The Challenge of Confronting Visionary Futures

By Gary Berg-Cross

When Paul Kurtz and Edwin H. Wilson penned the Humanist Manifesto II in the middle of the Viet Nam war (1973) they noted opportunities for the rapidly approaching 21^st century based on “dramatic scientific, technological, and ever-accelerating social and political changes crowd our awareness.”  They went on to talk about virtually human domination of the planet, moon exploration, and dramatic travel and communication advances. It all suggested  that  we stand at the dawn of a new age. It was one they characterized as “ready to move farther into space and perhaps inhabit other planets.” Well the movie 2001 certainly was in that spirit, but in 2012 we remain far short of that vision.

And it is not just space exploration.  The promise of technology suited to wise control of our environment hasn’t been promoted and we face a changed planet that could bring hurricane level flooded coasts on a permanent basis.

To be sure we have done a good job enhancing communication technology, but that gets used to let us shout alarms of problems rather than systematically solve really big systemic problems like putting poverty on the run or achieving what the Manifesto signaled as “an abundant and meaningful life.”  At times technological advances seem to go sideways towards profit as opposed to investing in the solution of large problems. “Shale boom derails U.S. investments in clean coal technology” reads a recent headline in the vein.

Why haven’t we done a better job of providing for the common good?  One problem is that large scale efforts (poverty, climate, renewable energy, space exploration) require long term commitments to visions. We simply lack policy frameworks (economic and otherwise), social organization and agreements needed to advance such large-scale projects to bring about visions.  On some issue, such as energy we are maintaining the status quo, rather than going with the new. This  makes narrow plutocratic sense based on old economic models.  Fractured policies and entrenched interests with political connections make change difficult and expensive. 

Take the issue and promise of residential,rooftop solar. According to the Department of Energy the US has more than 18,000 jurisdictions at state & local levels that have a say in how rooftop solar is rolled out. In Germany, at a latitude equal to Maine’s, they have addressed the problem as a whole society and reached a working consensus on solar's importance.  In Germany the price of installed rooftop solar has fallen to $2.24 per watt and on a sunny day in May, rooftop solar provided all of Germany's power needs for two hours. In the US it was $9 a watt in 2006 and is now closer to $5 and if commercial industrial installations are included the national installed price plummets to $3.45 a watt (Solar Energy Industries Association, a Washington trade group).

This point on the organizational rather than technical nature of problems is made in Solar energy is ready, the U.S. isn't which notes:

The trouble is, many of the big, investor-owned utilities that provide about 85 percent of America's electricity see solar as both a technical challenge and a long-term threat to their 100-year-old profit models. And the lack of a national energy policy means regulation of solar is up to states, public service commissions, and a wealth of local governments and bureaucracies - many of whom have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

The rule of thumb had been that once rooftop installations made up 15 percent of the power on a given circuit, utilities could stay new connections until residents undertook an engineering study - costing as much as $50,000 - that showed their addition wouldn't destabilize the power grid. The hidden costs of obtaining permits and regulators' approval to install rooftop panels is a big reason the United States lags behind Germany, which leads the world in rooftop installations, with more than 1 million.

On big problems is that we need to formulate new plans of action and response and get some agreement. Such agreements may even cross national boundaries and so hint of some global governance based on common values. Follow ups to Humanist Manifesto II have taken modest steps in proposing things in that direction. It’s a long haul and vision starts with discussion and understanding of the issues. 

Some of each of this will be afforded at the discussion of an Agenda for a Democratized Economy So it is the People’s Economy Saturday, Nov 3rd, from (2-4 p.m.) when the MDC chapter of WASH hosts  Margaret Flowers & Kevin Zeese (co-directors of Its Our Economy).  This will be at the Wheaton regional library 11701 Georgia Avenue  Wheaton, MD 20902.

Images

1. Dawn of Man from 2001: http://publishingarchaeology.blogspot.com/
2. 2001 Logo: http://www.azadtimes.com/blog/2012/10/28/weekly-classics-2001-a-space-odyssey/
3. The promise of Solar panels: http://www.perspectivesonglobalissues.com/building-a-solar-india-the-promise-of-solar-power/
4. Plutocrats and Poverty: http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/10/wow-the-energy-is-intense-2483010.html

People Organize to Protest G8, Present Alternative Economic View

by Gary Berg-Cross

May 18, 2012 10:00 am to 2:00 pm
Community Room, C. Burr Artz Public Library
110 E. Patrick Street, Frederick, Maryland

The “Occupy G8 Summit for the People” is an alternative to the G8 that will have speakers (see agenda below) discuss the effect of concentrated wealth on global public policy, the effects of wealth inequality on peoples’ well-being and alternative economic structures that would close the wealth divide and create a more democratic, sustainable economy. The Summit will include time for hearing the voices of the 99% who will be in attendance. The public and the press are invited.

