Friday, December 20, 2019

I'm not outraged, and I am paying attention

When I was in high school, a friend of mine introduced me to the statement, “If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.” My three-minute Google search for the origin of the phrase didn’t give a conclusive source, but someone typed that they saw it on a bumper sticker in the 70s.

The problem with that statement is that it constrains the believer to a specific emotion - outrage - based on some outside stimulus - the source of outrage. It says that the only valid response to inequality, injustice, and any other wrongness is strong negative emotions. I disagree. I believe that we should feel free to respond to injustice any way we’d like, and that one emotional response is not necessarily more right than another. In other words, I may not always express my reaction to systemic racism or sexism as frustration, but it doesn’t mean I’m not committed to a safe, equitable world for all. (Feel free to argue that this is a privilege as a result of my male whiteness.)

I’ve committed myself to the well being of all life. I’m nearly 39 years old, but I’ve just come to see that, for myself, my commitment needn’t require despondency, anger, or inner torment. I’ve finally come to understand that I can enjoy in wonder and satisfaction, ease and appreciation the subtle and the deep of this life, and still have space for compassion, empathy, and action. Experiencing existential satisfaction in being alive, and giving a shit about others and the world, are not mutually exclusive.

I fully stand for a safe, enjoyable, and fulfilling world for all of us, and I’m standing with all the enjoyment, wonder, and appreciation with which I am committed to experiencing my life. And I want my students and colleagues to know that we are never actually constrained to feel any specific way no matter how the world and its people and things are showing up to us. We don’t need to be outraged to prove that we're paying attention.


Wednesday, September 25, 2019

I don't think I'm being Vulcan here

In societies where modern conditions of production prevail, all of life presents itself as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into representation.

A video of Greta Thunberg speaking to the UN this week blew up for a few days on my Twitter and Facebook feeds. When I first started seeing them, I thought that it was because people were judging her as angry, immature, and too emotional. What I saw instead is that a lot of the people on the left that I follow were proud of her for getting angry. One climate activist that I respect tweeted that "Rage-filled Greta is actually my favorite Greta."

I'm a bit perplexed by this. Her anger and rage are fine, but that it takes her getting so emotional to make such ripples is sad to me.

I'm not trying to be Vulcan about it and saying that we shouldn't get emotional. I'm saying that we're simply not using our imagination enough if it takes a kid to get angry for us to listen. Her getting angry doesn't make her any more right (or wrong).

Like the burning CVS, I'd like to think that anger is okay if it gets people to listen, but I don't think that it gets us to listen any more than we were already. It gets us turned on to the spectacle of it, but likely no more committed to a future that works for all.

I'm amazed at her thinking and articulation and maturity. And I think it's fine that she got angry. This isn't an indictment of her self-expression. It's an indictment of the culture that turned her message and self-expression into a spectacle. I'm feeling sad that anger seems so meaningful to express, when devastated homes, hungry bellies, the 6th mass extinction, and mass migration aren't enough to call us to action.

Just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right!
- Ricky Gervais


Tuesday, September 24, 2019

That's how the light gets in

Anthem by Leonard Cohen
(Lyrics copied from here.)

The birds they sang
at the break of day
Start again
I heard them say
Don't dwell on what
has passed away
or what is yet to be.
Ah the wars they will
be fought again
The holy dove
She will be caught again
bought and sold
and bought again
the dove is never free.

Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in.

We asked for signs
the signs were sent:
the birth betrayed
the marriage spent
Yeah the widowhood
of every government --
signs for all to see.

I can't run no more
with that lawless crowd
while the killers in high places
say their prayers out loud.
But they've summoned, they've summoned up
a thundercloud
and they're going to hear from me.

Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in.

You can add up the parts
but you won't have the sum
You can strike up the march,
there is no drum
Every heart, every heart
to love will come
but like a refugee.

Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in.

Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in.
That's how the light gets in.
That's how the light gets in.




Monday, September 23, 2019

What being pro-life feels like

Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 
- Jesus, in Matthew 18: 3-4 

What do you mean, "Why?"
Tonight at dinner, I asked the boys what I should write about for my blog. My older son said that I should write about the Bahamas [recently ravaged by a hurricane]. I asked him why, and he said, "because they were destroyed." I asked him why that matters. He said, "What do you mean?! The Bahamas were wiped out!" And why does that matter? He couldn't get why I was asking such a preposterous question - in his world, it obviously matters that people are getting hurt and will get more hurt by the impacts of climate change.

My younger son said that I should write about littering and pollution. I asked him why. "Because it's a problem." Why is it a problem? "What do you mean?! Of course it's a problem!"

The older students that I typically teach can dig deeper when I ask those questions - keep peeling back the layers of our thinking and beliefs. I like the exercise because it's fun and kinda enlightening, but I also find that it's a powerful experience for me and them to get in touch with the things that really matter to us. At some point, we say: "Because I care about it!" And there's no deeper layer, because our caring about it doesn't need a reason, it doesn't need an argument, it doesn't need a justification.

We hit that level very quickly tonight at dinner. My kids are pro-life. They care about other people and animals, automatically and unequivocally.

This is a pro-life movement
At the end of the documentary, Chasing Coral, that I watched in a couple of my classes last week in preparation for the climate strike activities, one student came up to me at the end and said, "That's so sad." I think she's pro-life, and that's why she found it sad, but I'll find out. (25% of the world's species live in coral reef ecosystems, over 1.25 billion people survive on them, and we're likely to lose all coral reefs by the end of this century.)

