Is the future of our society and economy still tenable?

The international banking system that has made dependent on petrodollars and has exclusive rights to unlimited money creation out of nothing (printing press instead of gold as reserve value) drives our global economy and society of infinite economic growth.

We now live in a global village in which the C (l) ash of civilizations is becoming more present and societies are increasingly torn by conflicting economic, political and religious interests based on dogmas and myths. On the one hand strive certain groups behind the scenes for a new world order (one large global system) on the other hand you see just an increasing disorder (chaotic, complex world) of local groups with different interests who oppose the increasing globalized Western capitalist economy, politics and culture

The manipulation of the financial and real markets by the major central and commercial banks having a devastating impact on citizens, businesses and governments, and divide entire populations, ideologies and religions. The clash of civilizations is not only a cultural religious clash between orthodox fundamentalism and Western capitalism, but also an economic social clash between different cultures and ideologies within and between nations and economic regions (EU, NAFTA, the CIS, UNASUR, ASEAN etc.) . We have entered into a global debt society dominated by the 1% (elite / corporatocratie) the rest of the population. The corporatocratie and top executives use the mantra of endless economic growth, maximum consumption and production based on market fundamentalism at the expense of the environment and the democratic rights of the population. TTIP secret discussions between US and European ‘top’ directors, lobby groups and multinationals is a good example. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of refugees there in continental Europe in which we hardly have an answer.

Arise within our own Western societies or are there cultures and subgroups together national and international financial and economic, religious and ideological grounds barely understood and often at cross life. We are going to live on islands. In Europe hounding opponents and each other now. The refugee debate polarizes between the good man and the fascist. Thus we see the real causes of the refugee problem no more: the geopolitical power (between Russia, USA, China, Europe and the rest), the endless mountain of debt (international financial system) and neo-colonialism (corporatism) imposed by the financial elite.

The focus on economic growth through the privatization of the housing caused a huge housing shortage in social housing for both refugees and people who have been waiting for housing that they can not get through the financial crisis. Tunnel vision on infinite economic growth leads to the structural causes of looking away. We are again afterwards confronted with the effects of those causes. We would our own system of endless economic growth can be considered critical, but it is easier to blame others whenever lay down (debt Assad, adventurers, smugglers, open borders). In addition, no single politician dares (to PvdD after) to point the finger at themselves. Our own global footprint, consumption and import of oil and commodities.

This creates a culture of fear-based emotions (war on terror and xenophobia). Moreover, it diverts attention from the causes (elitist geopolitical formation, competition for raw materials, water, food and energy) to domestic disruption of societies (us-them culture and well-error). The mass media repeatedly zooms in on these emotions, largely looking away from the major underlying geopolitical interests. The shadow elite (banks and corporations) remain almost always outside shot. But the shadow elite is responsible for the implementation and ideology of endless economic growth and our financial system of compound interest.

You may wonder how long this system is still tenable and why different cultures and beliefs so collide? The effects of major global conflicts are becoming more visible in large refugee flows and internal civil wars (Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya). Political, economic and ecological refugees from areas that are plundered by the current system based on economic growth and an ideological struggle between various parties mostly still social Darwinian grounds: who has power over the commodities. Ideology, psychology, economics, banking, politics, military intervention and religion are the means to encourage us there.

The first and second industrial revolution are entirely based on the possession of these fossil fuels (oil and coal) that we need for our industrial western prosperity. Adherence to these fossil resources paired with the industrial revolution has given us a lot of geopolitical world power (Great Britain and later the USA). It is therefore not surprising that the West because we traditionally keep holding. We must ask ourselves whether we still so want and what the alternatives are of a third emerging industrial revolution (Jeremy Rifkin), which is based more on ecology, use, skills (bio-based economy), decentralized energy sources (wind, solar, biomass, geothermal) and cooperation (smart grids and residents cooperatives). Perhaps then breaks the era of distributive capitalism (better distribution of wealth) instead of the hierarchical top-down capitalism that we know today.

