Your message

Dear John:
Thanks for your message and your kind offer to send me an advanced copy of 
your book:
"It prompts me to write to you about the Simultaneous Policy campaign which 
was launched last year. The text of a press release which outlines the 
campaign follows. The campaign is based on my forthcoming book "The 
Simultaneous Policy - An Insider's Guide to Saving Humanity and the Planet"
It was a really present surprise to find out, that a great many people seem 
to share some of my concerns and viewpoints. I should greatly appreciate 
receiving a copy of your book; my address is Av. Brasil 754/14, Santiago/Chile.
But it might be even better, if you could send me a short summary of your 
ideas, which I could then post on the World System Network, where such 
positive attitudes towards the worlds problems are sorely lacking. If you 
are aware of another group, interested in serious and unprejudiced 
discussions on such subjects, please let me know their E-mail addresses.

 From my side I am including a file with a wishlist for reforming 
capitalism, plus some ideas on how such reforms might be implemented.

Best regards        Paul Riesz

Enclosure
Ideas on reforming capitalism, with special regard to the influence of 
wealth on decision making.

Richard Moore asked me to list the primary reforms that I suggest imposing 
on capitalism to make it acceptable? He added that I could say "like 
Sweden" if I wanted, but to be specific as to which characteristics I was 
referring to. He also was curious as to why I find 'reforming capitalism' 
such a wonderful idea and whether I thought, that it would more easily 
achieved politically than some other alternative, such as socialism?"

Here are my answers:
These are problems that should be discussed thoroughly on a public-spirited 
group and deserve a lot of hard thinking. Nevertheless I shall now describe 
some rather disconnected ideas of mine on such subjects:

Primary reforms:
1. Reduce the influence of wealth on decision making. This is a complex 
problem on which I would need a lot of help from you and others, but a 
thorough reform of campaign financing and a prohibition of lobbying might 
be considered.

2. An increased role of government in the economy; above all governments 
should have a master plan for useful public works for a rather long period, 
to be carried out preferably when the economy slows down, in order to 
provide jobs for EVERYONE willing and able to work. The difficulties of 
financing such plans might be overcome through a correct application of the 
theories of Lord Keynes. This would have to be combined with an increased 
watchfulness against public corruption and inefficiency (checks and 
balances); on this problem your plan of communal and regional assemblies 
(not including professional politicians) might help.

3. The problem of the immense differences in wealth between the different 
sectors of our societies must be tackled WITHOUT discouraging productive 
investment. This should be considered a principle based on ethics, to be 
taught to children by their families and in schools. (The Norwegians seem 
to have a special term for this principle).

4. Private and public investment in a gradual changeover from oil to 
sustainable sources for energy and fuels must be promoted and enjoy a very 
high priority.

5. Delegates to the WTO, the IMF and other international institution must 
be chosen among professionals, who understand that the benefits of 
globalization must be distributed more fairly and in a way, to enable 
developing countries to start catching up. There should be a separate 
discussion on the means for achieving this goal.

Why do I prefer reformed Capitalism?

1. In the countries where such a system already exists (Scandinavia), 
people seem to enjoy more personal freedom and happiness then elsewhere.
2. It seems to be the primary goal of people worldwide to improve or at 
least maintain their living standards, but on the other hand many natural 
resources are being overexploited and nearing exhaustion. We must therefore 
try to change over to a sustainable system of production, without depriving 
people of their hope for a better future. Such difficult goals need the 
highest level of human ingenuity and resourcefulness and such gifts have 
proved to blossom best under a system of market-based free enterprise and 
private property.

3. Though I do NOT believe that reforms shall be easy to carry out, they 
are probably more acceptable to the great majorities, than the 
revolutionary changes promoted by radicals from the left and right. At 
present there seems to be a reasonable chance for starting to implement 
such reforms, through using the energies and enthusiasm of the people, who 
started the worldwide protests against the present model of 
corporations-dominated globalization. One would have to convince their 
spokespersons, that mere protests are not enough, but that they should now 
concentrate on presenting viable, positive alternatives. Furthermore they 
would have to involve themselves with existing political parties, gaining 
influence through diligent, local work, with the goal of naming their 
representatives for public office. (This is the area, where a thorough 
discussion of ways and means is most urgent).

What about Socialism:
I feel that pure Socialism based on the ideal of:
 From everybody according to his capacity,
To everybody according to his needs
has proved to be incompatible with human nature.
The majority of humans work best if they have a reasonable chance to 
receive some economic benefits for their efforts.

REFORMED SOCIALISM, maybe starting with the Cuban model, but with more 
options for expressing the will of the citizens and for economically 
rewarding high levels of productivity or for saving, might be a viable 
alternative and should certainly be promoted. The continued existence of 
this model might prevent complacency in countries with a free enterprise 
system, since their governments would be aware, that people might vote for 
such a system, if they seem unable to provide them with a reasonable chance 
for personal happiness.
Regards      Paul