Economics, Politics, Honesty
Significant challenges present themselves as we wrestle with the major
political and economic changes needed to address the climate and ecological
emergency. Such changes will not be easy. Avoiding both societal and
ecological breakdown will get progressively more difficult as climate
change bakes in ever more unpredictable and destructive impacts. Why are we
avoiding putting an end to growth in terms of our collective demand for
transport, materials and energy – and instead drastically reducing this
demand? Avoiding transgressing these boundaries implies placing physical
limits on what humans can use and consume, in terms of resources and
energy. Once the need to place such limits is accepted, the question arises
of how the limited resources are distributed – between countries and
between individuals within countries. How this should be decided and by
whom leads to questions around governance, democracy and power. Existing
power structures have led to severe inequality. Instead hope can only be
generated through collective action that transforms both our worldviews and
future possibilities. This disruption holds both risks and opportunities.
There will be technological changes but, on their own, they risk locking
out rather than enabling sufficient transformation. Breaking through the
harder times ahead will require a complete metamorphosis in how our society
is organised and governed.
There is a need for a raw public debate, such that politicians are honest -
and citizens accurately informed - about the scale and nature of changes
needed to address the climate emergency.The notion that the overall level
of UK and European energy and material consumption needs to reduce if we
are to address the climate emergency is still rarely acknowledged. It is
time that rethinking energy demand, post growth economics and the radical
redistribution of our access to such resources gains political credence to
allow wellbeing for all within climate and environmental limits. This
requires an acceptance that:
“Unless we cap overall energy use, renewable energy will drive
energy demand growth rather than displacing the extraction and burning of
fossil fuels. This will be reflected in overall growth in the size of the
economy: economic growth. An adequate response to the climate emergency
requires us to look beyond ‘green growth’ as an add-on to current fossil
fuel powered economic growth. Thus, plans to reduce overall energy demand
form a key element alongside eliminating our extraction and burning of
fossil fuels. Scaling up renewable energy generation and electrifying
transport, heating, energy storage and other technologies that underpin the
transition to zero carbon requires significant amounts of rare earth metals
and other minerals such as lithium and copper. Reducing overall energy
consumption is a crucial means of constraining the amount of mining and
pollution that takes place around the world and of limiting the continued
impacts of an unrestrained extraction drive to accessing ever more
resources. As material and energy extraction falls, their availability will
be limited which will bring to the forefront the question about how
resources should be shared and who gets to use them. Thus, redistribution
and shared (public) use of increasingly scarce resources, both within and
between countries, underpins sufficient climate action. This includes
ensuring that the Global South can access its share of the limited supplies
of rare earth metals, lithium and copper, which in turn requires already
developed countries such as the UK to limit their demand for such
materials. This illuminates the links between justice, global equity and
limiting future carbon emissions.”
A climate emergency economy requires nothing short of a reimagining of
what we call politics and the part played by citizens. The role of the
state must go further than tweaking policies and incentives to address the
extreme impacts of capitalist economics and consumer culture, and nudging
businesses and ‘consumers’ to behave differently. Instead, we need genuine
leadership that links national strategy to place-based plans at the
community level. This, in effect, means a shift from a predominantly
market-led economy to an economy that is much more planned and directed.
Instead, the different tiers of governance must work better together.
Policy decisions must be properly implemented (including enforcement)
whilst providing clear feedback so that policy better reflects realities on
the ground and is continually improved to ensure that the sum of local
actions is sufficient. Elinor Ostrom explored such tiered governance
systems in her principles for managing
Effective emergency decision-making at multiple levels of government must
rely on stronger levels of trust and collective understanding of our
predicament. This requires national agreement on key ‘direction-setting’
decisions that frame action, and local agreement on the implementation of
those decisions. Local citizen engagement will be needed to drive and
support such shifts, both in terms of politics and around cultural and
social norms such that they are successfully implemented.