The only question is how long we still stuck in the old paradigm? Internet, open communication, new networks, alternative media, the destructive power of the fossil capitalism and the finiteness of fossil fuels undermine already the current paradigm. We are already seeing a shift in which the emphasis increasingly being placed on use rather than ownership. Energy, use of cars, hotel stays we started to fall more and more sharing driving down the cost. Services and usage are central to the client. That means that the producer should be as efficiently as possible with cost and raw materials.

The emerging energy and communication networks that play a crucial role. The American dream as a measure of ownership, independence and material self-interest is shifting to use, share things with each other, and interdependence. Quality of life and gaining experience playing an increasingly important role in human existence. New energy and communication networks play an important role in driving the third industrial revolution, with the emphasis shifts from financial capital (and individual wealth), market efficiency, looting of resources, environmental pollution, large income disparities, social capital and collective responsibility (the sharing and exchanging experiences and happiness with each other).

The focus on quantitative growth will shift more towards qualitative growth (sustainable use of raw materials, attention to clean air, welfare, happiness and quality of life). The first and second industrial revolution has made us independent of our natural environment and the biosphere in which we go through inert stored solar energy in the form of carbon. We have created an illusion that we have become independent as a man of our natural environment and biological oerklokken (we now live in a non-stop 24-hour economy, based on institutionalized compulsive and mechanical efficiency). We just forget what the effects thereof (demolition ecosystems, the biosphere and interpersonal relationships).

We pretend we have established a very efficient energy with fossil scale. That is a myth. Especially when you energy and economics get together. Energy is basically everything you see around you. What processes set in motion, the turnover of one form of energy into another, but also everything you consume is energy (2nd law of thermodynamics). Especially fossil fuels (oil, coal, gas, nuclear) are a good example. In the current paradigm, we see the conversion of fossil fuels into products as an increase in prosperity. But actually, we put in a very short time a very concentrated form of energy into a much less useful form of energy (often emissions of heat-polluting gases and waste). Apart from the fossil industry, the meat industry is a good example of huge waste of energy. Not only feeding cattle takes a lot of energy (wheat and maize), but also any branch within the manufacturing process consumes a lot of energy (cooling, transportation, slaughtering, production, use plastics etc.) using the punch livestock too vast amounts nitrous oxide and methane from (negative byproduct of the meat industry). While each branch of the manufacturing process produces economic value is enormous amount of energy wasted in the production of concentrated energy into a product that does not rise to hardly in energy value.

Economists years saw the laws of the invisible hand of physics back into the economy (Newton, Adam Smith). Market forces would eventually always ensure recovery as long as you do not interfere too much in the economy. But economists looked no further to the concept of time and the same physical laws of thermodynamics. They saw an ever-increasing GDP and production as a parameter for prosperity and progress, where the laws of supply and demand determined the price and prosperity. But thermodynamically production is an indicator of loss of energy and increasing entropic waste (CO2, NOx, nitrous oxide, garbage, etc.).

A prosperous society draws more from the environment that the rule of positive energy stops. Prosperity and wealth measured in production and GDP is always negative. In the short term it seems the value we add from production progress in the long term affects the life of the total base stock up. We need to redefine the concept of economic growth. Economic growth (converting energy into useful products and services) will therefore not be about the amount of energy we put in a product, but on how effectively we deal with the energy that we put into a product. The less energy in a product, the more economic growth: the thermodynamic efficiency. The thermodynamic efficiency or again largely depends on the level of the oil price and the amount of fossil reserves (piekoil). Currently, the entropic effects or the externalities hardly settled in the price. Thus the harmful effects are passed on to people who can afford it least. If we took this actual price would mean the end of the current capitalist western hierarchical model. That is also the reason that many Western neoliberal think tanks want to know nothing of this entropic blame on climate, energy and material resources. It takes a different view of consumption and production. Another view of our humanity, the economy and education system that now mainly puts the focus on the productive and consuming human.

