Climate protesters read a newspaper as they stand with the Extinction Rebellion boat in the center of Oxford Circus on April 17 in London. Leon Neal / Getty Images
By Jeremy Lent
Facing oncoming climate disaster, some argue for "Deep Adaptation" — that we must prepare for inevitable collapse. However, this orientation is dangerously flawed. It threatens to become a self-fulfilling prophecy by diluting the efforts toward positive change. What we really need right now is Deep Transformation. There is still time to act: we must acknowledge this moral imperative.
<p>Every now and then, history has a way of forcing ordinary people to face up to a moral encounter with destiny that they never expected. Back in the 1930s, as Adolf Hitler rose to power, those who turned away when they saw Jews getting beaten in the streets never expected that decades later, their grandchildren would turn toward them with repugnance and say "Why did you do nothing when there was still a chance to stop the horror?"</p><p>Now, nearly a century on, here we are again. The fate of future generations is at stake, and each of us needs to be prepared, one day, to face posterity — in whatever form that might take — and answer the question: "What did you do when you knew our future was on the line?"</p><p>Unless you've been hiding under a rock the past few months, or get your daily updates exclusively from Fox News, you'll know that our world is facing a dire climate emergency that's rapidly reeling out of control. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/08/global-warming-must-not-exceed-15c-warns-landmark-un-report" target="_blank">issued a warning</a> to humanity that we have just twelve years to turn things around before we pass the point of no return. Governments continue to waffle and ignore the blaring sirens. The pledges they've made under the 2015 Paris agreement will lead to 3 degrees of warming, which would <a href="https://owlcation.com/stem/Mark-Lynass-Six-Degrees-A-Summary-Review" target="_blank">threaten the foundations</a> of our civilization. And <a href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/4/30/17300946/global-warming-degrees-replace-fossil-fuels" target="_blank">they're not even on track</a> to meet those commitments. Even the IPCC's dire warning of calamity is, by many accounts, too conservative, failing to take into account tipping points in the Earth system with reinforcing feedback effects that <a href="https://climateextremes.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/What-Lies-Beneath-V3-LR-Blank5b15d.pdf" target="_blank">could drive temperatures</a> far beyond the IPCC's worst case scenarios.</p><p>People are beginning to feel panicky in the face of oncoming disaster. Books such as David Wallace-Wells's <em>Uninhabitable Earth</em> paint a picture so frightening that it's already feeling to some like game over. A strange new phenomenon is emerging: while mainstream media ignores impending catastrophe, increasing numbers of people are resonating with those who say it's now "too late" to save civilization. The concept of "Deep Adaptation" is <a href="https://www.resilience.org/stories/2019-03-05/rethink-activism-in-the-face-of-catastrophic-biological-collapse/" target="_blank">beginning to gain currency</a>, with its proponent Jem Bendell <a href="https://jembendell.wordpress.com/2019/01/09/hope-and-vision-in-the-face-of-collapse-the-4th-r-of-deep-adaptation/" target="_blank">arguing</a> that "we face inevitable near-term societal collapse," and therefore need to prepare for "civil unrest, lawlessness and a breakdown in normal life."</p><p>There's much that is true in the Deep Adaptation diagnosis of our situation, but its orientation is dangerously flawed. By turning people's attention toward preparing for doom, rather than focusing on structural political and economic change, Deep Adaptation threatens to become a self-fulfilling prophecy, increasing the risk of collapse by diluting efforts toward societal transformation.</p>
<p><em>Jeremy Lent is author of <a href="http://www.jeremylent.com/the-patterning-instinct.html" target="_blank">The Patterning Instinct: A Cultural History of Humanity's Search for Meaning</a>, which investigates how different cultures have made sense of the universe and how their underlying values have changed the course of history. He is founder of the nonprofit <a href="http://www.liology.org/" target="_blank">Liology Institute</a>, dedicated to fostering a sustainable worldview.</em></p>
Our Headlong Fling Toward Disaster
<p>I have no disagreement with the dire assessment of our circumstances. In fact, things look even worse if you expand the scope beyond the climate emergency. Climate breakdown itself is merely a symptom of a far larger crisis: the ecological catastrophe unfolding in every domain of the living Earth. Tropical forests are <a href="http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm#.Wz6H5thKjUI" target="_blank">being decimated</a>, making way for vast monocrops of wheat, soy and palm oil plantations. The oceans are being turned into a garbage dump, with projections that by 2050 they will <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/01/20/by-2050-there-will-be-more-plastic-than-fish-in-the-worlds-oceans-study-says/?utm_term=.4299cfb53950" target="_blank">contain more plastic</a> than fish. Animal populations are being <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/pages/living-planet-report-2016" target="_blank">wiped out</a>. The insects that form the foundation of our global ecosystem <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/20/insectageddon-farming-catastrophe-climate-breakdown-insect-populations" target="_blank">are disappearing</a>: bees, butterflies and countless other species in free fall. Our living planet is being ravaged mercilessly by humanity's insatiable consumption, and there's not much left.</p><p>Deep Adaptation proponents are equally on target arguing that incremental fixes are utterly insufficient. Even if a global price on carbon was established, and if our governments invested in renewables rather than subsidizing the fossil fuel industry, we would still come up woefully short. The harsh reality is that, rather than heading toward net zero, global emissions <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/05/brutal-news-global-carbon-emissions-jump-to-all-time-high-in-2018" target="_blank">just hit record numbers</a> last year; Exxon, the largest shareholder-owned oil company, proudly announced recently that <a href="https://www.economist.com/briefing/2019/02/09/exxonmobil-gambles-on-growth" target="_blank">it's doubling down</a> on fossil fuel extraction; and wherever you look, whether it's air travel, globalized shipping or beef consumption, the juggernaut driving us to climate catastrophe only continues to accelerate. To cap it off, with ecological destruction and global emissions already unsustainable, the world economy is <a href="https://data.oecd.org/gdp/gdp-long-term-forecast.htm" target="_blank">expected to triple</a> by 2060.</p><p>The primary reason for this headlong fling toward disaster is that our economic system is based on perpetual growth — on the need to consume the Earth at an ever-increasing rate. Our world is dominated by transnational corporations, <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2017/11/30/ai-has-already-taken-over-its-called-the-corporation/" target="_blank">which now account</a> for 69 of the world's largest 100 economies. The value of these corporations is based on investors' expectations for their continued growth, which they are driven to achieve at any cost, including the future welfare of humanity and the living Earth. It's a <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2017/12/19/what-will-it-really-take-to-avoid-collapse/" target="_blank">gigantic Ponzi scheme</a> that barely gets a mention because the corporations also own the mainstream media, along with most governments. The real discussions we need about humanity's future don't make it to the table. Even a policy goal as ambitious as the Green New Deal — rejected by most mainstream pundits as utterly unrealistic — would still be insufficient to turn things around, because it doesn't acknowledge the need to transition our economy away from reliance on endless growth.</p>Deep Adaptation ... or Deep Transformation?
<p>Faced with these realities, I understand why Deep Adaptation followers throw their hands up in despair and prepare for collapse. But I believe it's wrong and irresponsible to declare definitively that it's too late — that collapse is "inevitable." It's too late, perhaps, for the monarch butterflies, whose numbers are down 97 percent and <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/monarch-butterflies-extinct-1302838" target="_blank">headed for extinction</a>. Too late, probably <a href="https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/06/coral-reef-bleaching-global-warming-unesco-sites/" target="_blank">for the coral reefs</a> that are projected not to survive beyond mid-century. Too late, clearly, for the climate refugees already fleeing their homes in desperation, only to find themselves rejected, exploited and driven back by those whose comfort they threaten. There is plenty to grieve about in this unfolding catastrophe — it's a valid and essential part of our response to mourn the losses we're already experiencing. But while grieving, we must take action, not surrender to a false belief in the inevitable.</p><p>Defeatism in the face of overwhelming odds is something that I, perhaps, am especially averse to, having grown up in postwar Britain. In the dark days of 1940, defeat seemed inevitable for the British, as the Nazis swept through Europe, threatening an impending invasion. For many, the only prudent course was to negotiate with Hitler and turn Britain into a vassal state, a strategy that nearly prevailed at a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_1940_War_Cabinet_Crisis" target="_blank">fateful War Cabinet meeting</a> in May 1940. When details about this Cabinet meeting became public, in my teens, I remember a chill going through my veins. Born into a Jewish family, I realized that I probably owed my very existence to those who bravely chose to overcome despair and fight on in a seemingly hopeless struggle.</p><p>A lesson to learn from this — and countless other historical episodes — is that history rarely progresses for long in a straight line. It takes unanticipated swerves that only make sense when analyzed retroactively. For ten years, Tarana Burke <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarana_Burke" target="_blank">used the phrase</a> "me too" to raise awareness of sexual assault, without knowing that it would one day help topple Harvey Weinstein, and potentiate a movement toward transformation of abusive cultural norms. The curve balls of history are all around us. No-one can accurately predict when the next stock market crash will occur, never mind when civilization itself will come undone.</p><p>There's a second, equally important, lesson to learn from the nonlinear transformations that we see throughout history, such as universal women's suffrage or the legalization of same-sex marriage. They don't just happen by themselves — they result from the dogged actions of a critical mass of engaged citizens who see something that's wrong and, regardless of seemingly insurmountable odds, keep pushing forward driven by their sense of moral urgency. As part of a system, we all collectively participate in how that system evolves, whether we know it or not, whether we want to or not.</p><p>Paradoxically, the very precariousness of our current system, teetering on the extremes of brutal inequality and ecological devastation, increases the potential for deep structural change. Research in complex systems reveals that, when a system is stable and secure, it's very resistant to change. But when the linkages within the system begin to unravel, it's <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/tag/tipping-points/" target="_blank">far more likely to undergo</a> the kind of deep restructuring that our world requires.</p><p>It's not Deep Adaptation that we need right now — it's Deep Transformation. The current dire predicament we're in screams something loudly and clearly to anyone who's listening: If we're to retain any semblance of a healthy planet by the latter part of this century, we have to change the foundations of our civilization. We need to move from one that is wealth-based to once that is life-based — a new type of society built on life-affirming principles, <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2018/10/10/we-need-an-ecological-civilization-before-its-too-late/" target="_blank">often described as an Ecological Civilization</a>. We need a global system that devolves power back to the people; that reins in the excesses of global corporations and government corruption; that replaces the insanity of infinite economic growth with a just transition toward a stable, equitable, steady-state economy optimizing human and natural flourishing.</p>Our Moral Encounter With Destiny