I'm pro-life: I want all people, animals, plants, fungi, etc. - all of it - to have a fair chance at living full-out, satisfied, and fulfilled lives. And I hope to grow in my wonder at life, its mysteries and beauties, that my kids have reinvigorated in me these last 11 years. The climate and environmental movements are pro-life movements, and I'm excited to see young people starting to fill the leadership gap.

Source: a friend took this image at the DC climate strike.



Sunday, September 22, 2019

Smoke signals from a burning CVS

I likely wouldn’t have known about Freddie Gray at all, or the depth of continuing issues of U.S. racism, if that Baltimore CVS wasn’t set on fire.

At the time, I was teaching high school engineering and physics at a private school just north of Baltimore. Another teacher at school mentioned that she was going to be discussing in her classes the death of Freddie Gray and issues of police violence and systemic racism, so I decided to find a couple videos to watch in class to lead us into discussions. It wasn’t a topic I felt very comfortable discussing with students in class, but it seemed important enough to bring the conversation up, follow my values, and see where things went.

I found the following video; after watching it a couple times, something clicked for me.


My initial perspective on the Baltimore Uprising was that what happened to Freddie Gray was wrong, but destroying property was not the way to make things better. In the video, Wolf Blitzer tries to get Deray McKesson to condemn the acts of destruction. However, Deray stands focused in attempting to bring Wolf back to understanding the why behind the destruction: people are in pain, people are angry. And then it clicked for me.

Smoke signals from that burning CVS woke me up to severe well-being issues that I was ignorant of. What’s some damaged property compared with the real suffering of people?

I’m grateful for those smoke signals, because it opened me up to new levels of understanding, compassion, and commitment in my life.

I don’t want the transformation of our environmental awareness and actions to also necessitate the destruction of property, this time at the hands of the climate and damaged ecosystems. I'd rather us solve these problems without calamity.

New Orleans, Houston, Puerto Rico, the Great Barrier Reef, and others. These are smoke signals. Are we waking up yet?

What’s the smoke signal you think will get the fossil fuel industry (and the politicians on its payroll) to wake up?


How sad to think that nature speaks and mankind doesn't listen.
- Victor Hugo, 1840


A formidable question

We can’t build what we can’t imagine. We can’t build what we can’t imagine. I’ve said it again and again, but please, let it really sink in. It’s the most important fact on our planet right now: We can’t build what we can’t imagine.
- Alex Steffen, Climate Activist, in his essay Heroic  

Tonight I got to do something that I love to do - sit around a fire with people that I'm close to.

I shared with my friends a little about attending the Climate Strike in Baltimore yesterday, and a friend asked me, "Are we *screwed*?" (That's not the actual word that he used...)

Many of us ask that question, and I too wanted to know the answer to it. I haven't asked it in a while, but I feel mildly drawn to it still, or at least the portentous story that often follows. Tonight, trying to put my finger on why I've asked the question, though, I think it's because it would help guide me in how to feel. 

"Yes, we're screwed" would give me permission to indulge in grief and then resign myself to a sad, unavoidable future (or ignore the problem altogether). "No, we're not screwed" would give meaning to my actions - good, so my actions won't be for nothing!

My thoughts about the future are initially cynical. So when my friend asked me that question tonight, I said, "Yes, I think we're screwed. But I'm still going to do everything I can to build a different, better future." That's meant to be inspiring, but really it's just cynicism protecting me from feeling like I failed, or feeling like I'm fighting a losing war.

In retrospect, I wish I had thought a little bit before I spoke. 

Here's what I'd say to him now: "What kind of future do you want for yourself, for your kids, for others?"

That question is the one I mean to ask others. That question is the one we need to ask each other more often. The strategy, the game plan, can't be developed until we've created what it means to win. Otherwise, we'll just be playing the game of survival, and we know how that game goes. Us against them. Anger, fear, frustration, resignation.

I want a world of laughter and compassion and freedom and ease. Of health and well-being, of enjoyment and satisfaction. Clear oceans and thriving ecosystems. Clean, renewable energy. Games in the sunshine and naps in the shade. All of life would have an equitable, feasible, fulfilling access to the kind of life that it's drawn to.

Try it out: What future do you want? 

The follow up question, of course, if anyone is willing to ask it, is "What can we do now to get there?" But that question isn't where we need to start.

So answer that first question, to me, to a friend, to yourself: What future do you want?

If we want a thriving, prosperous, sustainable world we have to imagine it, first...
- Alex Steffen, Climate Activist, in his essay Heroic   


Friday, September 20, 2019

Sometimes it's messy

A letter to the faculty of my school on the eve of the global climate strike:

Though it usually feels like I’m doing way too little for the environmental movement, I’m committed to a future that works for all life.

The past couple weeks at school, with regard to the climate strike today, have been messy. Since [a couple students] presented to the school about the strike a couple weeks ago, to some extent we have all wondered what’s happening, how much we should assist/guide the students, and how to best support the climate movement in general. We’ve probably voiced or at least had judgments about the students, how they’re handling it, about each other, about school admin, about ourselves, and about the movement itself.

In 50 years, they won’t care how awkward or messy this planning may have felt. They won’t care whether we went to DC or Baltimore or stayed on campus. They won’t care whether we wanted to help or not, whether we really meant it or not, or how many people showed up to march.

In 50 years, they’ll care whether they have clean air, clean water, healthy food, healthy relationships, and a stable society. They’ll care whether ecosystems have the chance to live or die on their own.

No matter how messy this planning has been or how awkward or thrilling or satisfying or scary or frustrated or meh our experience at Friday's climate strike may be, it’s worth it. Building a world that works is worth all those feelings, and it’s going be messy. Revolutions are messy.

As eco-activist Derrick Jensen wrote, “Nothing matters but that we stop this culture from killing the planet.”