This summit will discuss how to:

• Build the international economy from the bottom up, not the top down.
• Highlight the wealth divide that undermines the foundation of the economy and corrupts political decision-making.
• Increase the minimum wage, end poverty and reduce debt to provide a stronger foundation on which to build a new sustainable economy.
• Institute a Robin Hood Tax on the purchase of stocks, bonds and derivatives.
• Build a new economy that is both economically and environmentally sustainable.
• Build wealth at the base by encouraging worker owned co-ops and other democratized economic institutions; and by turning corporate welfare into taxpayer investment where everyone profits from the investment by the commonwealth, not just the corporate owners.
• Recognize that we all share a common destiny and that even the wealthiest require the commonwealth in order to increase their riches.

Schedule

10:00 am – Welcome Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese, co-directors, ItsOurEconomy.US and organizers for October2011.org/OccupyWashington, DC

10:10 am – Global Wealth Inequality Sam Pizzigati, Too Much; Brooke Harper, Global Trade Watch; Jeremy Weyl, JubileeUSA

11:10 am – Creating a Global Economy Based on Sustainable Resources Brent Blackwelder, former executive director Friends of the Earth and Steady State; Ruth Caplan,Campaign for Global Water Watch and Alliance for Democracy; Alexis Baden-Mayer, Organic Consumers Association

12:10 pm – Break

12:20 pm –Building a New Economy from the Bottom Up Rob Kall, Editor of OpEd News and Bottom Up Radio Show; James Riker, University of Maryland and co-facilitator of 2010 G20 Civil Society Dialogue; Emily Kawano, Solidarity Economy Network and Center for Popular Economics; Lisa Stolarski, The National Cooperative Business Association

1:30 – Reception

Sponsored by OccupyFrederick, October2011.org/OccupyWashington,DC and ItsOurEconomy.us

A Conversation with a Friend

My friend, William Whitesell, is the author of the recently published book, Climate Policy Foundations: Science and Economics with Lessons from Monetary Regulation. On a recent visit with Bill I was the astonished recipient of a gift copy of this book. I had read a draft of the the text and given him some recommendations on how it could be improved. I never imagined though that my modest efforts would be included in the printed acknowledgments in the book or that Bill would buy a copy of this very expensive book (it's list price is $80) as a gift for me. Bill and I share our strongly felt position that global warming is a systemic problem of profound proportions. Bill and I talked about those issues and the vast disconnect in government decision making from what is scientifically known.

There is currently unrest in many countries that has either toppled governments or threatens to topple them soon. One of the major reasons for the unrest is hunger. The cost of food has gone up relentlessly in recent times. Russia had drought and fires that reduced its wheat crop by 25%. They had been a major wheat exporter and they are now cutting off all exports because they need to feed their own people. Crops in Australia have been much diminished because of massive flooding. Few people in our government are making the logical connection between these events and global warming. However, this is exactly what the global warming models have predicted.

A warmer climate will evaporate more water and provide the basic source for more precipitation. However, that precipitation will not necessarily fall where it is needed. The precipitation will fall in larger amounts when it does fall and the greater evaporation and heat when it does not fall will create more droughts and fires.

Bill and I did not talk about Queensland, Australia, now being hit with 186 mile per hour winds from cyclone Yasi. It was not happening yet when we had our conversation. Yasi is happening very shortly after the flooding has receded. According to Reuters “The ocean around Australia is now warmer than at any time in history. Warmer ocean temperatures increase the frequency and intensity of cyclones.”

We did talk about the fact that many of the areas with the most dramatic increases in population are also ones with the greatest vulnerability in the food supply. Egypt has doubled its population over the last thirty years and it has relatively little arable land. Afghanistan is another example with very rapidly increasing population and great risk to its agricultural productivity.

While Bill's book reviews the potential negative effects on agriculture that we discussed it only asserts net damage to worldwide agriculture if average world temperatures rise more than three degrees centigrade. There are many studies that suggest that this is excessively optimistic. The scientific predictions about the long term effects of global warming on the food supply are not in full agreement but the impact in recent times has been horrendous.

Republican leadership is fond of spouting factually false statements such as, “We know that government spending cannot create jobs because if it could we would have a furiously growing economy.” Never mind the fact that Federal stimulus money being spent almost exactly counterbalances the money removed from state budgets. There is no respected theory of economics which would actually predict anything much different than the lackluster jobs recovery we are now having.

Bill's Ph.D. Is in economics. He noted that America was coming out of the Great Depression until 1937. That was when people being concerned about debt and budget deficits sharply cut back on the deficit spending. This is exactly the type of nonsense that Republicans are pushing now. Our country went back into the economic depression and did not get out of it until World War II. We agreed that government spending certainly created a lot of jobs at that time.