<p>Does that seem unlikely to you? Sure, it seems unlikely to me, too, but "likelihood" and "inevitability" stand a long way from each other. As Rebecca Solnit points out in <em>Hope in the Dark</em>, hope is not a prognostication. Taking either an optimistic or pessimistic stance on the future can justify a cop-out. An optimist says, "It will turn out fine so I don't need to do anything." A pessimist retorts, "Nothing I do will make a difference so let me not waste my time." Hope, by contrast, is not a matter of estimating the odds. Hope is an active state of mind, a recognition that change is nonlinear, unpredictable, and arises from intentional engagement.</p><p>Bendell <a href="https://jembendell.wordpress.com/2019/01/09/hope-and-vision-in-the-face-of-collapse-the-4th-r-of-deep-adaptation/" target="_blank">responds</a> to this version of hope with a comparison to a terminal cancer patient. It would be cruel, he suggests, to tell them to keep hoping, pushing them to "spend their last days in struggle and denial, rather than discovering what might matter after acceptance." This is a false equivalency. A terminal cancer condition has a statistical history, derived from the outcomes of many thousands of similar occurrences. Our current situation is unique. There is no history available of thousands of global civilizations bringing their planetary ecosystems to breaking point. This is the only one we know of, and it would be negligent to give up on it based on a set of projections. If a doctor told your mother, "This cancer is unique and we have no experience of its prognosis. There are things we can try but they might not work," would you advise her to give up and prepare for death? I'm not giving up on Mother Earth that easily.</p><p>In truth, collapse <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2017/09/14/the-climate-catastrophe-were-all-ignoring/" target="_blank">is already happening</a> in different parts of the world. It's not a binary on-off switch. It's a cruel reality bearing down on the most vulnerable among us. The desperation they're experiencing right now makes it even more imperative to engage rather than declare game over. The <a href="https://grist.org/article/cyclone-idai-lays-bare-the-fundamental-injustice-of-climate-change/" target="_blank">millions left destitute</a> in Africa by Cyclone Idai, the communities <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/09/puerto-rico-year-maria-recovery-remains-slow-180920230214958.html" target="_blank">still ravaged</a> in Puerto Rico, the two-thousand-year old baobab trees <a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/extinction-countdown/climate-change-is-killing-these-ancient-trees-but-thats-just-part-of-the-story/" target="_blank">suddenly dying en masse</a>, and the countless people and species yet to be devastated by global ecocide, all need those of us in positions of relative power and privilege to step up to the plate, not throw up our hands in despair. There's currently much discussion about the devastating difference between 1.5° and 2.0° in global warming. Believe it, there will also <a href="https://owlcation.com/stem/Mark-Lynass-Six-Degrees-A-Summary-Review" target="_blank">be a huge difference</a> between 2.5° and 3.0°. As long as there are people at risk, as long as there are species struggling to survive, it's not too late to avert further disaster.</p><p>This is something many of our youngest generation seem to know intuitively, putting their elders to shame. As fifteen-year-old Greta Thunberg <a href="https://youtu.be/HzeekxtyFOY" target="_blank">declared in her statement</a> to the UN in Poland last November, "you are never too small to make a difference ... Imagine what we can all do together, if we really wanted to." Thunberg envisioned herself in 2078, with her own grandchildren. "They will ask," she said, "why you didn't do anything while there still was time to act."</p><p>That's the moral encounter with destiny that we each face today. Yes, there is still time to act. Last month, inspired by Thunberg's example, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/19/school-climate-strikes-more-than-1-million-took-part-say-campaigners-greta-thunberg" target="_blank">more than a million</a> school students in over a hundred countries walked out to demand climate action. To his great credit, even Jem Bendell disavows some of his own Deep Adaptation narrative to put his support behind protest. The <a href="https://rebellion.earth/who-we-are/" target="_blank">Extinction Rebellion</a> (XR) launched a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/14/earth-death-spiral-radical-action-climate-breakdown" target="_blank">mass civil disobedience campaign</a> last year in England, blocking bridges in London and demanding an adequate response to our climate emergency. It has since spread to 27 other countries.</p><p><span></span>Studies have <a href="https://rationalinsurgent.com/2013/11/04/my-talk-at-tedxboulder-civil-resistance-and-the-3-5-rule/" target="_blank">shown that</a>, once 3.5 percent of a population becomes sustainably committed to nonviolent mass movements for political change, they are invariably successful. That would translate into 11.5 million Americans on the street, or 26 million Europeans. We're a long way from that, but is it really impossible? I'm not ready, yet, to bet against <a href="http://steps-centre.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/How_Did_We_Do_That.pdf" target="_blank">humanity's ability to transform itself</a> or <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/03/natural-world-climate-catastrophe-rewilding" target="_blank">nature's powers of regeneration</a>. XR planned <a href="https://rebellion.earth/get-active/international-rebellion-a-guide-for-participants/" target="_blank">a global week of direct action</a> that began April 15, as a first step toward a coordinated worldwide grassroots rebellion against the system that's destroying hope of future flourishing. It might just be the beginning of another of history's U-turns. Do you want to look your grandchildren in the eyes? Yes, me too. I'll see you there.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Tim Robberts / Stone / Getty News
By Jeremy Lent
In the face of climate breakdown and ecological overshoot, alluring promises of "green growth" are no more than magical thinking. We need to restructure the fundamentals of our global cultural/economic system to cultivate an "ecological civilization": one that prioritizes the health of living systems over short-term wealth production.
<p>We've now been warned by the world's leading climate scientists that we have just twelve years to limit climate catastrophe. The UN's International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/08/global-warming-must-not-exceed-15c-warns-landmark-un-report" target="_blank">has put the world on notice</a> that going from a 1.5° to 2.0° C rise in temperature above preindustrial levels would have disastrous consequences across the board, with unprecedented flooding, drought, ocean devastation and famine.</p><p>Meanwhile, the world's current policies <a href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/4/30/17300946/global-warming-degrees-replace-fossil-fuels" target="_blank">have us on track</a> for more than 3° increase by the end of this century, and climate scientists publish dire warnings that amplifying feedbacks could <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/06/global-temperature-rises-could-be-double-those-predicted-by-climate-modelling" target="_blank">make things far worse</a> than even these projections, and thus <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/115/33/8252" target="_blank">place at risk</a> the very continuation of our civilization. We need, <a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/news_and_events/pr_181008_P48_spm.shtml" target="_blank">according to the IPCC</a>, "rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society." But what exactly does that mean?</p><p>Last month, at the <a href="https://www.globalclimateactionsummit.org/" target="_blank">Global Climate Action Summit</a> (GCAS) in San Francisco, luminaries such as Gov. Jerry Brown, Michael Bloomberg and Al Gore gave their version of what's needed with <a href="https://newclimateeconomy.report/2018/" target="_blank">an ambitious report</a> entitled "Unlocking the Inclusive Growth Story of the 21st Century by the New Climate Economy." It trumpets a <a href="https://newclimateeconomy.report/2018/the-new-growth-agenda/" target="_blank">New Growth Agenda</a>: through enlightened strategic initiatives, they claim, it's possible to transition to a low-carbon economy that could generate millions more jobs, raise trillions of dollars for green investment, and lead to higher global GDP growth.</p><p>But these buoyant projections by mainstream leaders, while overwhelmingly preferable to the Republican Party's malfeasance, are utterly insufficient to respond to the crisis facing our civilization. In promising that the current system can fix itself with a few adjustments, they are turning a blind eye to <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2017/12/19/what-will-it-really-take-to-avoid-collapse/" target="_blank">the fundamental drivers</a> propelling civilization toward collapse. By offering false hope, they deflect attention from the profound structural changes that our global economic system must make if we hope to bequeath a flourishing society to future generations. </p><h3>Ecological Overshoot</h3><p>That's because even the climate emergency is merely a harbinger of other existential threats looming over humanity as a result of ecological overshoot—the fact that we're depleting the earth's natural resources at a faster rate than they can be replenished. As long as government policies emphasize growing GDP as a national priority, and as long as transnational corporations <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2017/11/30/ai-has-already-taken-over-its-called-the-corporation/" target="_blank">relentlessly pursue greater shareholder returns</a> by ransacking the earth, we will continue accelerating toward global catastrophe.