Thank you for participating in this movement, however you’ve chosen to join it on Friday.

P.S. I recommend that you read this excerpt from activist Derrick Jensen’s essay, “You Choose.” And I also recommend Greta Thunberg's TEDx talk, which kicked off our school movement a couple weeks ago.


Monday, September 2, 2019

What the hand is pointing to

We're pointing somewhere
I really enjoy conversations with my nieces and nephews. I like hearing about their lives and their thinking, and I like sharing stories of my experiences with them. Their creativity, thoughtfulness, passion, and care for others inspires me. I nearly always find that I could've listened more and talked less.

One of my nephews is studying to be a Catholic priest. He's clearly going to be a phenomenal priest, and I appreciate our friendship and our conversations. Though we share a similar language due to our Catholic/christian upbringing, we have different beliefs when it comes to religion, spirituality, and the meaning of it all. Regardless, our conversations seem to be stimulating to both of us on an intellectual and spiritual level.

Today we had a conversation about a human experience of God, and the conversation curved towards what effect a belief in God may have on one's moral actions. While I still don't think that a belief in God necessarily provides much support to one's quest to make the world a better place, I left the conversation clear about my nephew's commitment to others' well-being.

My nephew and I are both pointing forward to a better future for life, an improvement in well-being and fulfillment. Our conversation, however, was mostly about the hand that's pointing there.

Our hands are pointing there
His hand is the hand of a Catholic, one studying to be a Catholic authority on fulfilling on that future. Though we didn't get to the means in our conversation today, I suspect that his means of arriving at that future are different from mine, including an after-life.

My hand is the hand of an athiest, one studying to be ethically effective at fulfilling on that future in this lifetime. I think that the path to get there includes minimizing our negative impacts and maximizing our positive ones, supporting other life in getting its necessities, but also challenging myself and others to find greater depths of satisfaction, fulfillment, and enjoyment in the fundamental experiences of being alive.

It's enjoyable and stimulating to talk about the nature of our pointing hands, and I look forward to seeing more about his and mine as we move along.

What we're pointing towards
What's more important right now to me than the nature of our hands, though, is the future our hands are pointing towards. A future where life is healthy and fulfilled at all levels of its being. 

I wonder how many of us share such a vision, despite what our hands look like. (Probably many, many, many more of us than we think.)

Gratitude
I'm grateful to be surrounded by people in my life who care for others and their well-being. For the pointing hand insight, I'm grateful to Michael Neill, author and teacher (I highly recommend his Inside-Out Revolution book). And I'm grateful for your taking the time and energy to read this - thank you!


You might be interested to read a previous post of mine, Pointing forward, that expresses my breaking through resignation at my political dissatisfaction last year - pointing my finger forward instead of pointing it at others.


Monday, July 8, 2019

None but ourselves

The mythology of your culture hums in your ears so constantly that no one pays the slightest bit of attention to it. Of course man is conquering space and the atom and the deserts and the oceans and the elements. According to your mythology, this is what he was BORN to do.
- Daniel Quinn, Ishmael

The water we're swimming in
For the past two weeks, I worked on a project with a handful of colleagues at school. We discussed and created the beginnings of an interdisciplinary program. As an example of taking a big question and looking at it through different lenses, one morning we addressed the question, "What makes the climate crisis so hard to solve?"

We each took a couple minutes and listed out the various thoughts that initially came to mind. On my list of about 10 thoughts, the one that stood out as most impactful was the dissociation between the consumer and the producer - that we, as western consumers, have lost touch with those producing our products, where they are, what the raw materials were, where the raw materials were from, and what actually went into making these things. Capitalism works a lot better when we're close enough to relate to the producers.

We are consumers, and we live in a consumerist culture. That's a fact. And it's such a part of our lives that mostly we're oblivious to it and how it impacts our thinking.

Mental prison
The world of the Takers is one vast prison, and except for a handful of Leavers scattered across the world, the entire human race is now inside that prison.
- Daniel Quinn, Ishmael

At some point in our conversation at school, one of us used the phrase "freedom from consumptive thinking." I like that phrase. It's a reminder to me that we must in fact be constrained in our thinking by the culture of consumption in which we're living.

Maybe it's just fine to be constrained in our thinking in this way, but what might become possible if we free our minds and actions from the grip of the culture of consumption?

Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn, was a powerful book for me when I read it sometime in college. I recommend that you check it out too!

Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind.
- Marcus Garvey. Source.


Monday, February 18, 2019

The way things are. Or not.

If you suffer from the misconception that most of the world is still too poor to buy anything at all, you risk missing out on the biggest economic opportunity in world history while you use your marketing spend to push special "yoga" pads to wealthy hipsters.
- Hans Rosling, Factfulness 
We're Failing Capitalism: Part 5 of 5
Despite very real and appreciated successes, the way we do capitalism is failing us. The most devastating failures are the growing momentum of climate change, other environmental concerns, and wealth inequality. Either these challenges will destroy capitalism entirely in the end, or we need to modify our approach to capitalism to solve them.

The five parts to the series are:
  1. The source of the world's problems?
  2. Some of capitalism's successes
  3. The winning formula
  4. We're failing capitalism
  5. The way things are. Or not.

While capitalism has provided many benefits to the average person over the last 500 years, it is ostensibly failing many of us in obvious ways; with escalating climate forces and other environmental degradation, it will increasingly fail more of us. I used to think that capitalism itself is to blame, but capitalism isn't a living thing, and it only operates according to the conditions that humans specify.

I've felt a bit overwhelmed by the task of distilling all relevant information on this topic to a single blog post offering some realistic solutions. So I've decided to stick with a couple that I really like and find myself sharing most often with people in conversations. I hope you find the following ideas helpful and practical.

