Prosperity without growth – where did it go?
Today, as promised yesterday, I am going to discuss why there was no discernible change in government policy after Tim Jackson’s Prosperity without Growth (PWG) report was published by the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC). But first, here is a clue:
In May 2010, the UK failed to vote for a majority government and so, after a lot a political horse-trading, what we got was government by a Coalition of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties. Somewhat unkindly, this was almost immediately labelled by the likes of idiosyncratic Socialist (or may be just “self-publicist”) George Galloway as the “CON-DEM” coalition.
However, in what came to be known as the Bonfire of the Quangos, one of the many organisations that were condemned to oblivion by the incoming government in an attempt to reduce government spending was… yes, you guessed it, the SDC: Rather than kicking the PWG report into the political long grass; by appointing a committee to review it and come up with recommendations (i.e. including that government should appoint a committee to come up with recommendations) the government simply waved a magic wand and made it disappear…
Will history repeat itself?
Upon the restoration of Charles II to the throne, the body of Oliver Cromwell was exhumed – and the head was separated from his body – as a deliberate act of retribution for his having engineered the trial and execution of Charles I. This makes me wonder if future generations of humans, once they have resolved the existential threats to their survival, will dig up any available corpses of today’s politicians simply to disarticulate them in retrospective protest at their failure to face up to the nature of reality. If so, in order to avoid their final resting place being desecrated, I would recommend that all politicians clearly specify in their Wills that their mortal remains should be cremated. Furthermore, they had better hope that they die before their folly becomes much more obvious; and that their wishes are respected.
The essence of the problem
We don’t live in a democracy; we live in a global petrocracy; where all real power is vested in companies extracting fossilised sunlight from rocks (a million times faster than it can be recycled). As such, our politicians have mostly been hypnotised into slavish obedience to their essential oil masters.
Just as turkeys will never vote for Christmas, our politicians will not choose to prohibit the burning of fossil fuels (or even for the generation of the main waste product of their combustion to be properly penalised)… unless the opinions of the great mass of ordinary people becomes more important to them than the risk of disappointing the vested interests of those who are already extremely wealthy.
In short, we need to complete another failed revolution; namely the establishment of government of the people for the people by the people… Because, what we have now is government of the people, by the politicians, for the businessmen.
Therefore, despite being a very long way from being a Marxist, I am tempted to say: “Viva la revolucion!”
The idea of future political apologists picking over the policies of the present to get down to the detail of where it all got @$&*@£ up is disturbing, although a humorous point well made. But, I for one cannot blame the politicians for their backsliding. We all have the power of informed foresight and enough intelligence to know we cannot do it alone, we need leaders, visionaries who can get us all through a century of transition.
The irony is that our grand children will live in low carbon world, the issue is not whether we will decarbonise our economy but when. The political vision is choosing that moment [1996 perhaps?] when future necessity outweighs economic disruption. I don’t think big-oil is really calling the shots rather it is the economics of our perception of wealth; look at GDP as a measure [and I will put this into an essay, sorry blog] the healthcare industry as a component includes good things like cures but it also includes things like depression, plastic surgery and obesity. Afghanistan does not get the benefit of heroin exports on its GDP but other countries benefit from exporting tobacco or weapons or junk.
True wealth is a healthy, educated and stimulated [I avoid the word happy] population and resources of raw materials whether they are healthy seas and fertile lands or energy and minerals. When we start measuring that as well reflecting those values in our economics then perhaps we will have a better vision of what future should be.
julesbollocks
23 August 2012 at 10:03
Thanks for those thoughtful comments, Jules. Do you mean to imply that our politicians did not board the mitigation ship when they should have done (i.e. circa 1996)? As for Gross Domestic Happiness (etc), you sound like you would enjoy reading Schalk Cloete’s oneinabillion blog (you had at least check he has not already written your essay for you).
Martin Lack
23 August 2012 at 12:03
Apart from the fact that our system of government, if it can be called a system at all, is already circa three centuries old; and is no longer up to the task of resolving the many and varied problems which confront us – nearly all of which are of our own making – the present crew and their predecessors, who set the tone and virtually wrote the script for the farce/tragedy that is enacted on a daily basis in Westminster, are responsible to no-one.We are informed that, if they do not perform, then we can kick them out at the next election. But this merely brings us a repetition of the play with new faces.
We need direct democracy, as in the Schweiz/Switzerland, where the whole people, if they make the wrong choice, must live with the consequences of their acts. Here, in GB, and wherever else we have exported this ghastly form of rule, we have to live with the consequences of other people’s acts over which we have not the slightest influence. Add to this the “perfectly legal business of lobbying”; and the stage is set for corruption in all quarters. Who pays the piper calls the tune, then as now, and the oil companies and their cohorts make us dance to their music. There is a deep-seated canker within our society.
Duncan
23 August 2012 at 11:04
Thanks Duncan. As ever, your comments make me painfully aware of my own tendency to compile complex sentences, where a series of short ones might well – it could be argued – be better; as indeed the present one is a case in point. I am therefore left wondering if you too are a member of the comma appreciation society; the full-stop preservation society; and/or the RSPCA (i.e. the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Apostrophes)?
Martin Lack
23 August 2012 at 11:56
Yes, the politicians are in the pockets of powerful business and media interests, but more than that, everyone – govt, business and economic advisors – are under the sway of the view that a healthy economy is a growing economy. As we approach resource limits this view is coming under question. It will be a brave government that leads a whole society away from the common belief/dream that each new generation will have lots more material goods than the previous one. Blogged here… http://bit.ly/RhYgP0
mildaykerr
24 August 2012 at 08:15
Thank you for visiting and taking the time to read and to comment; it is really appreciated: Especially when I look at your blog; which is full of wisdom and good ideas for constructive action. Indeed, it makes me question the purpose of my own blog; which seems only to have demonstrated to the World how angry I am about the Merchants of Doubt who work so hard to prevent action being taken.
Martin Lack
24 August 2012 at 09:51
A timely post. The day before the day you wrote this (ie 22 August 2012) was this year’s Earth Overshoot Day. Time is running out for our ludicrously wasteful ‘civilisation’ to wake up and realise it’s shitting where it eats.
pendantry
29 August 2012 at 23:40
This is very scary because, last year, Earth Overshoot Day was 27 September: as I noted (thanks to you) at the time.
Martin Lack
30 August 2012 at 09:55
Very scary indeed. Looking at the progress* of EOD over time, it’s clear we’re eating into our planet at an ever-increasing rate.
* in this case, ‘progress’ isn’t just not good, it’s bad. No prizes for guessing what I think about society’s bland acceptance of the not-truism ‘all progress is good, by definition’. Who, me, against progress? That must mean I’m a luddite who wants to live in a cave on some deserted island, someplace, right? Wrong.
pendantry
30 August 2012 at 16:43
That speedometer graphic does not reflect the change of over one month in the last year. Have they changed the way they calculate EOD?
Martin Lack
30 August 2012 at 17:33
dunno :/
pendantry
30 August 2012 at 17:40