</p><p>Currently, our civilization is running at <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/4/1/25" target="_blank">40% above its sustainable capacity</a>. We're rapidly depleting the earth's <a href="http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm#.Wz6H5thKjUI" target="_blank">forests</a>, <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/pages/living-planet-report-2016" target="_blank">animals</a>, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/20/insectageddon-farming-catastrophe-climate-breakdown-insect-populations" target="_blank">insects</a>, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2015-09-16/half-marine-life-lost-in-40-years/6779912" target="_blank">fish</a>, <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/freshwater/freshwater-crisis/" target="_blank">freshwater</a>, even the <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/only-60-years-of-farming-left-if-soil-degradation-continues/" target="_blank">topsoil</a> we require to grow our crops. We've already transgressed three of the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/461472a" target="_blank">nine planetary boundaries</a> that define humanity's safe operating space, and yet global GDP is expected to <a href="https://data.oecd.org/gdp/real-gdp-long-term-forecast.htm#indicator-chart" target="_blank">more than double</a> by mid-century, with potentially irreversible and devastating consequences. By 2050, it's estimated, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/01/20/by-2050-there-will-be-more-plastic-than-fish-in-the-worlds-oceans-study-says/?utm_term=.4299cfb53950" target="_blank">there will be more plastic</a> in the world's oceans than fish. Last year, over fifteen thousand scientists from 184 countries <a href="https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/67/12/1026/4605229" target="_blank">issued an ominous warning</a> to humanity that time is running out: "Soon it will be too late," they wrote, "to shift course away from our failing trajectory."</p><p>Techno-optimists, including many of the GCAS dignitaries, like to dismiss these warnings with talk of "green growth"—essentially decoupling GDP growth from increased use of resources. While that would be a laudable goal, a number of studies have shown that it's <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0164733" target="_blank">simply not feasible</a>. Even the most wildly aggressive assumptions for greater efficiency would still result in consuming global resources <a href="https://www.resilience.org/stories/2018-09-19/why-growth-cant-be-green/" target="_blank">at double the sustainable capacity</a> by mid-century. </p><p>A desperate situation indeed, but one that need not lead to despair. In fact, there is a scenario where we can turn around this rush to the precipice and redirect humanity to a thriving future on a regenerated earth. It would, however, require us to rethink some of the sacrosanct beliefs of our modern world, beginning with the unquestioning reliance on <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2017/12/19/what-will-it-really-take-to-avoid-collapse/" target="_blank">perpetual economic growth</a> within a global capitalist system directed by transnational corporations <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2017/11/30/ai-has-already-taken-over-its-called-the-corporation/" target="_blank">driven exclusively by the need</a> to increase shareholder value for their investors.</p><p>In short, we need to change the basis of our global civilization. We must move from a civilization based on wealth production to one based on the health of living systems: an ecological civilization.</p><h3>An Ecological Civilization</h3><p>The crucial idea behind an ecological civilization is that our society needs to change at a level far deeper than most people realize. It's not just a matter of investing in renewables, eating less meat and driving an electric car. The intrinsic framework of our global social and economic organization needs to be transformed. And this will only happen when enough people recognize the destructive nature of our current mainstream culture and reject it for one that is life-affirming—embracing values that emphasize growth in the quality of life rather than in the consumption of goods and services.</p><p>A change of such magnitude would be an epochal event. There have been only two occasions in history when radical dislocations led to a transformation of virtually every aspect of the human experience: the Agricultural Revolution that began about twelve thousand years ago, and the Scientific Revolution of the 17<sup>th</sup> century. If our civilization is to survive and prosper through the looming crises of this century, we will need a transformation of our values, goals, and collective behavior on a similar scale. </p><p>An ecological civilization would be based on the core principles that sustain living systems coexisting stably in natural ecologies. Insights into how ecologies self-organize offer a model for how we could organize human society in ways that could permit sustainable abundance. Organisms prosper when they develop multiple symbiotic relationships, wherein each party to a relationship both takes and gives reciprocally. In an ecology, energy flows are balanced and one species' waste matter becomes nourishment for another. Entities within an ecology scale fractally, with microsystems existing as integral parts of larger systems to form a coherent whole. In a well-functioning ecosystem, each organism thrives by optimizing for its own existence within a network of relationships that enhances the common good. The inherent resilience caused by these dynamics means that—without human disruption—ecosystems can maintain their integrity for many thousands, and sometimes millions, of years.</p><p>In practice, transitioning to an ecological civilization would mean restructuring some of the fundamental institutions driving our current civilization to destruction. In place of an economy based on perpetual growth in GDP, it would institute one that emphasized quality of life, using alternative measures such as a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genuine_progress_indicator" target="_blank">Genuine Progress Indicator</a> to gauge success. Economic systems would be based on respect for individual dignity and fairly rewarding each person's contribution to the greater good, while ensuring that nutritional, housing, healthcare, and educational needs were fully met for everyone. Transnational corporations <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2018/07/12/five-ways-to-curb-the-power-of-corporations-and-billionaires/" target="_blank">would be fundamentally reorganized</a> and made accountable to the communities they purportedly serve, to optimize human and environmental wellbeing rather than shareholder profits. Locally owned cooperatives would become the default organizational structure. Food systems would be designed to emphasize local production using <a href="https://agroeco.org/" target="_blank">state-of-the-art agroecology</a> practices in place of fossil fuel-based fertilizer and pesticides, while manufacturing would prioritize <a href="https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/concept" target="_blank">circular flows</a> where efficient re-use of waste products is built into the process from the outset.</p><p>In an ecological civilization, the local community would be the basic building block of society. Face-to-face interaction would regain ascendance as a crucial part of human flourishing, and each community's relationship with others would be based on principles of mutual respect, learning, and reciprocity. Technological innovation would still be encouraged, but would be prized for its effectiveness in enhancing the vitality of living systems rather than minting billionaires. The driving principle of enterprise would be that we are all interconnected in the web of life—and long-term human prosperity is therefore founded on a healthy Earth.</p><h3>Cultivating a Flourishing Future</h3><p>While this vision may seem a distant dream to those who are transfixed by the daily frenzy of current events, innumerable pioneering organizations around the world are already planting the seeds for this cultural metamorphosis. </p><p>In China, President Xi Jinping <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2018/02/08/what-does-chinas-ecological-civilization-mean-for-humanitys-future/" target="_blank">has declared</a> an ecological civilization to be a central part of his long-term vision for the country. In Bolivia and Ecuador, the related values of <a href="https://www.resilience.org/stories/2017-03-24/degrowth-in-movements-buen-vivir/" target="_blank"><em>buen vivir</em></a> and <a href="https://www.pachamama.org/sumak-kawsay" target="_blank"><em>sumak kawsay</em></a> ("good living') are written into the constitution, and in Africa the concept of <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/reverend-william-e-flippin-jr/ubuntu-applying-african-p_b_1243904.html" target="_blank"><em>ubuntu</em></a> ("I am because we are") is a widely-discussed principle of human relations. In Europe, hundreds of scientists, politicians, and policy-makers recently <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/16/the-eu-needs-a-stability-and-wellbeing-pact-not-more-growth" target="_blank">co-authored a call</a> for the EU to plan for a sustainable future in which human and ecological wellbeing is prioritized over GDP. </p><p>Examples of large-scale thriving cooperatives, such as <a href="http://www.praxispeace.org/assets/pdf/THE-MONDRAGON-REPORT.pdf" target="_blank">Mondragon</a> in Spain, demonstrate that it's possible for companies to provide effectively for human needs without utilizing a shareholder-based profit model. Think tanks such as <a href="https://thenextsystem.org/" target="_blank">The Next System Project</a>, <a href="https://www.theglobalcitizensinitiative.org/" target="_blank">The Global Citizens Initiative</a>, and the <a href="https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/" target="_blank">P2P Foundation</a> are laying down parameters for the political, economic, and social organization of an ecological civilization. Meanwhile, visionary authors such as <a href="https://www.kateraworth.com/" target="_blank">Kate Raworth</a> and <a href="https://davidkorten.org/home/ecological-civilization/" target="_blank">David Korten</a> have written extensively on how to reframe the way we think about our economic and political path forward.</p><p>As the mainstream juggernaut drives our current civilization inexorably toward breaking point, it's easy to dismiss these steps toward a new form of civilization as too insignificant to make a difference. However, as the current system begins to break down in the coming years, increasing numbers of people around the world will come to realize that a fundamentally different alternative is needed. Whether they turn to movements based on prejudice and fear or join in a vision for a better future for humanity depends, to a large extent, on the ideas available to them. </p><p>One way or another, humanity is headed for the third great transformation in its history: either in the form of global collapse or a metamorphosis to a new foundation for sustainable flourishing. An ecological civilization offers a path forward that may be the only true hope for our descendants to thrive on Earth into the distant future. </p><p><em>Jeremy Lent is author of <a href="http://www.jeremylent.com/the-patterning-instinct.html" target="_blank">The Patterning Instinct: A Cultural History of Humanity's Search for Meaning</a>, which investigates how different cultures have made sense of the universe and how their underlying values have changed the course of history. He is founder of the nonprofit <a href="http://www.liology.org/" target="_blank">Liology Institute</a>, dedicated to fostering a sustainable worldview. For more information visit <a href="http://www.jeremylent.com/" target="_blank">jeremylent.com</a>. </em></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Pola Damonte / Getty Images
By Jeremy Lent
We need to rein in the destructive power of corporations and billionaires before it's too late. These five ideas would do that, while leaving global capitalism intact. Ultimately, only a complete transformation of our economic system will save our future, but these proposals could set changes in motion that might eventually take us there.