Impose costs on negative externalities
The market dynamics in capitalism do not provide any mechanisms in themselves to prevent this behaviour; it requires some forms of non-market intervention either by state or by organized social forces.

Climate change alone is already costing countries hundreds of billions of dollars each year. To ensure that markets absorb those costs as markets rightly should in a capitalist economy, carbon and other pollutants should be taxed.

Currently, governments pay for capitalism's environmental effects. If governments tax carbon and other pollutants, the costs are put into the market that caused the debt in the first place. "I actually think a carbon tax together with rebates is, in some sense, the most conservative way to deal with climate change" (Greg Mankiw, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers under President G.W. Bush).

This thinking can be applied to all our major issues. Antibiotic resistance, for example, can be handled in the form of taxes on the meat/agricultural industry so that the market itself adjusts in light of this externality. "Although the majority of antibiotic use occurs in agricultural settings, relatively little attention has been paid to how antibiotic use in farm animals contributes to the overall problem of antibiotic resistance" (source).

Educate ourselves and each other
The learned ignore the evidence of their senses to preserve the coherence of the ideas of their imagination.
- Adam Smith

As a teacher, I have found over the years that when students ask a question on a topic that I haven't recently read up on, I tend to give answers that I heard when I was a high school or college student 20 years ago. If my teachers then were repeating what they learned in school 20 years prior, then the information I'm speaking about is at least 40 years old. That's really old information!

It's especially old considering the drastic changes in the world in the last 30 years. As we saw in the second post of this series, Some of Capitalism's Successes, poverty, education, hunger, life expectancy and other areas have seen breakthrough transformations in the last few decades. However, if we're not educating ourselves and others about the current state of the world, we're not going to make informed choices.

Until we are educated on today's "what's so" and making educated decisions on how best to move forward, we're just living out high school teachers' views of the world from half a century ago or more.

Or not
How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it, except the pleasure of seeing it. 

I had a picture of the Hubble Ultra-Deep Field image in my old classroom, and I now have it at my desk. I find it calming to zoom out from my personal life sometimes, and this image helps me do that.


I don't need reason and logic to know that I love my kids, but reason often helps me shake off frustration and anger faster than they'd leave on their own. I don't need reason and logic to feel compassion and empathy for other people and other life, but reason helps shift my perspective to remember to be open to it. Likewise, viewing the Hubble Ultra-Deep Field image has a feeling to it as well as a reasoning to it, to me.

We're headed towards some changes - technological, social, and environmental. Nearly everyone I talk to about climate change and other environmental challenges, let alone the topics of psychological and social impacts of our modern living, pretty much agree that we're screwed and there's nothing we can do about it. That perspective is quite reasonable, and it's quite convenient.

It's easier to not try. It's easier to not get invested. It's easier to get wrapped up in everything else we deal with in our day-to-day lives than to consider the future. Saying there's nothing that can be done is certainly easier than struggling to find something that can be done. I agree!

But all it takes is to say, "Or not." We're screwed...Or not. There's little hope...Or not. There's no way we can turn things around...Or not. Or not opens a door a little bit. We might not know how to get there yet, and we might not know what role we can play, but maybe there is another way.

(A close friend of my wife and me likes to say "Who says?" in response to limitations. Who says you can't have dessert before dinner? Who says we can't transform society so that everybody wins?)

Rethinking how we do capitalism and how we engage with our capitalist system is worthy of the grander vision - one where people and non-human life are respected, valued, free, and fulfilled. I much prefer the vision of a world that works for all life than the resigned perspective that this is just the way things are and the way they'll be. 

The view that this is just the way things are and the way they'll be affects how we do capitalism, and either capitalism will die or we'll learn to use it to manifest a world that works. Our impact on the world will be remade either way - life's wonders are worth it.


I hope that this has been worthwhile reading for you. It's taken me much longer to complete this series than I anticipated! Changing jobs and getting confronted in my writing were a couple hurdles, and I'm glad to be back in the game. Please leave a comment if you have anything to say! 

Sunday, November 18, 2018

We're failing capitalism

We all know that junk food has taken over our diets and made us physically sick... But there's equally strong evidence that a kind of junk values has taken over our minds and made us mentally sick.
We're Failing Capitalism: Part 4 of 5
I used to personify capitalism as an entity with intentionality (malicious intentionality, in fact). But capitalism is just a collection of ideas, and we've adulterated some of the best parts. In this next segment of the series, we'll be looking at a handful of specific ways in which we're failing capitalism.

The five parts to the series are:
  1. The source of the world's problems?
  2. Some of capitalism's successes
  3. The winning formula
  4. We're failing capitalism
  5. The way things are. Or not.

Capitalism (with its partner, science) has played an instrumental role in making this one of the safest, healthiest, and most comfortable periods in human history for the average person. However, the canaries have started dying; this prosperity has been built on such an unsustainable foundation that global socio-environmental dilemmas are imminent.

Capitalism is an easy scapegoat - it appears that those who seem to have benefited most from this seemingly exploitative and unsustainable system are perfect poster children for greed and decadence. Just as easy as it is for some to call the poor lazy, we can blame capitalism for all of our societal and environmental issues. In this context, the dissolution of capitalism then looks like quite the panacea.

Source.

But maybe capitalism isn't to blame for all our problems. In fact, perhaps capitalism isn't to blame at all. What if it's just how we do capitalism that's problematic?