This presentation begins by asking questions about our own Western culture and the humanity of our own views. Does our current paradigm of large central systems, cumbersome fossil industries and top-down driven governments, will be whether we see this tilt paradigm for distributed systems based on solidarity, synergy and new entrepreneurial ideas from the bottom up? And this tilt also creates greater understanding between different cultures collide or local groups just louder with each other?

We can and will as a human being living in a Western society in which neoliberal economic goals (neocolonialism and individual self-enrichment) increasingly collide with highly orthodox religious views. We remain dogmatically believe in the infinite sacred welfare of the west, where economic growth and the optimization of the individual represented the neoliberal paradigm. Or are there outside the neoliberal paradigm alternatives to a society that are less based on economic growth, economism, economic reductionism, efficiency, self-centeredness, prosperity and quantities.

Western society often overlooks and perhaps rightly very critical of orthodox religious movements. But how dogmatic and critical we ourselves about our own beliefs and society. Is infinite economic growth for the individual after the “death” of God (secularism) did not become Western morals within Western society (Sartre). Economic growth is not our or my individual ‘holy grail of happiness. We as westerners and society not exactly the same as Orthodox believers. But we enrich our individual lives with wealth and economic growth within our finite life and religious believers aspire to happiness, prosperity and well-being, especially after the early life in the hereafter? When does Western society we find ourselves very enlightened, but we are actually not all believers. The belief in the sacred forces of the economy and infinite prosperity for everyone in Western society and the belief in the afterlife within the Orthodox religious societies.

In that respect every individual pursues a similar goal: happiness. People in western societies consume more happiness in the here and now and in more individual material consumption and prosperity. Orthodox religious people say that immediate feeling of happiness with the expectation to find happiness in the hereafter (those ideas can also bring a certain feeling of happiness with him in the here and now). The most extreme hedonist wants right now prosperity at any time of the day can consume for themselves. The idea of ​​”After us / me, the deluge. Seize the day. I live just one time. ” The most extreme orthodox believer is willing his own life and as many other lives of believers to give up a large amount of virgins or other forms of reward in the afterlife. Within that spectrum dominate all kinds of intermediate positions of extreme to very moderate, to neutral. Most people follow the crowd and do what the neighbor or what is normatively desirable within the dominant culture (people are adaptive and the masses are followers, not drivers / trainers).

In this presentation the focus is on Western society. Go we are still in the neoliberal paradigm of consumerism, economism, materialism and individualism if we see a tilt of this paradigm with other opinions, which people no longer accept the abuses of the current paradigm.

I describe the background of our western economies and societies. Piketty As I step down from the neoclassical approach to economics. I do not write about mathematical models, because I think that economics is more than economism. I only give the social interpretation of historical political-economic events which consist not only historical facts, but are based on certain assumptions and ideological views. Unlike Piketty I use little direct scientific sources. Everyone must be able to form an opinion. I only describe the historical context in a more holistic integrated multidisciplinary way. History is always written from a particular context and can be disputed to some extent. What we now call ‘facts’ can find in a few years by new facts or insights are falsified. In a postmodern society does not exist a definitive claim on the permanent truth. Certainly not within the economic discipline. Economists are more likely to disagree than to agree with each other. Yet most economists still believe firmly in economic modeling, econometrics and the ‘laws’ of economic data. Everything will be fine as long as we have to follow these mathematical models. We must follow the market, and especially do not ask too many ethical, moral and philosophical questions. The famous ‘economist’ and founder of classical liberal economics was actually a moral philosopher (Adam Smith), we simply forget.

The neoclassical school is in my opinion too little justice to the real social economic problems of today and sees the economy as dead amoral object of research, while the real economy is about the needs of people, the struggle for economic and political power structures, how do we deal with scarcity, how we set up our environment, how we deal with external effects, finite resources, experience of freedom, working conditions, who ultimately pays the real account, access to resources, inequality problems and relationships between people, institutions, businesses and governments and where we want to give moral and do not spend money on, why do we have legally abolished slavery and child labor (slavery and child labor exists but still, only we do not see that in our economic models).