<p>Transnational corporations have become the dominant force directing our world. Humanity is accelerating toward a precipice of overconsumption, and the large transnationals are the primary agents driving us there. We're rapidly losing the Earth's <a href="http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm#.Wz6H5thKjUI" target="_blank">forests</a>, <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/pages/living-planet-report-2016" target="_blank">animals</a>, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/20/insectageddon-farming-catastrophe-climate-breakdown-insect-populations" target="_blank">insects</a>, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2015-09-16/half-marine-life-lost-in-40-years/6779912" target="_blank">fish</a>, even the <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/only-60-years-of-farming-left-if-soil-degradation-continues/" target="_blank">topsoil</a> we require to grow our crops. The Earth is becoming denuded of its bounty as every living system is ransacked for resources—not to mention the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2016/mar/18/welcome-to-the-climate-emergency-youre-about-20-years-late" target="_blank">looming emergency</a> of climate breakdown. As a result, 20,000 scientists have <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/warning-to-humanity-scientists-2544973158.html">recently issued</a> a public warning to humanity, while prominent academics consider the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.2845" target="_blank">collapse of civilization</a> this century to be a serious threat.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODE4NDU5MC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMzk0OTE2MH0.VdExWz-eJmdUKhalMy_ZR_aCanUgS_DFlm7riFpxXM8/img.jpg?width=980" id="8fb59" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b58c6603b45fb2445092a32936fb7bca" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Transnational corporations are driving humanity to a precipice of overconsumption.</small></p><p>Changes in our personal consumption patterns are important, but are ultimately inconsequential compared with the impact of the transnationals that have come to dominate our global economic and political system. Of the world's hundred largest economies, <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/10/corporations-not-countries-dominate-the-list-of-the-world-s-biggest-economic-entities/" target="_blank">69 are now corporations</a>. Political parties in many of our so-called democracies are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/05/american-elections-battle-billionaires-civic-inequality" target="_blank">funded in large part</a> by billionaires, while government cabinet positions are <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/06/21/nearly-70-percent-trumps-picks-top-administration-jobs-have-corporate-ties" target="_blank">staffed by corporate executives</a>. International bodies setting global policy are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/nov/01/fossil-fuel-companies-undermining-paris-agreement-negotiations-report" target="_blank">infiltrated by corporate agents</a> so successful at entrenching corporate power that even those governments that still prioritize their people's needs can no longer make autonomous decisions without <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/badge/globalsupercourt" target="_blank">risking crippling lawsuits</a> from the transnationals whose interests they threaten. Meanwhile, countries and cities compete with each other to beg their corporate overlords for investment dollars, even it means <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/cities/series/big-tech-desperate-cities" target="_blank">undermining public services</a> and legal protections for their own populations.<br></p><p>Environmental groups, recognizing where ultimate power resides, try to pressure corporations to improve practices through the threat of public shaming, with <a href="https://www.ran.org/campaigns" target="_blank">some appreciable results</a>. However, these attempts are necessarily constrained by the very structure of big corporations, which exist to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/maximizing-shareholder-value-the-goal-that-changed-corporate-america/2013/08/26/26e9ca8e-ed74-11e2-9008-61e94a7ea20d_story.html?utm_term=.bee6f69c0bd1" target="_blank">enrich their shareholders</a> regardless of the consequences. The common goal of corporations around the world is to monetize human activity and what's left of nature's abundance as rapidly and efficiently as possible. The overriding purpose of the world's powerful institutional force is thus directly at odds with a flourishing Earth or a viable future for humanity.</p><p>Having spent the first part of my career in the heart of the capitalist system, consulting to major international banks and corporations, I developed a sense of the underlying forces that direct the centers of financial power. These ideas are my distillation of what I believe could be effective levers for humanity to take back some control from the increasing hegemony of corporations and billionaires.</p><p>If we are to avoid disaster, our global economic system with its gaping inequities and deranged consumption will eventually need to dismantled and replaced by one <a href="http://davidkorten.org/home/ecological-civilization/" target="_blank">based on life-affirming principles</a> rather than wealth maximization. These suggestions, even in aggregate, wouldn't do that. They represent mere tweaks in a system that ultimately needs to be completely transformed. But like a modest trim tab that helps <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/val-jon-farris/the-power-of-trimtabs-wha_b_5863520.html?utm_hp_ref=impact&ir=Impact" target="_blank">redirect an ocean liner</a>, perhaps they could begin to curb the destructive force of transnationals and redirect their enormous power toward a more sustainable path.</p><h2>1. Triple Bottom Line Required for Corporate Charters</h2><p>A fundamental reason for the rapacious behavior of transnational corporations is their drive to maximize shareholder value above anything else. While there is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/corporations-dont-have-to-maximize-profits" target="_blank">no explicit requirement</a> for this in the standard corporate charter, <a href="http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2012/05/case-law-on-the-fiduciary-duty-of-directors-to-maximize-the-wealth-of-corporate-shareholders.html" target="_blank">a century of case law</a> has entrenched this principle into the behavior of large corporations to the point that is has become the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/a-duty-to-shareholder-value" target="_blank"><em>de facto</em> standard of operation</a>. As a result, if corporations were people, <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2017/11/30/ai-has-already-taken-over-its-called-the-corporation/" target="_blank">they would be considered psychopaths</a>, utterly devoid of any caring for the harm they cause in the pursuit of their goals.</p><p>It is easier, however, to change a corporation's values than those of a human psychopath. All you need to do is change the legal basis of their charter. Instead of pursuing shareholder interests alone, they could be re-chartered with the explicit purpose of achieving a triple bottom line of social and environmental outcomes as well as financial—sometimes known as the "triple Ps" of people, planet and profit.</p><p>This alternative corporate value system is already available through chartering as a <a href="http://benefitcorp.net/" target="_blank">benefit corporation</a> or <a href="https://www.bcorporation.net/what-are-b-corps" target="_blank">certifying as a B-Corp</a>, and has been adopted by more than 2,000 corporations in over fifty countries around the world—including <a href="http://www.bcorporation.net/become-a-b-corp/how-to-become-a-b-corp/multinationals-and-public-companies" target="_blank">several multibillion-dollar transnationals</a>. My proposal is that, instead of being a voluntary step taken by a select few, this would be a requirement for all corporations above a certain size.</p><p>Overnight, the intrinsic character of the corporation would be transformed. Currently, CEOs and corporate boards are faced with continual pressure to grow their earnings at all cost. If they chose to make a humane decision, such as not to exploit a copper mine because of the consequent pollution, they could expect to be sued by shareholders, and possibly acquired by a more ruthless competitor. However, if they were legally required to achieve a triple bottom line, they would weigh up decisions in a more balanced way, as a rational person might. With the board responsible for all three bottom lines, they would have to consider the risk of being sued if they caused excessive pollution, or if they were callous to the needs of the communities where their plants were located.</p><p>Currently, large corporations boast of their <a href="https://hbr.org/2015/01/the-truth-about-csr" target="_blank">corporate social responsibility</a> departments that are supposed to care about issues such as employment practices of their suppliers, sustainability of their raw materials, environmental impact of their packaging, gender balance and ethnic diversity in the workplace, and investments in local communities. Suddenly, they would have to stop paying mere lip service to these issues and take them as seriously as marketing costs, revenue growth and distribution channels—the things that CEOs actually worry about when they go home at night.</p><h2>2. Charter Renewal Required Every Five Years</h2><p>Changing the corporate charter requirement might not, however, be enough by itself to halt the relentless pursuit of profits by large transnationals. After all, executive pay packages consist of dollars rather than goodwill, and those dollars are linked directly to the share price, which is driven by shareholders' expectation of financial returns. If they could get away with it, they might continue their rapacious practices, while trying harder to look like they're meeting the other two bottom lines.</p><p>That's the reason for my second proposal, which is to require that corporations, which currently enjoy what's known legally as a "<a href="https://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/incorporation-and-legal-structures/what-does-it-mean-that-corporations-have-perpetual-existence.html" target="_blank">perpetual existence</a>," get their charters renewed every five years. If they failed to meet pre-established criteria on their two non-financial bottom lines, they would not be permitted to continue in business. Currently, if a company can't meet its financial obligations, it's forced into Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings and the value of its stock generally tanks to zero. Under my proposal, executives would also have to consider the risk of declaring "social bankruptcy" or "environmental bankruptcy" as they made their business decisions.</p><p>As in currently regulated industries such as banking, the final step of losing their charter would not have to be immediate. If a corporation failed to meet its basic parameters, it could be given a warning, with a time period set to fix things. However, the mere threat of this happening would lead corporate executives to make sure they were well above the criteria required to keep their charter.</p><p>Corporations are, of course, highly adept at using their financial resources to influence regulatory bodies through bribes and other mechanisms. To avoid this, panel members responsible to renew the charter would be representatives of the communities and ecosystems covered in the company's scope of operations. Their task would be to weigh up the findings of experienced independent auditors on the company's performance. To minimize corruption, the panel could be chosen by a process of random selection called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition" target="_blank">sortition</a>, just a like a trial jury is chosen in our legal system.</p><h2>3. Tax Stock Trades Based on the Length of the Holding Period</h2><p>Powerful as they are, even corporations have their masters: their shareholders. But don't think of the typical shareholder as a Warren Buffet type, sitting back in his leather armchair perusing his holdings. Instead, corporate stocks are subject to the frenetic activity of financial markets, where split-second computer algorithms govern much of the trading. Investment firms spend hundreds of millions of dollars enhancing their computing networks to shave <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/04/everything-you-need-to-know-about-high-frequency-trading/360411/" target="_blank">as little as three milliseconds</a> off the timing of their trades. The hyper liquidity of global markets means that investors are obsessed with short-term market trends, which leads corporate CEOs, forever anxious about their stock price, to focus their time horizon on the next quarterly earnings report. Financial valuations apply discount rates to future earnings, which means that an investment paying off thirty years in the future can be worth as little as five percent of its future payoff in the present. Under these conditions, why would any CEO care about the state of the planet—or even their company—thirty years from now?</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODE4NDU5NC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwMTU4Nzg2M30.TRm1xF8Cu1qrTSRajp0TMPci93jjee0a949QTux-zl8/img.jpg?width=980" id="13b5d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="462783dae10e97f8db9b67b90feaf13a" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">The financial markets' hyper liquidity drives the short-term orientation of corporate CEOs.</small></p><p>During the 2016 U.S. election campaign, Bernie Sanders proposed a <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/dean-baker/bernie-sanders-takes-it-t_b_7438808.html" target="_blank">Financial Transaction Tax</a> to pay for free college tuition, setting the rate at 0.1 percent of the transaction. In Europe, <a href="https://www.bna.com/eu-restart-financial-n57982091709/" target="_blank">discussions are under way</a> to apply a similar EU-wide tax. My proposal increases the tax rate by orders of magnitude, and differentiates based on the length of the stock holding. For example, the tax rate might look like this:<br></p><ul class="ee-ul"> <li>10% if the stock is held less than a day</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"> <li>5% if less than a year</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"> <li>3% if less than 10 years</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"> <li>1% if less than 20 years</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"><li>Zero if more than 20 years</li></ul><p>The effects of this single step would be enormous. The financial services industry would be transformed overnight. High frequency stock trading and same-day traders would disappear. The short-term orientation of the stock market would be replaced by carefully considered long-term investment decisions. A typical mutual fund, which in the U.S. currently turns over its portfolio at <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/articles/mutualfund/09/mutual-fund-turnover-rate.asp" target="_blank">the rate of 130 percent a year</a>, could no longer afford to do so, and would have to change its investment decision-making based on sustainable returns. The tax could be waived for individuals experiencing a life-changing event or for simple hedging techniques where, for example, farmers need to lock in the price of their produce at a future time.