We're failing capitalism with:
  • Negative externalities
  • Exploitation of people and the environment
  • Inequality
  • Disassociation between consumption and production


Externalities - social and environmental debt

One of the most important rules of capitalism is to pay back debts to those who invested. As discussed in part 3 of this series, The Winning Formula, capitalism could not have succeeded if debts were not repaid. Investors have always financed the expedition (research and development), prototyping, production, and more with the expectation and trust that their investments would be returned (and with profit).

Unfortunately, social and environmental debt never make it into ledgers - they are externalities. An externality is "a side effect or consequence of an industrial or commercial activity that affects other parties without this being reflected in the cost of the goods or services involved" (Oxford dictionary).


So one of the foundational principles of capitalism, trust in the return on investment through the repayment of debts and dividends, is fundamentally not honored through the existence of social and environmental externalities. How? Because social and environmental debt will have to be repaid. We increasingly pay for carbon pollution with superstorm cleanup; we pay for worker exploitation with the various growing costs of inequality, such as war, aid programs, refugee projects, etc; we pay for superbug threats with suffering and higher health care costs.

The escalating evidence of the impacts of climate change, pollution, resource depletion, antibiotic resistance, and species extinction are highlighting that we can no longer view environmental debt as an externality to never be repaid. We will have to repay that debt, and the longer we delay, the more interest accrues.

Interesting note: those who say we can't afford to deal with those issues now are ignoring that the price goes up the longer we avoid dealing with them. We will pay for it - when is up to us.


Everyone is supposed to benefit

During the 19th century, the United States entered the ranks of the world's most advanced and dynamic economies. At the same time, the nation sustained an expansive and brutal system of human bondage. This was no mere coincidence. 

I'm grateful for the many successes of capitalism. From my current vantage point, my previous willingness to join a movement to overthrow capitalism was a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

What makes it so evident that there are problems with capitalism is that regardless of overall metrics, many people aren't benefiting. In previous posts in this series, I only mentioned the exploitation of people as part of the path that led our society to where we are today.

I think it would be immoral/unethical to ignore those past and current transgressions against mostly brown and black people as evidence that this system is flawed and it needs fixing. Slavery and sweatshops are two examples of pretty effective ways to optimize profits at the expense of the well-being of millions of people, and this is just one of many practices that demonstrate we're failing capitalism.

I think that it's not okay to shrug off the exploitation on which our current prosperity was and continues to be built. We don't need to feel guilt or shame, but we should let it lead us in a more equitable and ethical direction.
...if the aggregate goal of human striving isn’t merely to maximize aggregate profit but to achieve a measure of happiness and sustainability for the vast majority, well then, perhaps we have a problem. Several problems in fact. 
- Igor Greenwald, writing for Forbes 

 Maybe the system is doing well, but it might not feel like it

The concentration of income in the hands of the rich might not just mean a more unequal society, economists believe. It might mean less stable economic expansions and sluggish growth.
- Annie Lowry, writing for NYT 

Our more subtle failure in implementing capitalism lies in the fact that despite whatever metrics we use to show that the system is doing well, many people don't experience benefiting from the system. Consider the perspective of many U.S. working class people that our system is so inequitable and flawed that their vote for president in 2016 was a vote to "break the system." Their experience is valid.

Income inequality, in the U.S. anyway, is at nearly unfathomable numbers. It's not only a demonstration of a failure for the majority of how we do capitalism, it also points to a weakening of the system itself.

Even though statistics rarely serve to change a person's behaviors, here's an interesting set of statistics published in early 2016 by Oxfam:

And here are a few more statistics brought up in a great conversation between Johann Hari and Sam Harris, #142 - Addiction, Depression, and a Meaningful life. The key idea here is that social crises in wealthier countries (like the opioid crisis in the U.S.) are the result of deeper existential pains experienced by average people in capitalist societies:
  • More U.S. citizens die from opioids each year than who died in the Vietnam War
  • 1 in 3 middle aged women are on chemical anti-depressants
  • 1 in 10 13-yr old boys are on a stimulant drug
  • 30% of children in the foster care system are on at least one psychiatric drug
  • Suicide is significantly rising (24% increase between 1999 and 2014)

Johann Hari argues that, like the 18th century gin craze in England, the opioid crisis isn't the fault of opioids. Instead, it's the natural result of important social and psychological needs not being met by the status quo of survival in our society. (Source.)


Dissociation

The problem with evil is that in real life it is not necessarily ugly. It can look very beautiful...That is why it is so difficult to resist Satan's temptations.
- Yuval Harari, 21 Lessons 

One of the expectations of capitalism is that it responds to the consumer. The market is supposed to shift in response to how people utilize their purchasing power. 

In actuality, however, the consumer has become so disassociated from the means of production that we mostly have no idea where our products come from, who worked to create them, how they got to us, what materials and processes went into them, and what will happen to them once we're done with it. 

This is a BIG deal for capitalism. When the product was manufactured across town from us by people we could see and meet, we could see the deforestation, taste it in the water, smell it in the air, and find ourselves incapable of ignoring those means of production. Our purchasing power could, theoretically, shift the market.

When the mining, processing, manufacturing, packaging, and shipping by people we can't picture occurs so far from our line of sight (half the world away for most of our products), our purchasing power is much less likely to reflect what our actual choice might have been in the matter. The invisible hand has no sight, taste, or hearing to true the system.

Capitalism depends on "level, transparent markets to work well." (Source.)


In summary, I think that the main failings in our implementation of capitalism are the following:
  • Negative externalities
  • Exploitation of people and the environment
  • Inequality
  • Disassociation between consumption and production
I hope that this has been worthwhile reading for you - stay tuned for the conclusion of the series in part 5: The way things are. Or not. Please leave a comment if you have anything to say! 


