Re: Conclusions

To Richard:
Among other differences, we have a different set of priorities.Let us
consider mine:

1. First of all we must become aware, that the planets carrying capacity
has almost reached and perhaps already surpassed, the breaking point.
Therefore we must IMMEDIATELY stop and - if possible - reverse the
exponential growth of population, while at the same time use the planets
non-renewable resources much more carefully, if we want to achieve a
sustainable world.

2. For the same reason we must IMMEDIATELY find ways to reduce the already
enormous and still growing gap among rich and poor nations and among rich
and poor people within nations. 

Now you feel, that the capitalist system must be overthrown - a clean slate
- before such tasks can be considered and addressed, while
I am convinced that any new and untried system shall need a long time just
to get organized for carrying out the most basic functions of a working
society and much more time before it can even start considering these
tasks, TIME WE SIMPLY DO NOT HAVE.
 
You suggest that the powers that be, might plan to retreat into fortified
islands of prosperity and let the rest of the world go to hell. This is
certainly one scheme they might consider; especially if no better
alternative were available, but they must also be aware of its dangers and
shortcomings. The members of the armed forces, that would have to defend
such fortresses, come mostly from the underprivileged sectors of Society
and their loyalty in such an outcome would be more than questionable.
Furthermore resources are spread over immense areas; their control would be
enormously difficult and rivalries between different islands would
certainly surface. 

Therefore an alternative, in which they would preserve a significant role
might become quite acceptable to a significant portion of today's
superwealthy.

What I propose is to PEACEFULLY REFORM the current NEO-LIBERAL capitalism,
That would mean to reverse the tendencies, you have pointed out in your
latest posting; an enormously difficult, but hopefully not impossible task.
You must remember that the protest movements that started in Seattle, have
already convinced the powers that be, that their scheme of globalization
with benefits almost exclusively FOR THE WEALTHY, has little chance to
succeed. 

On the other hand, the alternative I am proposing would have both the
material and the human resources needed to carry out the immense tasks
outlined, before it is to late. For all of us that would be a challenge for
our ingenuity; for capitalists it would be an opportunity for investment,
that could replace the present unsustainable race for more and more
wasteful consumption.  I am convinced that their thinktanks have already
come to similar conclusions, but have not yet found an easy way out. 

What we must offer them is a regime, capable of convincing
1. the consuming public, that the party is over and that all of us must
adjust to the realities of our world and 
2. the wealthy, that they must give up SOME of their privileges, if they
want to preserve a reasonable part.

Our next task would be an outline of strategies for achieving such a regime.
I am willing to participate; are you?

Regards             Paul