</p><p>The result would be a massive shift away from destructive extractive industries and toward sustainable businesses. For example, the fossil fuel industry is recognized to be vastly overvalued as a result of its "<a href="https://www.carbontracker.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Unburnable-Carbon-Full-rev2-1.pdf" target="_blank">unburnable carbon</a>": the amount of fossil fuels in the ground that can never be burned if the world is to keep climate change below the 2° rise agreed at COP21 in Paris. A recent study estimates the overvaluation <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0182-1" target="_blank">as high as $4 trillion</a>. Investors, however, play a game of musical chairs, hoping they won't be the ones left holding the stranded assets. This proposed transaction fee would incent them to dump fossil fuel investments immediately for opportunities in renewable energy with longer-term payoffs.</p><h2>4. Cap on Billionaire's Assets Over $5 Billion</h2><p>As corporations have taken increasing control of the global system, they have catapulted founding shareholders and their heirs to previously unimaginable pinnacles of wealth. The combined wealth of the world's 2,754 billionaires is now $9.2 trillion, an amount that has <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billionaire" target="_blank">doubled in the past six years</a>, and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World%27s_Billionaires" target="_blank">increased tenfold</a> since the beginning of this century. The magnitude of this wealth is difficult to conceive. The top six billionaires <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/richest-men-in-the-world-2274065153.html" target="_self">own as much</a> as the lower half of the entire world's population. Taken together, the world's billionaires would represent the third largest economy in the world, behind only China and the U.S., with wealth equivalent to the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)" target="_blank">GDP of Germany and Japan</a> combined.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODE4NDU5OS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1OTYzNDI5N30.svjLq625zw8u1Us7VSu5FWrnM-yzSsSTuk2M9U6wG4k/img.jpg?width=980" id="55a0f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="74c9e9168b3bb8d013dd3d0d63b61a41" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">These six men own as much wealth as half the world's population.</small></p><p>There is no legitimate rationale for this outrageous concentration of such wealth in a few individuals. The argument that the founders of Microsoft, Amazon or Facebook deserve such excessive wealth is no more valid than the belief of the ancient Egyptians in the divinity of their Pharaoh, or the Medieval notion of the divine right of kings. Mark Zuckerberg, aged 33, currently owns more than $70 billion. If someone had singlehandedly miniaturized the transistor, developed the logic for computer code, invented the PC, and come up with the internet, then maybe they'd deserve having close to that amount as a reward for the value they created. But all Zuckerberg did was figure out a way to connect people up in a network that became a bit more popular than other networks, and because of the internet's scale effects, he was the lucky one who hit the jackpot. Zuckerberg merely took advantage of all the other infrastructure work that led to the internet, painstakingly pieced together by millions of people over decades, which has been the real value creator for the world.<br></p><p>In response to this excess, my proposal is to cap billionaires' wealth at, say, $5 billion. It's an arbitrary amount, still obscenely high and presumably more than enough for those who argue that people should receive ample financial rewards for success. Beyond a certain level of wealth, however, what drives these people is power and prestige. This could be tapped by requiring them to donate their excess wealth to a trust over which they could retain some influence.</p><p>Such a trust, however, would need to have some strict criteria. While the billionaire could influence the trust's priorities, he would not have control over its activities. The current Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, for example, while a step in the right direction, is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundation" target="_blank">under the total control</a> of the Gateses and Warren Buffet. The foundation set up with much fanfare by Mark Zuckerberg is viewed by experts as little more than <a href="http://fortune.com/2015/12/02/zuckerberg-charity/" target="_blank">a fancy tax dodge</a>.</p><p>Each trust would need to avoid interference in a country's political system and be dedicated to life-affirming activities, the scope of which could be based, for example, on the <a href="http://earthcharter.org/discover/the-earth-charter/" target="_blank">principles of the Earth Charter</a>, a framework for building a just, sustainable and peaceful global society endorsed by more than 6,000 organizations.</p><p>The positive impact that these trillions of dollars could have on human and natural welfare would be prodigious. Imagine a country the size of Germany and Japan combined dedicated entirely to serving human and natural flourishing. It would have the resources to <a href="https://www.visionofearth.org/economics/ending-poverty/how-much-would-it-cost-to-end-extreme-poverty-in-the-world/" target="_blank">end extreme poverty</a>, increase regenerative agriculture to <a href="https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/food/regenerative-agriculture" target="_blank">more than a billion acres</a> worldwide, educate <a href="https://www.globalpartnership.org/funding/education-costs-per-child" target="_blank">hundreds of millions of girls</a> through the Global South, disseminate <a href="https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/food/clean-cookstoves" target="_blank">up to a billion clean cookstoves</a>, and much, much more.</p><p>The billionaires of the world, meanwhile, would continue to enjoy enormous wealth, and when they <a href="https://www.verdict.co.uk/wef-2018-davos-year-super-rich-dwarf-worlds-elite/" target="_blank">jet to Davos</a> to hobnob with other luminaries for the annual World Economic Forum, they could finally have something worthwhile to boast about.</p><h2>5. Declare a Crime of Ecocide at the International Criminal Court</h2><p>Even with all these constraints, the powers of transnational corporations would remain enormous, and there would still be times when, through willful negligence or intentional bad faith, corporate action causes massive environmental damage. A UN study, which <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/feb/18/worlds-top-firms-environmental-damage" target="_blank">remained unpublished</a>, found that the world's largest companies had caused more than $2 trillion of environmental damage, which would cost a third of their overall profits if they were forced to pay for it. Because of their extensive political influence, even their most damaging activities go unpunished. This leads to my final proposal: to declare a crime of ecocide at the <a href="http://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/explore/international-criminal-court" target="_blank">International Criminal Court</a> (ICC).</p><p>The ICC is an independent judicial body set up by international treaty, the Rome Statute, in 2002 to prosecute war crimes, genocides, and crimes against humanity. While it continues to <a href="https://www.opencanada.org/features/despite-recent-achievements-many-challenges-ahead-international-criminal-court/" target="_blank">face serious challenges</a> to its enforcement powers, it has had the effect of putting tyrants everywhere on notice that they can no longer act with impunity. If ecocide—the loss, destruction or severe damage of an ecosystem—were declared a crime by the ICC, this could have a similarly daunting effect on those corporate tyrants who currently know they can get away with devastating the world's "sacrifice zones" where they are pillaging the Earth's resources for profit.</p><p>There is a campaign, <a href="http://eradicatingecocide.com/" target="_blank">Eradicating Ecocide</a>, already under way to make this happen. A <a href="http://eradicatingecocide.com/the-law/the-model-law/" target="_blank">model law</a> has been drafted, and an <a href="https://www.missionlifeforce.org/" target="_blank">Earth Protectors Trust Fund</a> has been set up to permit common people everywhere to become legal Earth protectors. If a two-thirds majority of the Rome Statute signatories were to approve this as an amendment, it would become enforceable globally. Suddenly, corporate boards and CEOs everywhere would realize they are no longer above the law.</p><p>––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––</p><p>There is a strange paradox to consider about these proposals. One the one hand, notice how limited they are in scope. Even if they were all implemented overnight, the global system would not be overturned. People would still go to work and get paid, food would still be on the shelves of the grocery store, the same governments would still be in power, and the internet would still work. The gaping structural inequities of our current world order would continue unabated, and we'd still be consuming far more than our planet can sustain. Ultimately, we need a complete transformation of our global system if our civilization is to survive intact through this century.</p><p>On the other hand, it doesn't take a political genius to realize that these ideas are so far from mainstream thinking that they have virtually no chance to be adopted any time soon. They would be considered too radical for even the most progressive mainstream politician to endorse. What does this tell us about our current political dialogue? To me, it suggests that our conversations are too severely constrained by what we're "allowed" to think in terms of how our system works. We need to cast our gaze outside the norms that our billionaire-controlled mainstream media permits us to consider.</p><p>Imagine a world where these ideas (or others like them) began to be seriously entertained. How would they even be enforced? The only way corporations could be brought to heel, or billionaires compelled to give up their excess billions, would be a concerted effort led by the U.S. in conjunction with the European Union, and joined by the preponderance of other countries.</p><p>This, of course, could only happen if grassroots demand for these ideas spread so powerfully that politicians had to take notice. This is not such an unrealistic scenario, given the worldwide disavowal of the dominant capitalist model: most Europeans have a <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/02/23/british-people-view-socialism-more-favourably-capi/" target="_blank">higher opinion of socialism</a> than capitalism, and even in the U.S., the overwhelming majority see <a href="http://fortune.com/2015/11/03/majority-of-americans-dont-like-capitalism-yougov-poll/" target="_blank">big business as unethical and unfair</a>.</p><p>Then, there is the potential <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/val-jon-farris/the-power-of-trimtabs-wha_b_5863520.html?utm_hp_ref=impact&ir=Impact" target="_blank">"trim tab" effect</a> of adopting these ideas. Even though these proposals alone wouldn't fundamentally transform our system in the way that's needed, they might set changes in motion that could eventually take us there. There may be other ideas more effective than these, and of course each proposal contains within it complications that would need to be worked out carefully. However, my hope is that these ideas invite a new mode of political dialogue, along with a recognition that even in the darkest times, realistic pathways exist toward a thriving future for humanity and the natural world.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODE4NDYwMy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMjcyODQ5MX0.VZV0CAToKQ2EAWDzQQ0vxKTYU2_f8N8a9xsIx_-GkE0/img.jpg?width=980" id="60fa5" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7f23a42e2ad7a66a439734d89b632a1b" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">The next Occupy movement will need clear demands that lead to specific deliverables.</small></p><p>When the Occupy movement failed to achieve its initial promise, many people pointed to its lack of specific demands as a reason for its demise. If and when the next radical grassroots movement emerges, which <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/11/america-left-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-new-york-primary" target="_blank">may be sooner than you expect</a>, let's make sure they have an array of ideas such as these in their quiver to focus public opinion on actual political deliverables.<br></p><p>There are very few people who really want to see our civilization collapse. If these proposals eventually did get implemented, perhaps even the executives of the transnational corporations might sleep better at night, knowing that they can become part of the solution rather than a force of destruction.</p><p><em>Jeremy Lent is author of <a href="http://www.jeremylent.com/the-patterning-instinct.html" target="_blank">The Patterning Instinct: A Cultural History of Humanity's Search for Meaning</a>, which investigates how different cultures have made sense of the universe and how their underlying values have changed the course of history. He is founder of the nonprofit <a href="http://www.liology.org/" target="_blank">Liology Institute</a>, dedicated to fostering a sustainable worldview. For more information visit <a href="http://www.jeremylent.com/" target="_blank">jeremylent.com</a>.</em></p><p><em>Originally published in <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2018/07/12/five-ways-to-curb-the-power-of-corporations-and-billionaires/" target="_blank">Patterns of Meaning</a>.</em></p>
From Your Site Articles
- What Will It Really Take to Avoid Collapse? ›
- What Does China's 'Ecological Civilization' Mean for Humanity's ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Throughout history, cultures have created different patterns of meaning. | Honghe Hani Rice Terraces in Yunnan Province, China. Jialiang Gao / Wikimedia Commons / CC BY-SA 3.0
By Jeremy Lent
What do all these ideas have in common—a tax on carbon, big investments in renewable energy, a livable minimum wage and freely accessible healthcare? The answer is that we need all of them, but even taken together they're utterly insufficient to redirect humanity away from impending catastrophe and toward a truly flourishing future.
