a framing for our contemporary condition, is “the Econocene” a useful
corrective to the geologic emphasis of “the Anthropocene”? How do these
compare to GTI’s term, “The Planetary Phase of Civilization,” which aims to
convey the multi-dimensionality of the globalizing social-ecological system?

I’d appreciate hearing your thoughts on these and other issues raised by
Norgaard’s stimulating essay.

Comments are welcome through NOVEMBER 30.

Looking forward,

Paul Raskin
GTI Director

NOTE ON GTI’S PUBLICATION CYCLE:
GTN discussions occur in ODD-NUMBERED months, and GTI publishes in
EVEN-NUMBERED months. Each discussion takes up a new essay or viewpoint
prior to its publication. After the discussion closes, GTI publishes the
piece, edited comments from the discussion, and a response from the author
(along with other new articles). You can review all GTN discussions at
www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-forum.

-------------------------------------------------------
Hit reply to post a message
Or see thread and reply online at
http://www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-discussions/171-the-church-of-economism-and-its-discontents/1415

Need help? Email [email protected]





-- 
Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org


P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

<http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list

Blog - http://www.blog.p2pfoundation.net
Wiki - http://www.p2pfoundation.net

Show some love and help us maintain and update our knowledge commons by making 
a donation. Thank you for your support.
https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/donation

https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

Reply via email to