Mainstream politics and economics remain wedded to the belief that the
path to a sustainable future can largely be built through technological
solutions and that this means leaving it to experts in the field. However,
discussions by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) or Bioenergy with CCS (BECCS) reflect a
form of climate policy capture by vested interests. Previous work by Green
House has explored the fallacy of relying on geo-engineering to absolve us
of treating the climate crisis seriously. Relying on technological
solutions creates the illusion that our society can blindly proceed as
normal. What would it mean to let go of the idea that technological
solutions should be anything but a minor part of our response to the crises
we face?
There is a need to be honest about the true predicament in which we
find ourselves and to avoid being deceived by technological false hopes and
illusions of humanity’s grandeur and wisdom in the face of the climate
crisis. Dougald Hine talks of how humanity cannot just plan and manage its
way out of the climate crisis. This means accepting that we are living in
the ruins of a fossil fuel powered, endless growth focussed economy, which
must be allowed to fail so that people’s livelihoods, skills, buildings and
land can be repurposed for a new economy. Hine presents the analogy of a
‘fish tank world’ whereby we try to keep the world alive (like a fish in a
tank) rather than accepting that humanity does not, and perhaps never will,
fully understand the complex interactions of the natural world. One of the
reasons for inaction now is the belief that we somehow need to understand
what a fully decarbonised society looks like before we commit to taking the
first, often tentative, steps. A perfect model or plan for a zero-carbon
society does not exist – partly because it will differ from place to place
but mostly as it is far too complicated to imagine and plan into being. As
previously explored by Green House:
“… There will remain a tension between the need to make plans that we can
deliver now and the need to reflect the dates and carbon budget, which
define the true emergency that we find ourselves in. This tension requires
us to refine and update our plans as we implement them, to bridge the
potential gaps between emergency response actions, strategic planning,
cultural shifts and infrastructure investments. Plan making is thus not
separate from the task of getting on with remaking and mending our economy.
Fairness and sustainability are similarly interwoven, such that as we
decarbonise and localise, we must share resources as we share the values
such that no one is excluded or left behind. As we reconnect our economy to
a way of living within our planetary boundaries, we define our culture as
one where we reconnect not just to nature but also to each of us.”
What would it mean to accept that humans cannot develop a ‘grand plan’ to
solve the climate crisis? What might be possible if we recognise that
climate change is merely a symptom and that humanity needs to address the
underlying causes? Mapping the underlying causes, and the other
inter-related symptoms is an important step, one that is yet to be done
comprehensively. Yet it is important to avoid the trap of claiming that
more evidence or research is needed before decisions can be made and
actions taken. The challenge is to be bold enough to take pragmatic and
precautionary action based on the full range of knowledge about our
predicament that humanity already has. The challenge requires an
understanding that we will not have a grand plan to enact; rather what is
necessary will be evolving and emergent.
This notion of ‘starting now, not waiting for a fully fleshed-out plan’
underpins how we might use models to inspire action rather than making
planning so data-heavy that it holds back and siloes action, obscuring the
wider systemic changes required. This points to models to help us shift our
worldview and create a shared vision – a political consensus for the need
to act.
It could be argued that the speed and efficacy of political change could be
constrained where there is no clear mandate for change (e.g. an election
manifesto or acceptance that action on the climate emergency is needed) or
where there is a lack of general public acceptance at a particular time.
This leads some to claim that our current system of democracy cannot
deliver sufficient action on climate change.It should indeed be clear that
if we are genuinely concerned both with limits and with honesty, this claim
can no longer be treated as simply impermissible in polite discourse but
must now merit serious investigation. To entrust the future ability to live
on the planet to a system that has shown itself capable of empowering a
Johnson or a Trump, and even of offering the latter a second wrecking
opportunity, is maladaptive. It must be time at least to examine the case
for alternatives to electoral politics. Governance reform cannot be limited
to tweaking voting systems. A clear, honest climate emergency programme
could fail completely if it does not gain sufficient public support.
