Re: A MANIFESTO FOR GLOBAL TRANSFORMATION

1/21/2001, Paul Riesz wrote:
    > I did object to your model, NOT because I thought that you
    want us to return to a hunter gatherer economy, but because
    it seems obvious to me, that such a non hierarchical model
    would be incapable to efficiently handle the complexity of
    our present system, even though it could function well for
    their simple society.

Dear Paul,

Thanks for the clarification.  

Please help me here.  I'm trying to understand why a
hierarchical system can be expected to handle complexity,
but not a decentralized system.  Could you suggest a few
specific examples - societal problems which are better
solved by hierarchy?


    > The disappearance of such societies
    worldwide should already be a powerful evidence for this
    conviction

I don't think this proves anything beyond the fact that
small socieities cannot survive in competition with
aggrandizing larger societies.

    
    > I believe that trying to revive a society of largely
    independent small communities on the hunter-gatherer model,
    simply could not supply the most basic needs of the present
    number of humans.

Perhaps not, but I'm not proposing a society of "largely
independent small communities".  What I'm suggesting is that
decision making start at the local level.  I said nothing
about communities being small, nor about them being
independent.  Does this bring us into closer agreement?

    
    > For that purpose it is vital to use the comparative
    advantages of each region even more than is already the case
    to-day.

Agreed, although the energy costs of transportation need to be 
taken into account when computing comparative advantage.
    
    > know that I am repeating myself insisting on this point
    and on the need to also address the immense problem caused
    by an exponentially growing population with a static supply
    of unrenewable resources, but these are facts that you
    continue to overlook with your proposals.

I don't overlook these points at all... but you would need
to read the material to know that.  First of all,
"Sustainability" is up there as one of my seven 'fundamental
principles'.  In that section, I say:

    > Achieving sustainability will be a major societal project.
    ... There needs to be a well-orchestrated transition
    program, in which current systems are gradually phased out,
    and new sustainable infrastructures are developed and
    established.  This transition program will in fact be a
    major development project, and it may require the use of a
    considerable portion of our remaining fossil fuels.
    Obviously we want to keep green-house emissions to a
    minimum, but what better use for fossil fuel, than to
    establish energy-efficient systems that don't depend on
    non-renewable sources?

Do you think I should give details for the 'transition
program' in the Manifesto?   Do you have reason to believe
that a transition program can only be achieved
hierarchically?  If so, can you say why?

best regards,
rkm