<p>That's because the problems these ideas are designed to solve, critical as they are, are symptoms of an even more profound problem: the implicit values of a global economic and political system that is driving civilization toward a precipice.</p><p>Even with the best of intentions, those actively working to reform the current system are a bit like software engineers valiantly trying to fix multiple bugs in a faulty software program: each fix complicates the code, leading inevitably to a new set of bugs that require even more heroic workarounds. Ultimately, it becomes clear that the problem isn't just the software: an entirely new operating system is required to get where we need to go.</p><h3>Searching for a Foundation of Meaning</h3><p>This realization dawned on me gradually over the years I spent researching my book, <a href="https://www.jeremylent.com/the-patterning-instinct.html" target="_blank"><em>The Patterning Instinct: A Cultural History of Humanity's Search for Meaning</em></a>. My research began as a personal search for meaning. I'd been through a personal crisis when the certainties on which I'd built my early life came crashing down around me. I wanted my life going forward to be truly meaningful—but based on what foundation? I was determined to sort through the received narratives of meaning until I came across a foundation I could really believe in.</p><p>My drive to answer these questions led me to explore the patterns of meaning that different cultures throughout history have constructed. Just like peeling an onion, I realized that one layer of meaning frequently covered deeper layers that structure the daily thoughts and values that most people take for granted. It was a journey of nearly ten years, during which I dedicated myself to deep research in disciplines such as neuroscience, history and anthropology.</p><p>Finally, I discovered that what makes humans unique is that we—to a greater extent than any other species—have what I call a "patterning instinct:" we are driven to pattern meaning into our world. That drive is what led humans to develop language, myth and culture. It enabled us to invent tools and develop science, giving us tremendous benefits but also putting us on a collision course with the natural world.</p><h3>Root Metaphors Underlie Cultural Frames of Meaning</h3><p>Each culture tends to construct its worldview on a root metaphor of the universe, which in turn defines people's relationship to nature and each other, ultimately leading to a set of values that directs how that culture behaves. It's those culturally derived values that have shaped history.</p><p>Early hunter-gatherers, for example, understood nature as a "giving parent," seeing themselves as part of a large extended family, intrinsically connected with the spirits of the natural world around them. When agriculture first emerged about twelve thousand years ago, new values such as property, hierarchy and wealth appeared, leading early civilizations to view the universe as dominated by a hierarchy of gods who required propitiation through worship, ritual and sacrifice.</p><p>Beginning with the ancient Greeks, a radically new, dualistic way of thinking about the universe emerged, conceiving a split cosmos divided between a heavenly domain of eternal abstraction and a worldly domain polluted with imperfection. This cosmological split was paralleled by the conception of a split human being composed of an eternal soul temporarily imprisoned in a physical body that is destined to die. Christianity, the world's first systematic dualistic cosmology, built on the Greek model by placing the source of meaning in an external God in the heavens, while the natural world became merely a desacralized theater for the human drama to be enacted.</p><p>The Christian cosmos set the stage for the modern worldview that emerged in seventeenth century Europe with the Scientific Revolution. The belief in the divinity of reason, inherited from the ancient Greeks, served as an inspiration for the scientific discoveries of pioneers such as Galileo, Kepler and Newton, who all believed that they were glimpsing "the mind of God."</p><h3>The Flawed Operating System Underlying Modern Culture</h3><p>But the worldview that inspired these breakthroughs had a darker side. The Scientific Revolution was built on metaphors such as "nature as a machine" and "conquering nature" which have shaped the values and behaviors of the modern age. The entailments of a dualistic cosmos inherited from the Greeks have defined our received beliefs, many of which we accept implicitly even though they are based on flawed assumptions.</p><p>We are told that humans are fundamentally selfish—indeed even our genes are selfish—and that an efficiently functioning society is one where everyone rationally pursues their own self-interest. We accept technocratic fixes to problems that require more integrated, systemic solutions on the premise that nature is just a very complicated machine—one that is entirely separate from humanity.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNzQ3MjE0Ni9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMjE5OTg3M30.XZFOquTNOmqRue_Gy1A92Af6YoN8Q3H2BP0aPOFz3gw/img.jpg?width=980" id="166f1" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="544a9b5fb185c7402d5527864b008ed9" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption..."> The "selfish gene" is just one of the pervasive—and deeply flawed—metaphors of our modern age.</small></p><p>Continued growth in Gross Domestic Product is seen as the basis for economic and political success, even though GDP measures nothing more than the rate at which we are transforming nature and human activities into the monetary economy, no matter how beneficial or harmful it may be. And the world's financial markets are based on the belief that the global economy will keep growing indefinitely even though that is impossible on a finite planet. "No problem," we are told, since technology will always find a new solution.<br></p><p>These underlying flaws in our global operating system stem ultimately from a sense of disconnection. Our minds and bodies, reason and emotion are seen as split parts within ourselves. Human beings are understood as individuals separated from each other, and humanity as a whole is perceived as separate from nature. At the deepest level, it is this sense of separation that is inexorably leading human civilization to potential disaster.</p><h3>Connectedness as a Foundation for Human Flourishing</h3><p>However, the same human patterning instinct that has brought us to this precipice is also capable of turning us around and onto a path of sustainable flourishing. We have the capacity to build an alternative worldview around a sense of connectedness within the web of life—a sense shared by indigenous cultures around the world from the earliest times.</p><p>I've seen this idea disparaged as a New Agey, kumbaya-style mentality even by otherwise progressive thinkers. However, modern scientific findings validate the underlying connectedness of all living beings. Insights from complexity theory and systems biology show that the connections between things are frequently more important than the things themselves. Life itself is now understood as a self-organizing, self-regenerating complex that extends like a fractal at ever-increasing scale, from a single cell to the global system of life on Earth.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNzQ3MjA5Mi9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1MDU3NDM5MH0.vUrvGxwJ5yNBWhzKXPeo5JxAxVjj2SAgjWooTk5Upxg/img.jpg?width=980" id="fc9b3" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="19279e8a37ef069949bfb270a16ec698" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption..."> Nature as fractal: river in Malaysia.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit..."><a href="http://paulbourke.net/fractals/googleearth/" target="_blank">Paul Bourke / Google Earth Fractals</a></small></p><p>Human beings, too, are best understood not by their selfish drives for power but by cooperation, group identity and a sense of fair play. In contrast to chimpanzees, who are obsessed with competing against each other, human beings evolved to become the most cooperative of primates, working collaboratively on complex tasks and creating communities with shared values and practices that became the basis for culture and civilization. In the view of prominent evolutionary psychologists, it was our intrinsic sense of fairness that led to the evolutionary success of our species and created the cognitive foundation for crucial values of the modern world such as freedom, equality and representative government.<br></p><p>Just as the values of previous generations shaped history, so the values we collectively choose to live by today will shape our future. The cognitive patterns instilled in us by the dominant culture are the results of a particular worldview that arose at a specific time and place in human history. This worldview has now passed its expiration date. It is causing enormous unnecessary suffering throughout the globe and driving our civilization toward collapse.</p><p>Rather than trying to transcend what we are, our most important task is to peel away this received worldview, reach within ourselves to feel our deepest motivations as living beings embedded in the web of life, and act on them.</p><p><em>Jeremy Lent is author of <a href="http://www.jeremylent.com/the-patterning-instinct.html" target="_blank">The Patterning Instinct: A Cultural History of Humanity's Search for Meaning</a>, which investigates how different cultures have made sense of the universe and how their underlying values have changed the course of history. He is founder of the nonprofit <a href="http://www.liology.org/" target="_blank">Liology Institute</a>, dedicated to fostering a sustainable worldview. For more information visit <a href="http://www.jeremylent.com/" target="_blank">jeremylent.com</a>. </em></p><p> <em>Originally published in <a href="https://www.opendemocracy.net/transformation/jeremy-lent/culture-shift-redirecting-humanity-s-path-to-flourishing-future" target="_blank">Open Democracy | Transformation</a>, March 20, 2018.</em></p>
From Your Site Articles
- What Does China's 'Ecological Civilization' Mean for Humanity's ... ›
- What Will It Really Take to Avoid Collapse? ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
What Does China’s 'Ecological Civilization' Mean for Humanity’s Future?
09 February 2018
Insights + Opinion
Artist's rendition of the Beijing New Airport Terminal building. Methanoia via Zaha Hadid Architects
By Jeremy Lent
Imagine a newly elected president of the United States calling in his inaugural speech for an "ecological civilization" that ensures "harmony between human and nature." Now imagine he goes on to declare that "we, as human beings, must respect nature, follow its ways, and protect it" and that his administration will "encourage simple, moderate, green, and low-carbon ways of life, and oppose extravagance and excessive consumption." Dream on, you might say. Even in the more progressive Western European nations, it's hard to find a political leader who would make such a stand.