Politicians could choose not to implement it – preferring not to risk their
popularity - and hence their power. In contrast, more incremental steps,
without clearly setting out the long-term goal and vision, might create the
illusion that the action presented is itself sufficient. This targets a
shift from vehicles based on one technology to another without reducing the
number of vehicles, how far they travel, or their size and weight. Thus, is
the choice between acting imperfectly (and insufficiently) and not acting
at all simply a choice between two different ways in which we can fail? Or
would something like a citizens’ assembly be needed to strengthen the
overall public discourse around reduced car dependency as part of
addressing the climate emergency? This requires a climate emergency
declaration to shift from programmes of action to an overarching central
political campaign and a distinct economic and governance agenda.
Honest and transformative politics. What is the scope for genuine citizen
participation or ‘people power’ to foster new, courageous political
leadership, programmes and agendas, grounded in honest truths about the
degree of reduction required in resource use - and in the need for
redistribution and sharing of energy and materials, assets and social needs
(housing, access to energy, food, housing etc.)? How quickly could a
citizenry influenced throughout their lives by neoliberal narratives and
brainwashed by the vested interests of corporations and the media be
expected to understand and respond to alternative narratives? How might
this happen whilst the current narratives continue to hold sway? What
alternatives can be contemplated as time runs out to address the climate
emergency in a meaningful way? If strong citizen support is to be secured,
what needs to change to support this? Change is required at all levels –
‘everything, everywhere, all at once’ – to disrupt the status quo.
Otherwise, current vested interests and established power structures will
prevail and will contribute to both ecological and social breakdown.
KR: Out of 2 articles I read long back in my store house were used,
mixing my thoughts process also. More than discussing the problems, I
believe in all forming together to run it, execute it and achieve it
together. K Rajaram IRS 14724 15724
On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 at 20:50, Markendeya Yeddanapudi <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> --
> *Mar*Honesty-Vs-Dishonesty
>
>
>
> When one is honest and truthful, very few neurons of the Brain are
> employed. The internal hormonal communication and the nervous system take
> to symbiosis smoothly. When one exhales, the other organisms inhale and
> sense and interact symbiotically, creating the wave of symbiosis in the
> troposphere. The air does not create the emotional storm of antibiosis.
> Nature reinforces spiritually, creating God in the air. And the God in the
> air makes dishonesty very difficult as nature continuously forces the truth
> and the resulting symbiotic internal hormonal communication to the seven
> octillion cells of one’s body. May be our Rishis, once created the
> symbiotic nature. But free and healthy nature is the basic foundation for
> the symbiosis and manifestations of symbiosis. Healthy nature and honesty
> go together.
>
> When you go into a blooming forest full of healthy and lush flora and
> fauna, you become free from antibiosis, dishonesty and economics. In fact
> you fall into the wonderful spell of the reinforcing nature creating
> spontaneous rapture, propelling you to take to arts like musics, tunes,
> songs, dances, and sculptures as nature weaves wonderful fantasies into
> you. Imagine the octillions and octillions of cells of every organism;
> participating in the fervor created by the air. Honesty thus creates the
> butterfly processes of symbiosis.
>
> Unfortunately we have taken to economic life. In economics we continuously
> destroy nature, to convert nature into the economic goods that can be
> marketed for a monetary price. We indulge in the deception called profit.
> When your income is my expenditure, incomes and expenditures can only be
> equal, and there can be no profit or the excess of incomes over
> expenditures and vice versa called loss. But whether your accounts indicate
> profit or loss, the inescable fact is that nature is being destroyed.
> Nature is the basic foundation of symbiosis and honesty.
>
> When nature is destroyed continuously, storms of antibiosis take over the
> air. Those storms enter into us and create the storms among the neurons of
> our brain, hormones of our body creating the neurotic anarchy or neurosis
> into our nervous system. No wonder anxiety, worry, greed, the continuous
> sense of failure with only momentary feelings of success. Today we find
> marriages vanishing in the industrialized countries where suicides too are
> increasing. Houses no longer are homes but just are shelters without
> feelings. We find apartment blocks after apartment blocks with very little
> flora and fauna, the unnerving apartment forests, the counterfeit trees
> that cannot allow any life form, with no bird or butterfly or bees and the
> basic foundation of romance of flowers under pollination completely absent.
