Two articles on the pitfalls of growth

[ellenrr]

1. Naomi Klein:

Werner termed it “resistance” – movements of “people or groups of people” who “adopt a certain set of dynamics that does not fit within the capitalist culture”. According to the abstract for his presentation, this includes “environmental direct action, resistance taken from outside the dominant culture, as in protests, blockades and sabotage by indigenous peoples, workers, anarchists and other activist groups”.

Serious scientific gatherings don’t usually feature calls for mass political resistance, much less direct action and sabotage. But then again, Werner wasn’t exactly calling for those things. He was merely observing that mass uprisings of people – along the lines of the abolition movement, the civil rights movement or Occupy Wall Street – represent the likeliest source of “friction” to slow down an economic machine that is careening out of control. We know that past social movements have “had tremendous influence on . . . how the dominant culture evolved”, he pointed out. So it stands to reason that, “if we’re thinking about the future of the earth, and the future of our coupling to the environment, we have to include resistance as part of that dynamics”. And that, Werner argued, is not a matter of opinion, but “really a geophysics problem”.

Brad Werner is saying that his research shows that our entire economic paradigm is a threat to ecological stability. And indeed that challenging this economic paradigm – through mass-movement counter-pressure – is humanity’s best shot at avoiding catastrophe.
http://www.newstatesman.com/2013/10/science-says-revolt


2.Vandana Shiva:
How economic growth has become anti-life:
An obsession with growth has eclipsed our concern for sustainability, justice and human dignity. But people are not disposable – the value of life lies outside economic development.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/01/how-economic-growth-has-become-anti-life

[Nihil]

1. Big kick for the 2nd article in particular

>> The concept of growth was put forward as a measure to mobilise resources during the
>> second world war. GDP is based on creating an artificial and fictitious boundary, assuming
>> that if you produce what you consume, you do not produce. In effect , “growth” measures=
>> the conversion of nature into cash, and commons into commodities.

>> But this growth is based on creating poverty – both for nature and local communities.

>> There are three levels of violence involved in non-sustainable development.
>> The first is the violence against the earth, which is expressed as the ecological crisis.
>> The second is the violence against people, which is expressed as poverty, destitution
>> and displacement. The third is the violence of war and conflict, as the powerful reach
>> for the resources that lie in other communities and countries for their limitless appetites.

And isn't that just the truth of it all.