<p>And yet, the leader of the world's second largest economy, Xi Jinping of China, made these statements and more <a href="http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/19thcpcnationalcongress/2017-11/04/content_34115212.htm" target="_blank">in his address</a> to the National Congress of the Communist Party in Beijing last October. He went on to specify in more detail his plans to "step up efforts to establish a legal and policy framework ... that facilitates green, low-carbon, and circular development," to "promote afforestation," "strengthen wetland conservation and restoration" and "take tough steps to stop and punish all activities that damage the environment." Closing his theme with a flourish, he proclaimed that "what we are doing today" is "to build an ecological civilization that will benefit generations to come." Transcending parochial boundaries, he declared that his Party's abiding mission was to "make new and greater contributions to mankind … for both the well-being of the Chinese people and human progress."</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNzE4ODU4MC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxOTQ2NTk1M30.ZeHI_VMqaCqiT-xnL8trlDQwUFmWq1GMZ8nFWy91K_c/img.jpg?width=980" id="a79b5" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="558309659bf236ae0391e70db5f1e985" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">China's President Xi Jinping addressing China's Communist Party National Congress in October.</small></p><p>It's easy to dismiss it all as mere political rhetoric, but consider how the current president of the United States came to power on the basis of a different form of rhetoric, appealing to the destructive nationalism of "America First." In both cases, it's reasonable to assume that the rhetoric doesn't exist in a vacuum. Just as <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump</a>'s xenophobic vision spells potential danger for the world, so could it be that Xi's ecological vision could offer a glimpse to a hopeful future?<br></p><p><strong>A Transformative Vision</strong></p><p>In fact, this is just the type of fresh, regenerative thinking about transforming the current global economic system that many in the environmental movement have been calling for. And this hasn't been lost on some leading thinkers. David Korten, a world-renowned author and activist, has <a href="http://davidkorten.org/living-earth-econ-for-eco-civ/" target="_blank">proposed expanding the vision</a> of Ecological Civilization to a global context, which would involve—among other things—granting legal rights to nature, shifting ownership of productive assets from transnational corporations to nation-states and self-governing communities, and prioritizing life-affirming, rather than wealth-affirming, values.</p><p>Within a larger historical context, it's not too surprising that this vision of "harmony between human and nature" should emerge from China. As I've traced in my book, <a href="https://www.jeremylent.com/the-patterning-instinct.html" target="_blank">The Patterning Instinct: A Cultural History of Humanity's Search for Meaning</a>, traditional Chinese culture was founded on a worldview that perceived an intrinsic web of connection between humanity and nature, in contrast to the European worldview that saw humans as essentially separate from nature. Early Chinese philosophers believed the overriding purpose of life was to seek harmony in society and the universe, while Europeans pursued a path based on a different set of values—which have since become global in scope—driven by "conquering nature" and viewing nature as a machine to be engineered.</p><p>Furthermore, Xi's rhetoric does seem to be grounded in at least some reality. Two months before Xi's speech, China announced they were <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/china-solar-target-2476947208.html" target="_self">more than doubling</a> their previous <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/solar">solar</a> power target for 2020, after installing more than twice as much solar capacity as any other country in 2016. This new target—five times larger than current capacity in the U.S.—would entail covering an area of land equivalent to Greater London with solar panels. They are similarly exceeding their <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wind">wind</a> power targets, already boasting more capacity than all of Europe.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="8c86b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="44GIY91576663182"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="940774552191340544" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">China Building Second Enormous Floating Solar Farm on Top of Defunct Coal Mine https://t.co/fuBzeVTiiW @SolarEnergyNet @SolarPowerWorld</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/940774552191340544">1513133106.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>As a result, China has <a href="https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2017/10/11/china-halts-150-coal-fired-power-plants/" target="_blank">recently halted</a> previous plans for building more than 150 <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coal">coal</a>-fired power plants. In <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/electric-vehicles">electric cars</a>, China is <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-21/global-electric-car-sales-jump-63-percent-as-china-demand-surges" target="_blank">leading the world</a>, selling more each month than Europe and the U.S. combined, with <a href="https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1112987_china-electric-car-rules-to-start-in-2019-aggressive-totals-are-worlds-highest" target="_blank">more aggressive quotas</a> on gas-guzzlers than anywhere else in the world, including California. Additionally, China has <a href="https://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/09/daily-chart" target="_blank">the world's most extensive network</a> of high-speed trains, and has already passed laws to <a href="https://www.chathamhouse.org/expert/comment/china-will-be-crucial-creating-global-circular-economy" target="_blank">promote a circular economy</a> where waste products from industrial processes are recycled into inputs for other processes.<br></p><p><strong>China's Industrial Avalanche</strong></p><p>Some observers, however, are far from convinced that China is on its way to an ecological civilization. Economist Richard Smith has written a <a href="http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue82/Smith82.pdf" target="_blank">detailed critique</a> of China's quandary in the Real-World Economics Review<em>,</em> where he argues that China's political-economic system is based on the need to maximize economic growth, employment and consumerism to an even greater extent than in the West. These forces, he claims, run diametrically counter to the vision of an ecological civilization.</p><p>There are compelling arguments for why this makes sense. Beginning in the 19th century, China suffered more than a century of humiliation and brutal exploitation from Western nations as a result of its relative military and industrial weakness. After Mao Zedong's death in 1978, Deng Xiaoping transformed China's economy into a hybrid of consumer capitalism and central planning that catapulted China to its current prominence on the world stage. Astonishingly, China's GDP is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China#Annual_GDP" target="_blank">more than fifty times greater</a> than at the time of Mao's death, the result of a growth rate approaching 10 percent per year for four decades.</p><p>This achievement, perhaps the most dramatic economic and social transformation of all time, is bringing China back to the dominant role in global affairs that it held for most of history. Within a decade, China's GDP is <a href="https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/economy/the-world-in-2050.html" target="_blank">expected to surpass</a> that of the U.S., making it the world's largest economy. It is just in the early stages of a profusion of record-breaking industrial megaprojects of <a href="https://youtu.be/gNE7VPtvfbI" target="_blank">a scale that boggles the mind</a>. It plans to extend its influence further through its <a href="https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/05/economist-explains-11" target="_blank">Belt and Road Initiative</a>, a vast infrastructure and trading project encompassing sixty countries in Europe, Asia and Africa, envisaged as a 21st century version of the famed Silk Road.</p><p>This industrial avalanche comes, however, at great cost to China's—and the world's—environmental well-being. China is by far the world's largest consumer of energy, using over half the world's coal, a third of the world's oil, and 60 percent of the world's cement. Astonishingly, China poured <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/how-did-china-use-more-cement-between-2011-and-2013-than-the-us-used-in-the-entire-20th-century-10134079.html" target="_blank">more cement in three years</a> from 2011 to 2013 than the U.S. used during the entire twentieth century! China is also the world's largest consumer of lumber, as Smith described, "leveling <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/forests">forests</a> from Siberia to Southeast Asia, New Guinea, Congo, and Madagascar." These are just some of the forces that draw Smith to the conclusion that Xi Jinping's vision of an ecological civilization is untenable. "The hyper industrialization required," he wrote, "to realize this China Dream of great power status compels him … to let the polluters pollute, pump China's CO2 emissions off the chart, and thereby bring on the ecological collapse not just of China but the whole planet … Xi Jinping can create an ecological civilization or he can build a rich superpower. He can't do both."</p><p><strong>Intimately Placed Between Heaven and Earth</strong></p><p>Or can he? That is a crucial question with ramifications for all of humanity. While it is clear that future economic growth at anything close to China's historic rate is untenable, there is a more nuanced question that poses the possibility of a sustainable way forward for both China and the world. Once China has regained its status as a leading world power, can it achieve yet another transformation and redirect its impressive vitality into growing a life of quality for its people, rather than continued consumerism? Is it possible that Xi Jinping is sowing the seeds of this future metamorphosis with his vision of an ecological civilization?</p><p>There is urgent awareness among thought leaders around the world that continued growth in global GDP is leading civilization <a href="https://patternsofmeaning.com/2017/12/19/what-will-it-really-take-to-avoid-collapse/" target="_blank">to the point of collapse</a>. Movements are emerging that <a href="http://www.resilience.org/stories/2017-10-20/theres-only-one-way-to-avoid-climate-catastrophe-de-growing-our-economy/" target="_blank">call for "degrowth"</a> and other approaches to a steady-state economy that could allow a sustainable future for humanity. But how can we break the death-grip of a global system built on continually feeding the growth frenzy of gigantic transnational corporations voraciously seeking a never-ending increase in profits to satisfy their shareholders? Along with the grassroots citizen movements emerging around the world, is it possible that China could pioneer a new path of sustainability, steering its citizens back to the traditional values that characterized its culture over millennia?</p><p>Even if China could achieve this redirection, the <a href="https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2018/country-chapters/china-and-tibet" target="_blank">continuous human-rights abuses</a> of its authoritarian government raise further questions. An ecological civilization—as envisaged by Korten and many others in the environmental movement—seems inconsistent with a centralized bureaucracy forcing its rules on citizens through coercion and repression. For China to genuinely move in this direction, Xi would need to be prepared to devolve decision-making authority and freedoms back to the Chinese people. It's a tall order, but not necessarily inconceivable.</p><p>For those living in the West, it would take a tremendous dose of cultural humility to accept philosophical leadership from China on the path to a flourishing future for humanity. But, if we are to get to that future, we must recognize the <a href="http://www.tikkun.org/nextgen/a-house-on-shaky-ground-eight-structural-flaws-of-the-western-worldview" target="_blank">structural underpinnings of Western thought</a> that brought us to this imbalance in the first place. A thousand years ago, Chinese philosopher Zhang Zai expressed a realization of connectedness with the universe in an essay called the Western Inscription, which begins with these words:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">Heaven is my father and earth is my mother, and I, a small child, find myself placed intimately between them.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">What fills the universe I regard as my body; what directs the universe I regard as my nature.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px;">All people are my brothers and sisters; all things are my companions.</p><p><em></em>Is it possible that this deep recognition of human interconnectedness, rooted in traditional Chinese culture, could form the philosophical basis for a future ecological civilization? The answer to this question may ultimately affect the future well-being, not just of China, but of the entire human family.</p><p><em><a href="http://jeremylent.com" target="_blank">Jeremy Lent</a> is the author of <a href="http://www.jeremylent.com/the-patterning-instinct.html" target="_blank">The Patterning Instinct: A Cultural History of Humanity's Search for Meaning</a>, which investigates how different cultures have made sense of the universe and how their underlying values have changed the course of history. He is founder of the nonprofit <a href="http://www.liology.org/" target="_blank">Liology Institute</a>, dedicated to fostering a sustainable worldview.</em></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
By Jeremy Lent
For a moment, the most important news in the entire world flashed across the media like a shooting star in the night sky. Then it was gone. Last month, more than 15,000 scientists from 184 countries issued a dire warning to humanity. Because of our overconsumption of the world's resources, they declared, we are facing "widespread misery and catastrophic biodiversity loss." They warned that time is running out: "Soon it will be too late to shift course away from our failing trajectory."