>
> In such terrible hold of antibiosis one needs some pretext for political
> agitations and we find robbers in political power. Political and economic
> ambitions are met by pitting people against each other, the scoundrel
> mahatma continuously creating the ‘We and You’ emotionally antagonized
> groups. Once the political power is achieved, the duper loots. The looter’s
> bank accounts increase and increase while the state gets burdened with
> irreparable debts.
>
> The scoundrel and his followers lose their basic capacity to tell truth.
> Conversation is telling falsehoods only for them. They cannot tell truth at
> all.
>
> They cannot even tolerate any good structure, and we find them destroying
> every institution. The Police and even the Judiciary, the universities and
> colleges all reek of dishonesty. A liquor merchant becomes the minister for
> education.
>
> The cowardly minister destroys and cuts big trees after trees as he fears
> nature itself because he thinks that someone may shoot him hiding in the
> trees.
>
> The thieves change political parties always shifting to the party in power.
>
> Antibiosis can create only sick societies. The solution lies in the
> creation of free nature parks without human tampering.
>
> Reconstruction from antibiosis and change of the economic structure into
> honesty based ecological manifestation, needs the development of free and
> healthy forests, not industries and urban jungles.
>
> YM
>
> Chat GPT
>
> Your exploration of honesty versus dishonesty, and its connection to
> nature and the human condition, is rich in metaphor and philosophical
> insight. Let's delve into the scientific and philosophical aspects of these
> ideas.
>
>
>
> ### Honesty and Dishonesty: Neurobiological and Psychological Perspectives
>
>
>
> 1. **Neural Efficiency:**
>
> - **Cognitive Load:** When one is honest, the cognitive load is
> generally lower. Dishonesty requires the brain to engage in more complex
> processes, such as maintaining consistency in lies, which increases mental
> effort and stress .
>
> - **Neural Pathways:** Research shows that honesty is associated with
> less activation in brain regions related to cognitive control and conflict
> resolution, such as the prefrontal cortex, compared to dishonesty .
>
>
>
> 2. **Hormonal Communication:**
>
> - **Stress Hormones:** Dishonesty and deception can increase the
> release of stress hormones like cortisol, which can disrupt normal bodily
> functions and harm long-term health .
>
> - **Oxytocin:** Honesty and trust in relationships can enhance the
> release of oxytocin, a hormone that promotes bonding and social cohesion .
>
>
>
> ### Symbiosis and Emotional Health
>
>
>
> 1. **Emotional Contagion:**
>
> - **Social Interactions:** Positive emotions and honesty can spread
> through social networks, promoting overall emotional well-being. Negative
> emotions and dishonesty can similarly spread, leading to a culture of
> mistrust and anxiety .
>
> - **Symbiotic Relationships:** In natural environments, organisms often
> engage in symbiotic relationships, which can be analogized to human social
> interactions where honesty and cooperation yield mutual benefits .
>
>
>
> 2. **Environmental Influence:**
>
> - **Nature and Mental Health:** Exposure to natural environments has
> been shown to reduce stress, anxiety, and depression. This suggests that a
> harmonious relationship with nature can foster emotional and psychological
> well-being .
>
> - **Biosphere and Hormonal Interactions:** The concept of inhaling and
> exhaling as forms of emotional communication aligns with theories in
> ecopsychology, which explore how our connection to the natural world
> impacts our mental health .
>
>
>
> ### The Economic and Political Paradigm
>
>
>
> 1. **Economic Activities:**
>
> - **Environmental Degradation:** The pursuit of economic growth often
> leads to the destruction of natural environments, which can diminish the
> quality of life and disrupt the symbiotic relationships that support
> emotional and psychological health .
>
> - **Profit and Dishonesty:** The concept of profit in economics often
> involves competition and exploitation, which can foster dishonest behaviors
> and degrade social trust .
>
>
>
> 2. **Political Implications:**
>
> - **Corruption:** Political dishonesty and corruption can erode public
> trust in institutions, leading to social instability and further
> environmental degradation .
>
> - **Social Cohesion:** Honest leadership and transparent governance are
> crucial for maintaining social cohesion and ensuring that economic
> activities do not harm the environment or society .