Thursday, August 16, 2018

The winning formula

What potential did Europe develop in the early modern period that enabled it to dominate the late modern world? There are two complementary answers to this question: modern science and capitalism.
- Yuval Harari, Sapiens    

We're Failing Capitalism: Part 3 of 5
This is the third part in a five-part series on how we're failing capitalism. In this post we'll look at the big ideas that makes capitalism tick.

The five parts to the series are:
  1. The source of the world's problems?
  2. Some of capitalism's successes
  3. The winning formula
  4. We're failing capitalism
  5. The way things are. Or not.

Bridges of shared values

The school where I taught during the last seven years had a politically conservative student body, generally. A student dressed up as failed Obamacare for halloween one year, numerous computers sported Trump stickers, and just about the only Hillary reference was "Hillary for Prison" on a handful of computers and t-shirts.

While I found that frustrating at times because my personal politics aren't aligned with those, I am very grateful to have been challenged in my thinking and to have grown to appreciate the humanity and logic of the opposing view. It's because I worked with and taught libertarians, non-Trump conservatives, and Trump supporters that I feel that I've come to a more sustainable perspective on many things, including capitalism. We don't need free market ideologues to become environmentalists to create a better future, but we may need to build bridges of shared values so that we can reach solutions faster together.

Capitalism's winning formula

I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past. 
- Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to John Adams 

The following sections will detail out what we're looking at as Capitalism's winning formula. There are two important notes to point out up front:
  • This discussion is NOT based on economics; it's based on the underlying human traits that make the economics possible. 
  • While more modern examples of the following ideas are available, it has been much easier to present these ideas in a somewhat book report form on Yuval Harari's Sapiens. The majority of these details and ideas are his, and I am grateful for his clear and educational writing style.

Capitalism's winning formula:
  1. Envision a rich future. 
  2. Invest in exploratory research (science).
  3. Invest in the production of something worthwhile that benefits the consumer.
  4. Pay back your creditors.
  5. End up richer.


Economic History of the World (from Sapiens)

None of this formula is possible without a willingness to envision, a willingness to explore, a willingness to trust, and a stable judicial system willing protect authentic contracts. The state provides the stable judicial system, but the rest is up to any of us.

Envisioning a richer future

In the late 1480s, Columbus requested that the Kind of Portugal finance an expedition westward across the Atlantic to discover a trade route to India. Columbus' vision was that such a route existed and that there would be a big return on the King's investment. The King said no - his advisors told him that he wasn't likely to get a good return on that investment. 

So Columbus went to the new King and Queen of newly formed Spain, and they also said no. Their advisors also thought that it would be a waste of money. A few years later, though, they agreed to finance his voyage. They didn't really expect him to even return, but the opportunity to potentially one-up Portugal made it worth a try. 

The age of imperialism thus gained serious momentum starting with a vision of a future that would pay back more than it would cost to get there.

Someone has to pay for it

The first English settlements in North America were established in the early 17th century by joint-stock companies such as the London Company, the Plymouth Company, the Dorchester Company, and the Massachusetts Company.
- Yuval Harari, Sapiens

Although in school I learned about different companies participating in the imperialist expansion of European nations during the age of exploration (like the East India Company), I've always had it in my mind that it was the governments of the nations themselves that did the financing. While this was sometimes true, as in the case of Columbus, it was much more common that exploration was privately funded with the hope of high returns.

Until the age of exploration, wealth was a fairly fixed thing - a nation either had it or took it from someone else who had it. Production increased globally throughout time, but this was due to demographic expansion; per capita increase did not really occur (Sapiens). People willing to risk financing (ad)ventures changed this.

Exploration (i.e., Science)

The discovery of America was the foundational event of the Scientific Revolution. It not only taught Europeans to favor present observations over past traditions, but the desire to conquer America also obliged Europeans to search for new knowledge at breakneck speed.
- Yuval Harari, Sapiens   

I often think of technology when I think of the Scientific Revolution. The development of scientific processes led to new technology, and technology was the magic that manifested control. But scientific knowledge itself can be fortifying and empowering, and scientific knowledge is a major key to capitalism's success.

In 1500, the average person living in China was wealthier than the average person living in Europe, and "in 1775 Asia accounted for 80 per cent of the world economy" (Sapiens). China had the world’s largest fleet, both in size and number of ships, and China had explored the coastline of South Asia all the way to eastern Africa prior to Columbus' voyage. Admiral Zheng He explored oceans, but he never conquered or colonized.

Chinese ship compared to Columbus' (source)

Now consider that Columbus' contemporary, Vasco de Gama, circumnavigated Africa around 1500 to reach a direct route to India. By 1850, the British had control of India, using about 180,000 linguists, scientists, troops, diplomats, business people, and families to subjugate 300,000,000 Indians. How was it possible for 180,000 foreigners not much better equipped technologically than the locals, to colonize and rule nearly 2000 times their own number?

The British empire knew India better than most Indians.

Expeditions were financed to develop the fields of linguistics, botany, geography, and history. "Without such knowledge, it is unlikely that a ridiculously small number of Britons could have succeeded in governing, oppressing, and exploiting so many hundreds of millions of Indians for two centuries" (Sapiens). And exploit they did. Just one example: 10 million Bengalis, a third of the population India's richest province, died as a direct result of British policies.