Economics is not just a system. Economics is a relate back (with politics, ethics, philosophy, psychology, law, sociology, biology) system that restricts movement of people, businesses, governments and institutions largely determines. Economics is therefore not a science of the laws, perhaps economy is not a science (most socio-cultural interpretation of events). Based on economic models, you can do hardly exact predictions. I therefore do not find objective research. I ask only questions about the way we organize our society. Science often focuses very specifically on one aspect out of all surveyed areas of research. Science focuses on new knowledge and new insights. I focus more on integrated interdisciplinarity of existing knowledge. Based on existing knowledge, we can also achieve a paradigm shift. The perspective is more holistic than specialist focused.

On the left site of the page you can click on the titles of the articles. If you click on it you can read the following articles:

On this blog, I ask the question to what extent our economy and our society sustainable for generations now and our future generations. Does the drive for growth and prosperity to an unequal society and a depletion of our natural resources? (1).

Is an economic financial system based on fractional reserve banking future-proof? (2).

How did our western society and economy. Where do our Western values ​​from. To what extent we have developed. How did we get to a postmodern world from prehistory? To what extent defines colonialism (VOC mentality) and neo-colonialism (seven sisters / oil companies), Western and non-Western image (clash of civilizations) in the world ?. (3-9).

What we are after the WWII in a period of reconstruction, growth and prosperity in a period of neo-liberalism, free market and individualism ended? (10).

In which western dogmas, myths and mantras we believe still sacred. Do we still actually in dogmas by which we believe or we take them uncritically as a fait accompli? What exactly are the alternatives and what are the alternatives? (11).

To what extent is the dominant role of the West in a postmodern world (end of history, Fukuyama)? Can we have a helicopter view ourselves back to see if we take all of the western media as an absolute truth? We commit enough retrospection and the Western media actually objective enough. We find ourselves well lit, but are we really? (12).

Can we still bring alternative ideas alongside the neoliberal paradigm. Ideas, ideas and concrete plans which contribute directly to a sustainable economy and society for everyone. Wear a circular resourced-based economy to a more sustainable society? Or we go unsustainable problems halt with no sustainable solutions? For example, America is trying to tackle obesity for years by purchasing more health, more exercise machines, more diets, more slimming. It does not address the underlying causes but dampens the effects of selling more products. Typical American and belief in the sacred market. (13)

We find the characteristics of neoliberalism and the commercial Darwinism back in socio-biological properties of the man himself. It’s eat or be eaten. Is it a constant struggle status (male) and beauty / looks (wife) just to arrive at the most suitable species. Neoliberalism is not just a disguised form of economic and social Darwinism? The law of the strongest (most suitable). (14)

Our Western culture is safe in the transition from the historic Hellenistic Greco-Latin culture into a mythical Western Christian culture. The iconography describes this transition and give possible explanations how we through power politics, forgeries, misconceptions, incorrect copies to the Christian Western culture come. Big dictatorial empires without religious glorification of mythical gods, symbols and rituals. The top-down doctrine, laws and regulations allow a small elite (pope and bishops) the power of attorney over the supporters (public domain): The papal encyclical. The chance that Western culture is based on two millennia of history forgery and impersonation is very present. The glorification of the historical Julius Caesar has given way to the mythical Jesus Christ. (15)

What moves me to write a blog about the economy and society. Why do I think we live in an unsustainable society where differences are magnified, individualism is canonized and status, power and wealth (men) and appearance (women) are important key factors have become for Western society? Personally I think that we continually satisfy short-term interests at the expense of economically vulnerable social groups and all our upcoming generations. There are alternatives, but they are still mostly laughed at present or ignored by the current opinions. Sustainability is nice, but if it is at the expense of our prosperity rather not. Again and again we get afterwards a lid on our Western noses. Should we now can not agree in advance to think about sustainable solutions? Would that not even have an idea? Are we going to investigate for yourself or the dogmas and myths of the economic models are correct or we follow the dogmas and myths ruthlessly as we did in the Middle Ages? (16)