Dec. 28, 2022

Saving the Anthropocene

Saving the Anthropocene

Saving the Anthropocene

If culture and civilization, the Anthropocene, is to have a future we need to embrace this critical moment in our relationship with ourselves, our communities, and planet to ensure its survival.

We no longer deny that we have had a dramatic and significantly negative impact on the environment, our life-support system. If we want our discoveries and progress to survive, we must take steps to ensure its survival. We must question every single layer of the fabric of our “normal” way of doing things, our FIAT ways.

Ownership

In particular, we need a dramatic change in the way we understand ownership. What we are used to, the FIAT way, is to view ownership as a given: a few special people are owners and everybody else works for them to make a living. Things have been getting better and have progressed so that must be a sign that the system is working for us all and that has been the end of the discussion. In fact, that assumption is leading us to a disastrous fall over the proverbial cliff.

Ownership is a human invention and a very good one at that. Owners care for their property, etc. I am not sure if that is “in our nature” or that is the way that it has worked out, but, in any case, let’s go with that assumption.

Assumption: Ownership Is Good

As a good thing then, ownership should be spread out to everybody, not just a selected few. It doesn’t really work well when limited to a very small segment of people. Competition and dominacion has pushed us to put the financial system as the ultimate boss, with the society as a servant and it will do it again and again. So, no, ownership does not work well for society when in the hands of a selected few, so let’s try spreading it to everybody and see what happens. People may do a lot of things, but they won't destroy their life support system.

Jobs

“Jobs” are the direct descendants of slavery, and I am not being bombastic. People that are forced to work are no longer forced to work for a slaver and work until their (early) death. That’s good. Now they can go from employer to employer to “improve their lot.” Instead, they get to sell their labor capacity to the highest bidder. People cannot be sold, but they have to sell themselves. Jeff Bezos no longer does. Like other owners, they don’t have to work for a living. They get to live off the profits from other people’s work.

Amazon

Since we mentioned him, look at Jeff Bezos. He really worked hard, took a huge risk on the Internet, changed the way publishers did business, and, in spite of “Wall Street” demands to the contrary, he invested profits for a long time and built a hardware business and created the Cloud space. He did this until his business became the big kahuna and he had become one of the biggest owners in the world.

Besides MacKensie Scot, his then wife, he was supported by the original investment his parents made. They had accumulated $300,000 in their retirement fund and gave it all to Jeff to get started. They didn’t rob anybody to get that money: his father was sent out of Cuba alone, went to school in the US, became an engineer, and that skill got him a middle class pay and generous benefits; his mom supported both of them with her work and tenacity.

But then, Amazon followed the “normal” business path. The business paid its workers salaries and kept profits for the owners. Ownership worked great for Jeff Bezos and Amazon’s investors. Many of its employees did very well, too, but not as well as Jeff Bezos. “But he did much more… ” I hear you thinking, “… and the people who worked for Amazon had it safe and cozy.” Or they had to pee in a bottle. Even the ones who didn’t have to pee in a bottle, didn’t benefit from the growth that they helped create.

Experiment: Co-Ownership

Ownership worked great for Jeff Bezos and it would have worked just as great for everyone who helped create that wealth.

However, co-ownership takes a huge mindset change. First, we have to see the invisible: ownership is not a given, it is not sacred. It is a human invention, and it is good. If it has caused progress to happen all these centuries, imagine what it would do if everybody was an owner. Co-owners care for their property. Co-owners would own their creation. Co-owners will take care of their life support system, not use it as a garbage can while saying “that’s what Government is for, to clean up!”

We need a system that will eventually lead to universal co-ownership. Near as I can tell, this is the only path to saving, and going beyond, the Anthropocene.