I report this one of very many available stories to not only implicate science in the exploitations of imperialism, but to also highlight the foundational role that science plays in capitalism. Countries were providing the protection for these expeditions in the form of military participation, but joint stock companies were providing the capital.
The key factor was that the plant-seeking botanist and the colony-seeking naval officer shared a similar mindset. Both scientist and conqueror began by admitting ignorance - they both said, 'I don't know what's out there.'
- Yuval Harari, Sapiens    

Trust

Credit enables us to build the present at the expense of the future. It's founded on the assumption that our future resources are sure to be far more abundant than our present resources. A host of new and wonderful opportunities open up if we can build things in the present using future income.
- Yuval Harari, Sapiens   

Funding in the age of exploration, just like funding now, depends on trust. Trust that the returns will be greater than the investment. Trust in the vision of a richer, brighter future. Trust in the systems that ensure integrity.

One of the most controversial, ideological, and powerful perspectives provided by Adam Smith on capitalism also relies on trust: "by becoming richer I benefit everybody, not just myself."
[The rich] are led by an invisible hand to make nearly the same distribution of the necessaries of life, which would have been made, had the earth been divided into equal portions among all its inhabitants, and thus without intending it, without knowing it, advance the interest of the society, and afford means to the multiplication of the species.
- Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, my emphasis

And to provide a final example of the need for trust in the capitalist system, consider Smith's take on the rule of law. Just as the Dutch won the trust of financial systems by repaying loans on time and by enforcing private property rights, Smith argued that justice and the rule of law were necessary to ensure the proper functioning of the economic system. The rule of law was a system that we could trust to ensure contracts were honored.



Thank you for taking the time to read this post. If you have any thoughts you'd like to share, please comment. I hope you'll visit again to read more!


Wednesday, July 11, 2018

Some of capitalism's successes

I expected the newly elected Labour government to withhold British support for this foul war [Vietnam]...and when this expectation was disappointed I began, along with many, many of my contemporaries, to experience a furious disillusionment with "conventional" politics. 
- Christopher Hitchens, Hitch 22

We're Failing Capitalism: Part 2 of 5
This is the second part in a five-part series on how we're failing capitalism. Although I've been quite willing in the past to blame capitalism for the world's problems, in this post we'll look at some of the measurable successes of humanity's application of capitalism. The five parts to the series are:
  1. The source of the world's problems?
  2. Some of capitalism's successes
  3. The winning formula
  4. We're failing capitalism
  5. The way things are. Or not.

Aligning values

I was raised Catholic, went to Church every Sunday of my youth, and I prayed a lot, off and on again, as a kid and young man. I read an illustrated Bible as a 3rd and 4th grader, and I think I was pretty engaged during religion class in my Catholic elementary school.

Somewhere I read or heard that the best prayer we can say to God is a prayer to become a better person. So in 6th or 7th grade, when I started to notice that I was kind of a bully, I made that prayer a mantra. I remember saying it in my head as I walked across Cooks Lane to play touch football at recess. I said it to myself as I fell asleep at night and when I woke up in the morning.

In early college I met a pretty cool Civil Engineering grad student named Luke, from Korea, who, with his wife Maria, led 1-on-1 bible studies with students. I really enjoyed those conversations. He would pick a verse from the new testament, bring in some old testament, and I really liked the practical considerations of some of Jesus' teachings. To this day I aim to live by some of those teachings as a useful philosophy, despite my current atheism.

Hypocrisy

When Bush was appointed President by the Supreme Court in 2000, his administration's environmental and economic policies weren't surprising. But for 20-year-old me, the seeming hypocrisy of a "born-again Christian" was a bit surprising, and I felt frustrated and a bit disillusioned. 

However, the administration's economic, immoral, and duplicitous push for the war against Iraq was another level. When 58% of the seemingly better party, the Democrats, also voted to authorize military action against Iraq, I was looking for another solution. The International Socialists were there with an answer that seemed to work with my personal values (until it didn't).

Capitalism's successes

Since then, I've been mostly unwilling to concede that capitalism has had any of the positive impacts for which people often acknowledge it. Social, educational, environmental, and health problems, as well as exploitations of all kinds, have been capitalism's fault; there's no room for success against all that. Yet....

What follows is a very brief overview of some AMAZING global statistics from the last 200 years. Any one of these charts should be enough of a glaring success for humanity that it knock me off my chair if I'm paying attention. Seriously - the significance of these improvements to global health and wealth is staggering from a human wellness perspective, and capitalism is in large part to thank for these results.

In the following bullets, if a statement lacks a reference, it has come from Factfulness: Ten reasons we're wrong about the world - and things are better than you think. I highly recommend that you spend just 10 minutes playing with the graphs on gapminder.org - they're certainly a source of hope and excitement for me, and they're fun. Also, you can click on the charts below to make them bigger.

*** The authors of Factfulness and the creators of gapminder.org have committed themselves to educating the world on its current state, not as our teachers taught it to us decades ago. A lot has happened in the last few decades. ***

I agree with the author of Factfulness that it's important to be two-minded about these numbers: while they demonstrate positive impacts that are worthy of praise, the world's still got problems that need solving.

Disclaimer - these results are not solely due to capitalism's impact on the world. Some people, including a former me, would even claim that these results are in spite of capitalism, not because of it. As we'll see in the final post in this series, I think that capitalism's successful impact in these areas is in spite of us, not the other way around.

Health
  • All countries in the world have a higher life expectancy than the highest life expectancy in 1800. Just 200 years ago, all countries had a life expectancy of 40 years or less; today, only 7 countries have life expectancies below 60 years old (and they're still above 50!).
  • In 1980, around 20% of all kids in the world received vaccinations. In 2016, 86% of all kids in the world received vaccinations.
  • Global child mortality was 18.2% in 1960. In 2015, it was 4.3%.

Wealth
  • 200 years ago, 85% of the world's population lived in extreme poverty. Today, around 10% of the world's population (800 million people) lives in extreme poverty.
  • The vast majority of the world lives within the same standards of living that the US and Western Europe experienced in the 1950s.
  • In the early 1980s, China's poverty rate was around 80%. Less than 40 years later, it's around 2%.
You've got to play with the charts on the gapminder.org site.


