Biden says Cuba is a ‘failed state’ and calls communism ‘a universally failed system’ Quoted on CNN. Th trouble is, so is, with its suicidal march with climate change, is capitalism. Now what?
If water is commodified those without cash will suffer.
Should institutions start planning now for our inability to halt drought, fires, hunger,, grid failures?
Property was not given. it starts as proper, what Is proper to a man to show his rank in society. The evolution to salable property was a long process. The following is from a history of part of that evolution. the Great Demarkation’The French Revolution and the Invention of Modern Property By RAFE BLAUFARB
T he French Revolution remade the system of property- holding that had existed in France before 1789. This book engages with the French revolutionary transformation of property not from an economic or social perspective, but from the perspective of laws and institutions. This transformation destroyed the conceptual basis of the Old Regime, laid the foundation of France’s new constitutional order, and crystallized modern ways of thinking about polities and societies. This revolution in property brought about a Great Demarcation: a radical distinction between the political and the social, state and society, sovereignty and ownership, the public and private. How the revolutionary transformation of Old Regime property produced such profound change is the subject of this book. T he revolutionary remaking of property had such important consequences because there was no clear distinction in Old Regime France between the regime of property and the constitutional order. Before 1789, French notions of property differed in two crucial ways from what is now understood by the term “property.” The first was that public administrative, judicial, and sovereign powers could be owned as hereditable, vendible possessions. The second was that real estate, such as land and buildings, was rarely owned independently and completely by a single person. Instead, any given piece of real estate had multiple, partial owners who stood in legally enforced relations of superiority and dependence toward one another.
We have humanity, the earth and institutions. Can we put them together? It would require that human use institutions to manage the three together.
One key problem is the tendency of the rich among the humans to try to marginalize a large proportion, maybe 1/3 to 1/2, of the population as being, in the current market driven debt milking world, many people who are consumers but not producers.
In current circumstances we have systems that need to change. Some are
Land ownership and use
Support for parenting
Preauction if essentials for all
Distribution of essentials to all.
How do we get these to change? All at once while working on each. But most people will try to prevent change on the idea that yesterday was better than tomorrow is likely to be.
Global focused conversations seem to focus on how to stop the worst of climate change. Local conversations on the other side – I just spent some time looking at Hawaii – the focus is on managing catastrophe. The two of course mutually impact each other in complicated ways, but at te moment instead of interactions the assumption if of separation. each seems to assume the other doe not have any impact and is fixed in time.just noting.
More conversations about where to move to, and how. For example, since people want to leave Miami, their places can be sublet for a very low rent. I heard “Pick a person who seems happy and move close to them.”
There are too many things that might work out so hard to agree on several seriously promising. Alternative:
Assume bad case climate change scenario such as unstoppable rising temperatures. Spell it out in some details how that happens. Then look for holes in the story. Work-them out in detail: are they things we should do?
Cool logic where there is the possibility is strategic.
example: we need to cut fossil fuel use to
cut co2 emissions
to prevent going of 1.5 degrees or worse. or, another example
.Cutting co2 use means curtailing its use in homes, business, transportation.
The result ill mean disrupted lives that will be at serious risk
unless simultaneously with the cuts
welfare is in place to prevent tragic loss of life.
That means such a welfare system must be started before such severe cuts start.
Timing is everything.
Logiccan be broken when there are new conditions. So in the case of these two logical structures, does anyone have a specific implementable plan to dbreak part these logics.
Syong something like “Les electrify everything” or “Get congress to chnage its mind set” are not actionable in their current form, so the logiccs still hold.
More work to do.
Maybe better to say nature than earth. We need the most evocative language.The result needs to be an intermingling of humans with the plants, animal, insects, dns thta surround us and are us.
The Greeks used the word economics to describe the management task of caring for estates which, inclasical Greek times, were more like cattle ranches than plowed fields and gardens.
I think we could repurpose economics as the task of managing the earth, nature, and us in a complex world of interdependencies. Not us controlling the plow and the truck. Earth is the home –eco, and noms is the task, the method, the procedures. The new economics
We live on a planet that went from molten to algae to photosynthesis to mammals and to us. That is a well known short version of the story we tell. All spices move through time with eating and co-pulating. All human history is abut the time between the beginning until arriving at the point where we begin to fail because we have exhausted our resources. Actually, they are not yet exhausted but people are hoarding what they have and distribution is not to everyone but to the few who have money, and money has become the key flow of society. If you have it you can participate. We all need water wings to keep afloat in this human created world of money, which is just notches on a stick for our cows. That stick idea joined with other ideas, susch as arithmetic and our capacity for abstraction so we can trade or sell the stick. But we don’t have the waterwings and too many are drowning in poverty, and swallowed by new deserts and new floods and storms. Access to nature, where we could go in times of trouble and which used to be fairly free, has been narrowed by owners to the exclusion of almost everyone. Owners can’t even go on someone elses property. Where do we go to sleep, to plant food?
The idea that we should have been managing the earth is obvious and that the rising carves of consumptions and population would at some point reach their limit. Not for a while we used to think, if we thought. Malthus and the Club of Rome and the Ehrlich’s were mostly right as to dynamics but missed on timing – but were essentially insightful. And here we are. Can we manage our prelateship to nature? Is it too Late, brutal to cut back to sustainable levels of use. Is the course we are on no longer capable of feeding itself?
That’s the picture. Our task is to imagine other ones that would stimulate another round imagined futures until something feels right – in the circumstances then enveloping us – and we act.