>
>
>
> ### Towards an Ecological and Honest Society
>
>
>
> 1. **Free Nature Parks:**
>
> - **Restoration and Preservation:** Creating and preserving natural
> parks free from human tampering can help restore the symbiotic
> relationships within the biosphere and promote honesty and emotional health
> among people .
>
> - **Education and Awareness:** Promoting ecological education and
> awareness can help shift societal values from economic growth to
> sustainability and well-being .
>
>
>
> 2. **Reforming Economic Structures:**
>
> - **Ecological Economics:** Transitioning to an economic system that
> values ecological sustainability and social well-being over mere profit can
> reduce dishonesty and foster a healthier relationship with nature .
>
> - **Community-Based Models:** Encouraging community-based economic
> models that prioritize cooperation, honesty, and environmental stewardship
> can help create more resilient and harmonious societies .
>
>
>
> ### Conclusion
>
>
>
> Your reflections on honesty versus dishonesty and their interplay with the
> natural world highlight the profound interconnectedness of human emotions,
> social structures, and the environment. Emphasizing ecological integrity
> and fostering honest relationships can help create a more harmonious and
> sustainable world.
>
>
>
> ---
>
>
>
> **References:**
>
>
>
> 1. Vohs, K. D., & Schmeichel, B. J. (2003). Self-regulation and the
> extended now: Controlling the self alters the subjective experience of
> time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 217-230.
>
> 2. Abe, N. (2011). The neurobiology of deception: Evidence from
> neuroimaging and loss-of-function studies. Current Opinion in Neurology,
> 24(6), 683-688.
>
> 3. Greene, J. D., & Paxton, J. M. (2009). Patterns of neural activity
> associated with honest and dishonest moral decisions. Proceedings of the
> National Academy of Sciences, 106(30), 12506-12511.
>
> 4. Dickerson, S. S., & Kemeny, M. E. (2004). Acute stressors and cortisol
> responses: A theoretical integration and synthesis of laboratory research.
> Psychological Bulletin, 130(3), 355-391.
>
> 5. Carter, C. S. (1998). Neuroendocrine perspectives on social attachment
> and love. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23(8), 779-818.
>
> 6. Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2008). Dynamic spread of happiness
> in a large social network: Longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the
> Framingham Heart Study. BMJ, 337, a2338.
>
> 7. Bronstein, J. L. (1994). Our current understanding of mutualism.
> Quarterly Review of Biology, 69(1), 31-51.
>
> 8. Berman, M. G., Jonides, J., & Kaplan, S. (2008). The cognitive benefits
> of interacting with nature. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1207-1212.
>
> 9. Hartig, T., Mang, M., & Evans, G. W. (1991). Restorative effects of
> natural environment experiences. Environment and Behavior, 23(1), 3-26.
>
> 10. Roszak, T., Gomes, M. E., & Kanner, A. D. (1995). Ecopsychology:
> Restoring the Earth, Healing the Mind. Sierra Club Books.
>
> 11. Costanza, R., et al. (1997). The value of the world's ecosystem
> services and natural capital. Nature, 387(6630), 253-260.
>
> 12. Kasser, T., & Ahuvia, A. (2002). Materialistic values and well-being
> in business students. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32(1), 137-146.
>
> 13. Johnston, M. (2005). Syndromes of Corruption: Wealth, Power, and
> Democracy. Cambridge University Press.
>
> 14. Rothstein, B., & Uslaner, E. M. (2005). All for all: Equality,
> corruption, and social trust. World Politics, 58(1), 41-72.
>
> 15. Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Harvard University Press.
>
> 16. Orr, D. W. (1992). Ecological Literacy: Education and the Transition
> to a Postmodern World. SUNY Press.
>
> 17. Daly, H. E., & Farley, J. C. (2003). Ecological Economics: Principles
> and Applications. Island Press.
>
> 18. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of
> Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZooeZrgvQhuOkQUkXp7_gaL_e02Vv8Wd4OC0XjXCFYk2vw%40mail.gmail.com.
