>This it is a good piece ( long but good)  on why the environmental
>movement has got to move on to a commons movement

>Our Commons Future Is Already Here
>A stirring call to unite the environmental and global justice movement 
>by Maude Barlow
>
>http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/10/13-6

It seems to me that things are getting bad enough that activists are
starting to consider dumping the current development paradigm.  I am seeing
more political proposals (see above) organized around "the commons" and the
"common good" instead of the "private greed under fascism" we have now.  My
idea -- AMERICA 2.0 -- is one of those proposals. 

Step one must be to take corporations completely out of our global political
systems (see below). If that's not done, then progressive change is simply
not possible.  Therefore, I suggest global activists organize around the
idea of removing corporations from politics.  Everyone should be able to
agree on that first step. Once corporations are completely out of our
political systems, different post-capitalist, post-fascist social models can
be tried to see which one seems to be the most promising.

Jay
=========
[ Snip from <http://tinyurl.com/2dojm4l> ]

What follows are six political steps, listed in order of priority, that are
designed to mitigate the societal disruptions of the net energy cliff:

1. Remove the "personhood" Constitutional protections from corporations.
2. Make it a federal crime for corporations to advocate anything (including,
but not limited to, advertising) in the mass media.
3. Make it a federal crime for anyone employed by a corporation to lobby
elected or appointed officials directly or indirectly.
4. Mandate public financing for elections.
5. Assemble teams of the country's best and brightest medical doctors,
scientists, engineers and other thinkers-but no representatives of religious
groups, economists, or other corporate-special interests-to recommend public
policy. (We do not need a Manhattan Project for economics-on how to save the
corporations and their outrageous profits; we need a Manhattan Project on
how the country can survive the net energy cliff!)
6. Encourage public debate on proposed changes.

  (Number 5 above is the key difference that I am advocating. Public policy
recommendations would come from medical doctors, engineers and scientists
who are looking at the entire system instead of from a room full of fat
salesman trying to sell worthless shit to an unsuspecting public. It's based
on the recognition that if one changes the environment in which political
decisions are made, one changes the political decisions.)


_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to