Thank you for taking the time to read this post. If you have any thoughts you'd like to share, please comment. I hope you'll visit again to read more!


Sunday, July 1, 2018

The source of the world's problems?

We're Failing Capitalism: Part 1 of 5
This is the first part in a five-part series on how we're failing capitalism. In this first part we'll be looking at how I came to view capitalism as the source of the world's problems. (I no longer see it this way.) The five parts to the series are:
  1. The source of the world's problems?
  2. Some of capitalism's successes
  3. The winning formula
  4. We're failing capitalism
  5. The way things are. Or not.

In 2002 the US began arguing for the need to invade Iraq, and this seemed wrong to me. I was studying at the University of Maryland, and posted on a bulletin board outside the Physics building was a flyer for "Peace Forum", a meeting to engage in conversations about the possible war.

I went to my first Peace Forum meeting one evening, and it felt good and inspiring to be around other people (there were about 20 total) who thought the war seemed unethical. I kept going back to Peace Forum. I'm mildly sad now thinking that at a school with over 30,000 students, only 20 people showed up to these meetings. But we weren't the only ones opposed to the war.

Here's a letter to the editor I wrote to the student newspaper, The Diamondback, in December of 2002 during my Peace Forum days (there shouldn't be a period at the end of the first sentence in the second paragraph):


I asked a fellow Peace Forum member one day about the "ISO" button on her jacket - the International Socialist Organization. I had heard of socialism, but I didn't really know what it was. So I went to a meeting. And I kept going back.


The meetings were educational, giving me a perspective on history and current events I had never before learned or been introduced to. We had discussions, guest presenters, workshops, teach-ins, and book loaning and swapping. I learned about revolutions from around the world that I didn't know had happened, about the struggles of people I never knew existed, and about ways to organize the education of others.

And the best part was that they had figured out the source of the world's problems: capitalism.

If only we got rid of capitalism and welcomed capitalism's natural successor: socialism. If only we could destroy the profit motive, people would have the space to be motivated by altruism, equality, health, and respect.

I officially joined the organization a month or so later. An overthrow of the US government had started to sound good:
Our organization participates in many different struggles for justice and liberation today, while working toward a future socialist society, free of all exploitation and oppression, and built on the principles of solidarity and democracy. (Source.)
It sounded good until I realized that our chapter leader wasn't talking about a peaceful revolution by changing hearts and minds. No, he was talking about an armed revolution. I thought that was silly then, and I think it's silly now, but also dangerous.

So I stopped going to meetings and workshops, and I stopped calling myself a socialist. I was no longer a card-carrying member of a socialist organization.

But Capitalism was for me still the source of the world's problems.


Tuesday, April 10, 2018

A cherry tree approach to consumption


Population size
Last year sometime, a colleague of mine excitedly said, "Okay, I think I know the source of our environmental problems: population size." He'd been talking with one of our science teachers who, at the time, thought the same and backed it up with numbers.

Consumption
Human population size isn't the problem, I told him. It's consumption. As the world's population tries to consume to the standard set by the U.S. and 'the West', the global ecosystem is weakening. On the contrary, Eaarth could sustain many more billions of people if all of us consumed much less than 'the West' currently consumes per person. Consumption means waste, and waste is bad.

It's a design problem
But then I read Cradle to Cradle and I came to believe that

Humanity doesn't have a consumption problem, 
we've got a design problem. 

Take the cherry tree:
Thousands of blossoms create fruit for birds, humans, and other animals, in order that one pit might eventually fall onto the ground, take root, and grow. Who would look at the ground littered with cherry blossoms and complain, How inefficient and wasteful! The tree makes copious blossoms and fruit without depleting its environment. Once they fall on the ground, their materials decompose and break down into nutrients that nourish microorganisms, insects, plants, animals, and soil. Although the tree actually makes more of its product than it needs for its own success in an ecosystem, this abundance has evolved (through millions of years of success and failure or, in business terms, R&D), to serve rich and varied purposes. In fact, the tree’s fecundity nourishes just about everything around it. 
- McDonough and Braungart, Cradle to Cradle  

No such thing as waste
In Nature, there's no such thing as waste, as demonstrated by the cherry tree. In human production, however, waste is perceived as an inevitable by-product. Engineers and economists seek to minimize waste, whether it's unused resources or toxic effluent.

A cherry tree's response to consumption would be to eliminate the concept of waste, and "to design things - products, packaging, and systems - from the very beginning on the understanding that waste does not exist" (Cradle to Cradle).

Re-imagining our system
In the U.S. where most rivers and streams "can't support healthy aquatic life" (source), what if we built facilities whose processes, products, and by-products nourished the ecosystem instead of degrading it?

What if being sustainable weren't our goal, 
and instead our goal were to flourish?

Changing paradigms is not naive
I know, I know, I know. It's hopelessly naive to think that we can transform our resource extraction, materials processing, product manufacturing, and transportation methods based on no-waste design models. I think so too.

However, the promise of a life of abundance, fulfillment, and comfort that a shift in our design paradigm would hold for us and our children's children's children's children is worth it.

What they won't care about in 80 years is how naive we thought our ideas were - especially if the ideas give hope that people in 80 years have easy access to water, healthy food, fulfilling relationships, beautiful shelter, and satisfying labor.
Imagine what a world of prosperity and health in the future will look like, and begin designing for it right now. . . This is going to take us all, and it is going to take forever. 
-  McDonough and Braungart, Cradle to Cradle