|
Author
|
Topic: What is an economy?
|
thwap
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5062
|
posted 30 November 2004 08:14 AM
When I took Canadian history, I read a book called Planting the Province which argued that contrary to most histories that emphasized wheat exports as the primary engine of Upper Canada's/Ontario's economy, intensive development of the provincial economy (development that served the local community) was a larger contributor to growth. That a middlingly prosperous society looking after its own needs laid the groundwork for further growth.It's kind of like Mandeville's "Fable of the Bees" or The Grumbling Hive , where internal concerns produce wealth. I was reminded of this when posting to the Auntie thread about support for single mothers. It strikes me that the secret for the rest of the world to "develop" and for "developed" societies to develop further and more sanely, is for us to focus our energies on providing the necessities of life for everyone. I think our manic quest for employment (to provide services for others so that we can eat ourselves) is more destructive to the planet than would be the weight of an equitable sharing of civilization's wealth. For one thing, it is poverty that produces the huge families in the poorer countries, as children provide additional income and old age support later in life. An economy should serve its people not the other way around. toodles. [ 30 November 2004: Message edited by: thwap ]
From: Hamilton | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
lonecat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5460
|
posted 03 December 2004 12:11 PM
Well Thwap, here is a different take on economics I got this fall from my Anthropology 100 class.
My professor, in a nutshell, said the economy is not a "thing" unto itself, but is the creation of everyone who takes part in it. This whole idea is based on the writings of American sociologist Peter Berger, who says society, the economy included, is a human product that continuously acts back on its producer, that it is the result of externalization, objectivation and internalization.
What I am saying, is that people are responsible for the situation that you correctly address in this thread. The good news is we are capable of coming up with viable solutions. Because the economy is a human creation, it can be fixed by humans too. The question then, as I see it, is how to proceed.
From: Regina | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
thwap
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5062
|
posted 03 December 2004 01:54 PM
lonecat,I agree entirely. It isn't a thing unto itself. It is a concept based upon the sum total of how we arrange our lives, how we sustain ourselves. It isn't something we should work for, it is something that exists because we work for ouselves. Here's to showing "the goddamn GDP" who'z boss.
From: Hamilton | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lonecat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5460
|
posted 03 December 2004 05:37 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dillinger:
Restrictions on corporations? Who's going to enforce that? The corporate state?The political ruling class and economic ruling class are the same people, interchangeable parts in the same whole. Keynsianism, social democracy, reformism in general is confined to a bygone era when the USSR and China threatened global capitalism and convinced our ruling class to give up a few crumbs in order to keep the whole pie. They're not scared any more. They think they're invincable and except for a few scattered distrubances (Seatle, QC01, etc) history really has ended. If we're going to move forward we need to forget about restricting corporate rule and start the work to overthrow it entirely.
More questions - how do we overthrow corporate rule, and what do we replace it with?
From: Regina | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
thwap
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5062
|
posted 03 December 2004 06:14 PM
quote:
Originally posted by lonecat:
More questions - how do we overthrow corporate rule, and what do we replace it with?
Here's my two cents: quote:
We are all realizing that the Left has to work harder at offering alternatives as well as critiques of the present political-economic system.Some posters here at "babble" do provide such alternatives. I would like to offer my own as well: I believe that the best way to ensure peaceful (and therefore lasting) change is to pursue the establishment of people's democratic and human rights as workers. These human rights are to be entrenched in constitutions or as the laws of countries through the political process. While the political path is being pursued, unions, and social justice activists should obviously attempt to achieve work place human rights on their own, outside of the political process. Part of this will consist of the active dissemination of the justice and benefits of democracy in the work place. Three final points before discussion [hopefully] begins: 1. Work place democracy should be made more central to Left activism because so many other things flow from justice at work. Women's autonomy, anyone's autonomy depends to a great deal on the accessibility of quality work. Environmental sustainability will best be served by workers unafraid to pursue environmental stewardship. etc., ... 2. Giving people greater control within their work places helps to transcend the old debate over "free markets" [which some people believe is the height of human liberty] and "big government" [which can supposedly ensure social justice and democratic control over the economy]. 3. The present political system is being recommended because it does contain within it the means for our emancipation. Politics is presently rendered useless due to the influence of money/capital over it. But by giving people power over capitalism within the productive economy, much of capital's influence will be weakened, to gradually wither away.
originally posted here
From: Hamilton | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