<p style="">This is not the first such notice. Twenty-five years ago, in 1992, 1,700 scientists (including the majority of living Nobel laureates) sent a similarly worded warning to governmental leaders around the world. In ringing tones, they called for a recognition of the Earth's fragility and a new ethic arising from the realization that "we all have but one lifeboat."</p><p style="">This second warning contains a series of charts showing how utterly the world's leaders ignored what they were told 25 years earlier. Whether it's CO2 emissions, temperature change, ocean dead zones, freshwater resources, vertebrate species or total forest cover, the grim charts virtually all point in the same dismal direction, indicating <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/chomsky-trump-doomsday-clock-2342419463.html">continued momentum toward doomsday</a>. The chart for marine catch shows something even scarier: In 1996, the catch peaked at 130 million tonnes and in spite of massively increased industrial fishing, it's been declining ever since—a harbinger of the kind of overshoot that unsustainable exploitation threatens across the board.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image" style="">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNjk3Mzg0MS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNDc0Mzc4OH0.jUW0OW4P-7rXVrAvIjo9Qh1r2JUFMOfrhkPTgcSK9SI/img.png?width=980" id="90b1d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b205ca24f5d0d8934875d49b1152c58e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit..."> Charts from "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice"</small></p><p style="">Along with their warning, the scientists list a dozen or so examples of the kind of actions that could turn humanity's trajectory around. These include indisputably necessary strategies such as halting the conversion of native habitats into farmland; restoring and rewilding ecologies; phasing out fossil fuel subsidies; and promoting dietary shifts toward plant-based foods. With the future of humanity at stake, why aren't we already doing these things? What will it really take for our civilization to change course and save itself from destruction?<br></p><p style=""><strong>Ignoring Climate Breakdown</strong></p><p style="">We can begin to answer that simply by looking at the media's reception to this warning. With 15,000 scientists—including Jane Goodall, E. O. Wilson and James Hansen—declaring a potential catastrophe at hand, you might think this would make headlines everywhere. Think again. While it led to a few short articles in select publications around the world, with the one <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/14/health/scientists-warn-humanity/index.html" target="_blank">commendable exception of CNN</a>, it was virtually ignored by American mainstream media. </p><p style="">This should hardly come as a surprise. In fact, global climate breakdown—perhaps the greatest existential threat faced by our civilization—is barely considered newsworthy on American television. In 2016, the hottest year on record, when the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/paris-agreement">Paris agreement</a> was signed and presidential candidates held widely differing opinions on climate change, the entire year's climate coverage by all network news services in the U.S. amounted to <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2017/03/23/how-broadcast-networks-covered-climate-change-2016/215718" target="_blank">less than an hour</a>: a paltry 50 minutes, representing a 66 percent drop from the previous year. </p><p style="">How could that be? One reason is that, as a result of decades of massive industry consolidation, the U.S. media is <a href="https://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart" target="_blank">controlled by</a> a few large corporations. Like all shareholder-owned companies, their overriding concern is making profits, in this case from advertising dollars. The news services, once considered a hallowed responsibility administered for the public good, have been reduced to <a href="https://thenextsystem.org/learn/stories/next-system-media-urgent-necessity" target="_blank">just another profit center</a>—and it was decided that climate change news isn't good for advertising revenue, especially since a big chunk of that comes from the fossil fuel and agribusiness companies responsible for much of the problem.</p><p style=""><strong>The Largest Ponzi Scheme in History</strong></p><p style="">Which leads us to some of the underlying structural changes that need to occur if human civilization is to avoid collapse. The fundamental problem is brutally simple: Our world system is based on the premise of perpetual growth in consumption, which puts it on a collision course with the natural world. Either the global system has to be restructured, or we are headed for a catastrophe of immense proportions that has never been experienced in human history. However, the transnational corporations largely responsible for driving this trajectory are <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/12/03/ai-has-already-taken-over-its-called-corporation" target="_blank">structurally designed</a> to prevent the global changes that need to take place.</p><p style="">Something that is only dimly understood outside financial circles is that the vast bulk of the wealth enjoyed by the global elite is based on a fabrication: a belief in the future growth in earnings that corporations will deliver. For example, the <a href="https://seekingalpha.com/article/4128836-s-and-p-500-p-e-ratio-cause-concern" target="_blank">current P/E ratio</a> of the S&P 500 is about 23, which means that investors are valuing companies at 23 times their earnings for this year. Another way of looking at it is that less than 5 percent of the wealth enjoyed by investors relates to current activity; the rest is based on the dream of future growth.</p><p style="">Historically, investors have been richly rewarded for this dream. The world's economic output is roughly <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_world_product" target="_blank">20 times greater</a> than it was in 1950, and market valuations have increased accordingly. But this is the same growth that is driving our civilization to collapse. Today's market values are based on a belief that the world's economic output <a href="https://data.oecd.org/gdp/gdp-long-term-forecast.htm" target="_blank">will triple</a> from its current level by 2060. That implies three times as much pillaging of the world's resources than the rate that has led to the scientists' dire warning to humanity. Something has to give.</p><p style="">Like any Ponzi scheme, this global growth frenzy is based on maintaining the illusion for as long as possible. Once it becomes clear that this rate of growth is truly unsustainable, the whole house of cards will come tumbling down. We saw in the 2008 financial meltdown a relatively tame dress rehearsal for what a full-scale financial collapse would look like.</p><p style="">This is what the global power brokers don't want anyone to think about. It's ultimately why <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/07/climate-change-media-coverage-media-matters" target="_blank">the media obsesses</a> with Donald Trump's latest tweets rather than the devastation caused by climate breakdown-induced hurricanes. Like passengers moving deckchairs on the Titanic, much of the world's population has been hypnotized by a daily onslaught of celebrity spats and political feuds—anything to avoid the realization that we are all heading for collapse in order to keep the affluent in luxury. It is a testament to their success so far that, in the words of Slavoj Žižek, it is "easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism."</p><p style=""><strong>Imagining the End of Capitalism</strong></p><p style="">However, the only thing that will truly avert collapse will be a radical restructuring of the economic system that is driving us ever more rapidly to that precipice. This will only come about when enough of us are ready to jettison the consumer values that pervasive mainstream culture foists on us. In their place, we need to find other sources for meaning in our lives: growing the quality of our experiences rather than our consumption, building our communities together and reconnecting with the natural world. </p><p style="">On that basis, we'll be better equipped to join in the struggle to save humanity—and the rest of the Earth—from the plundering envisaged by the perpetual growth frenzy of global corporate capitalism. There are plenty of alternative paths available to us—we just don't hear about them because they never get the media's attention. Most Americans, for example, are completely unaware that the little country of Costa Rica, with a GDP per capita less than one-fifth of the U.S., boasts a higher average life expectancy and <a href="http://www.resilience.org/stories/2017-11-22/averting-the-apocalypse-lessons-from-costa-rica/" target="_blank">scores far higher</a> in levels of wellbeing—while producing 99 percent of its electricity from renewable sources. </p><p style="">There is valuable work being done around the world in <a href="https://thenextsystem.org/systems" target="_blank">visualizing a future</a> based on <a href="https://www.kateraworth.com/doughnut/" target="_blank">different principles</a> than the current Ponzi scheme. Well-developed plans to avert climate breakdown include a state-by-state and nation-by-nation pathway to reach <a href="http://thesolutionsproject.org/why-clean-energy/" target="_blank">100 percent renewable energy by 2050</a>, and a <a href="https://www.theclimatemobilization.org/our-plan" target="_blank">Climate Mobilization Victory Plan</a> to restructure the U.S. economy in a manner similar to what FDR accomplished after Pearl Harbor.</p><p style="">There are radically different ways for a society to function effectively that could apply to nations around the world if given half a chance. A flourishing future might involve more <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/worker-cooperatives-are-more-productive-than-normal-companies/" target="_blank">cooperative ventures</a>, protection and expansion of <a href="http://www.monbiot.com/2016/12/15/the-fortifying-commons/" target="_blank">the commons</a>, and enhanced global governance with <a href="http://eradicatingecocide.com/" target="_blank">strict penalties</a> for those who destroy ecological wellbeing. Collapse isn't the only future in store for humanity—it's merely the one we're headed for unless and until we change course. Since the mainstream media isn't going to get the word out, it has to be up to each of us who cares about the future of the human race. So, let's get to it.</p><p style=""><span></span> <em><a href="https://www.jeremylent.com/" target="_blank">Jeremy Lent</a> is author of "<a href="http://www.jeremylent.com/the-patterning-instinct.html" target="_blank">The Patterning Instinct: A Cultural History of Humanity's Search for Meaning</a>," which investigates how different cultures have made sense of the universe and how their underlying values have changed the course of history. He is founder of the nonprofit <a href="http://www.liology.org/" target="_blank">Liology Institute</a>, dedicated to fostering a sustainable worldview.</em></p>
From Your Site Articles
Read More
Show Less