Well,
for a start, most of the West is loved or at least tolerated by most
of the rest of the world, but it is the point of this piece to claim
that the bits that are not adored and emulated are the very bits the
Green Party is seeking to change. Put it another way, terrorism would
not be incited by a Greened up West.
My
claim is based on my perspective on world views as held by people other
than me. That is a tough job to do, but one that everyone should
attempt before deciding on the justification of any 'war' - hot or cold.
This
Green Party supporter's idea of a non greenies subconscious view of the
world is one where people go about their daily lives unaware of their
impact on the environment - unable or indeed unwilling to do anything
about it. Lack of interest or engagement forms most of the inability of
the West to change, a solid and determined desire for power - to keep
'business as usual going for as long as possible - forms the rest, the
most influential section. Sadly, that final part controls or owns the
infrastructure , both physical and legal that runs our world.
This
is not a blame game. The lot in charge have been responsible for the
massive gains in freedoms and opportunities that all the people of the
west have benefitted from for so long. We love our way of life and have
no intention of changing it, certainly not because someone somewhere
else doesn't like it. It really puts our backs up if the outsiders start
doing anything about their grievances. Terrorism is not nobel,
exciting, or in anyway acceptable - but it does have a cause. My
contention is that this very cause is the thing that Greens see as
dooming us all. In one word, it is Growth.
Growth
needs two things, space and resources. For centuries, the strong have
inherited everything the weak have had to offer - because they can. This
has worked fantastically well for the strong, us. It even strengthened
the otherwise weak, or at least convinced them that they where second or
third class world citizens. They were told by their stronger 'betters'
that they could and should work hard to improve themselves - by
emulating us.
In
ancient history, civilisations had survived and grown to the point
where things leveled out nicely, not too few people to do the work, not
so many that there was not enough to eat. Presumably life was good,
comfortable and people could be happy living it, but it didn't grow.
Now, add a few wolves to that contented herd and you will get quite a
few very angry sheep. OK, a sheep can't take down a wolf, but a bunch of
them could be very nasty to a few unprotected cubs.
Rome
worked in rather the same way as the west today. Looking back at what
happened to them gives us an idea of the future of the 'West' Rome was
supported by slaves but a slave could rise to great heights and some
did, but most could not. There were a limited number of spaces for freed
slaves and lots of work for the rest to do, so there was only one
carrot and a very large number of sticks. Today is the same, but there
are more carrots - not an unlimited number of spaces, however the trick
still works because everyone really believes 'it could be you' and so
'keeps calm and carries on'.
This
fuels Growth. Growth is good, the alternative is death - or so we
teach. The Roman Empire faded away as their resources failed to support
the increased demands, but there were a lot of bangs and even more
whimpering on its way out. Rome just had to keep growing, if it had been
happy with what it had, it could still be around now.
Rome
knew nothing else and it was not alone. Napoleon had to invade Moscow,
so did Hitler - all in the name of growth ( but they called it 'living
room' ). The goal of growth was the downfall of all of them. Resources
ran out and nature got its own back.
We
can yet escape this trap by recognising their error. The alternative to
growth is not death, it is sustainability. That does not mean
ossification, we can still have novelty, luxury, great advances in
everything - but - not at the expense of space or resources - these have
to be shared and re-used, reclaimed and redistributed so everyone has a
go - or, and this is the main bit, the weak will get strong and take it
from us.
The threats and the solutions:-
The
only way to be safe from unprovoked attack is to ensure you don't have
anything an attacker may want - the way to ensure total safety is not to
do anything provocative.
Proper
resource distribution addresses that first point. Science and
technology, although not a panacea, do offer us the chance to
continually improve our way of life and - when shared openly with anyone
who wants it - give the same to everyone else too. That would negate
our need for defence systems - quite a saving.
For
the second point, we in the west have no intention of provoking others
although we do it every day. We don't even know anyone else exists - we
are 'Little England' and the rest of the world is just where we dump old
stuff and get new stuff from. In a green future, we could be just as
insular, but we would create nothing that needed dumping and would need
nothing more from the outside than we had already inside. Ukip
supporters should love that - total isolation until the summer holidays.
What
would we do with our time ? Go and explore space - or learn new things,
or learn old things - that will be up to the individual, but I'm sure
someone somewhere would still be angry about something. We should be
strong enough to let them shout.
No comments:
Post a Comment