economists: no - systems engineers: yes

["Jay Hanson" <j@qmail.com>]

From: Roberto Verzola <rverzola@phil.gn.apc.org>

>To Jay: Who will optimize for the individual's welfare? If we are
>talking of an individual's own ruleset, we can presume that every
>individual will be looking mainly after their own self-interest (the
>selfish strategy), instead of others' (the altruistic strategy) --
>although this is of course open to debate. The selfish strategy is

You are right about everyone looking after their own interests, but
not in the way that economists claim.   Keep in mind that modern
economic theory is not science, it's politics. [1]   So if you want
truth, forget the economists and rely on the scientists and systems
people.

The present crisis goes far beyond Y2K.  It's a crisis inherent to
capitalism and democracy themselves!

In 1992, the two most prestigious scientific institutions in the world
-- the US National Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society of London
-- warned in a joint statement that science and technology may NOT be
able to save us:  "The future of our planet is in the balance... The
next 30 years may be crucial." [2]

Well, nothing has changed in the last seven years, we race full speed
to keep our date with disaster.

PSEUDO DEMOCRACY
In 1997, the Chinese lobbyist Johnny Chung observed: "I see the White
House is like a subway - you have to put in coins to open the gates."
[3] Millions of Americans have made the same observation: American
politics is based on money - one dollar, one vote. Why is American
politics based on money? The surprising answer is because the Founding
Fathers intended it that way.

Democracy is defined as "government by the people", but the framers of
the Constitution never intended "the people" to govern themselves.
Governance was reserved for the moneyed class (for excellent reasons).
Madison even went so far as to boast that "the true distinction"
between ancient regimes and the proposed experiment in government
"lies in the total exclusion of the people in their collective
capacity."  In short, the framers of the Constitution crafted an
"authoritarian"  political system that presented the illusion of
democracy to the people.

(  My next newsletter covers these issues in great detail -- with all
    the references. Sign up at: http://dieoff.com/page1.htm  it will
    be sent out on Jan 1.)

So what can be done?  Before solving our crisis. we must see it as an
"systems engineering" problem and NOT as an "economic" problem
("getting the prices right")!  What follows is not meant to be a
comprehensive description  of a new society, but only presents some
conceptual "systems engineering" ideas  for consideration.

KEY DEFINITIONS
     GLOBAL PROBLEMATIC (after The Club of Rome, 1972): Global tragedy
of the commons because people are genetically programmed to
more-than-reproduce themselves and make the best use of their
environments.

     COMMONS: "A commons is any resource treated as though it belongs
to all. When anyone can claim a resource simply on the grounds that he
wants or needs to use it, one has a commons."

     NEEDS: Human "needs" have a scientific basis which is defined by
human biology.  35,000 years ago, three million hunter-gatherers
"needed" community, shelter, health care, clean water, clean air, and
about 3,000 calories a day of nutritious food. Today, people still
"need" the same things that hunter-gatherers "needed" then (except
fewer calories).

     eMERGY: eMergy is the solar energy used directly and indirectly
to make a service or product. In other words, eMergy is the "cost" of
a service or a product in units of solar energy.

     SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Sustainable development both improves
quality of life and retains continuity with physical conditions; it
requires that social systems be equitable and physical systems
circular.

     AUTHORITY: Goals (or ideals) are not produced by a consensus of
the governed, rather a qualified authority determines goals. For
example, physical goals for sustainable development must come from
"scientific" authority - because no one else knows what they must be.
All contemporary political systems are "authoritarian" with the
moneyed class ruling the so-called democracies.

     COERCION (politics): To "coerce" is to compel one to act in a
certain way - either by promise of reward or threat of punishment. Two
obvious examples of coercion are our system of laws and paychecks.

     THE ONE-AND-ONLY HUMANE SOLUTION: Global coercion. In principle,
the global commons can only be managed at the global level by people
who understand the physical systems involved: scientists. Global
coercion can be seen in the worldwide reactions to ozone depletion and
global warming.

Step one would be to establish a global government of some sort with
the authority to protect the global commons - our life-support system
- as well as protecting universal human rights. This government would
also oversee the "clean" manufacturing of "repairable" and "reusable"
energy-efficient appliances and transportation systems. It would also
insure the sustainable production of staples like wheat, rice, oats,
and fish.

Does this new global government sound repressive or restrictive? Not
at all. A great deal of freedom is possible - in fact, far more than
we have now.

In short, the one big freedom that individuals would have to give up
would be the freedom to destroy the commons (in its broadest sense) -
the freedom to kill. And in return, they would be given a guaranteed
income for life and the freedom to live almost any way they choose.

That's the big picture, I will elaborate if anyone is interested.

Jay
--------------------------
[1] pp. 150-151, SCIENCE, RATIONALITY, AND NEOCLASSICAL
ECONOMICS, L.D. Keita; Delaware, 1992.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0874134102
See http://dieoff.com/page141.htm#Keita

[2] http://dieoff.com/page7.htm