Dear Willy,
thank you for your ultimate future post, which has deepened, as always, the point of my speech on democracy and self-organization thoroughly. Above all, I am grateful that you have devoted myself out with you own insight to the crucial point in the coexistence of any society. This is about the crucial question: How do you think's the property?
You're absolutely right. Before we have not resolved this fundamental concept, we need the intricacies of the political structure of a sustainable society to set apart not. Therefore, I have the same impact as a provocative thesis for further discussion, if a sustainable society is to do without (significant) material growth must be the same, the end of individual property.
this sounds radical and it is. But do not worry, I shall not warm up old Marxist musings and everything collectivized. That did not work and will not work. A major reason for this is that we are dealing with a much more complex reality, which (as we have noted already) every plan and every hierarchical leadership / government withdraw, in which we only playing by the rules of self-organization can flourish. Collectivization in the Marxist sense meant but always planning, always "exercising power" of a party, always the dictate of the "knowing". Dictation is the opposite concept of self-organization! It is doomed to failure, how well-meaning and moral integrity to the steering ends they may be.
But what I would have is the "small difference" between ownership and possession again at the center. Property is indeed the "unlimited" claim to power over any thing (we do not even touch on the question of ownership of human beings and animals, so is not without its own moral problems in terms!).
First, I would now like just a little in the world-tricks . Access A key feature of the mechanistic world view is the strong linkage of the (free) individual with his property. But it is also difficult simple: if the man every metaphysical meaning is to be withdrawn if it is only a product of chance and necessity (as Jacques Monod so aptly characterized), then the man even more by its relationship to the other individuals and things of reality determined. His "sense" is then given by his individual place in reality, its place in the "power structure" and just through his power over things, his property given.
As much as in the increase of property as the Institute for meaning a mechanistic world view is understandable, so funny, it thus seems that the Church in the Second Vatican Council speaks of that property is a necessary precondition for individual freedom of man. Well, if that's the "boss" ...
learns at this point we would look at the relationship between a powerful concept of ownership and growth ideas. When property is so important for the sense of the individual, then its protection is of course a "vital" role. In order to protect what you have, but you have to win control of "more": to protect the pasture, you have to have a fence to their own to protect animals against the ravages of nature, you need a stable, to protect themselves from plague need reserves in order to protect themselves at the age of the loss of living standards, you need "vested" rights to pensions, etc., etc. ., etc. is a fact: Only more property to protect property. When property that is such a crucial place in the world holds and where it has also its own individuality against all "other" and must be protected against nature, then growth is programmed before! Here we are a primary driving force behind our social order (and its aberration!) Got to the bottom. Do we want a self-organizing to always more structural rather than material developed society, we need to think about what we do with this driver.
In contrast to the unlimited power to claim ownership of the ownership concept is derived more from the concept of use. If you own something, then you are in the strict sense of the "owner" of the commitment and responsibility. One is called the optimal management of the transferred property, the "owner" expects that the property is held in proper position, just as he expects in return for the release of his estate. Property is therefore not absolute power of control, but much stronger a copyright on any matter, which also includes the responsibility for this thing with.
is interesting that our ancestors in the Middle Ages, that was built economically largely on land, this difference is not very well known but just their main economic base is not the personal property of said, where land was in fee, use and administration. The feudal lords had the right to withdraw this Lehn, but to also get a share of the produce.
Of course the use of medieval legal systems as well as the re-heat humbug of communism. It shows that ownership society as the only Standard is not absolutely necessary. It also shows, surprisingly, that economic systems, to measure the individual property of little importance to grow, barely. The essential question is, we are able to find a society that allows for self-organizing, structural development, quality of life for the people but provides the ecological limits to material growth binds.
I believe like you that this is possible. The foundations of such a company are as long known and future post from you both in the past and even in other parts of our discussion has been called. They are: *
basic security of the individual
* legal certainty in the Management of individual property tax
* of ground and soil
* taxation of resources
I want these issues addressed individually, already put to our further discussion, a basis.
The basic security of the individual is the fundamental basis of such a company. Only if we succeed, the people to take their angst, we can break the deadly and inefficient growth cycle of striving for more and more property to the existing property (and thus the individual existence) to protect. This basic security should guarantee every person's survival. It should consist of a strong health care, adequate health care, a excellent education, unrestricted access to culture, knowledge and opportunities to sharpen their skills and use, and consist of an economic transfers. The most interesting part of the surface is certainly the calibration of the economic transfers. It should be such that an individual can live in dignity, but above all it should to encourage socialization of people. This could be done in that joint accounts get progressively more: A family of four, as well as a four-person residential community of students would no longer be replaced four times the basic allowance, but on a joint account five times the amount. The key: This power transfer is the only financial benefit to the citizens of the state (except for special promotions for special needs). It is every person equally.
important for the company in strategic terms, however, are the other measures, namely, an excellent education and access to knowledge and individual development. This helps us a hand, the Internet has democratized the access to knowledge this set. In addition, we have to our educational institutions "on its head" position and finally offer real life education (and not short-term occupational upgrading), as well as efficient ways to good ideas to develop and implement. This broad field, we are certainly one or the other must pay future post!
The individual basic allowance but may be only a part. A major cornerstone of his other self-organized society, the legal security in the use of the property. You see, already, here is nothing of the property! It is rather to avoid the errors of medieval feudalism and communism. Possession should be protected by society as long as he is a
used) and
b) such use is within the rules for the conservation of the basic substance is.
Hence, we are not expropriated or feudal despotism. It is about preventing of inefficient speculation on the one hand and exploitation on the other. Possession required. Possession but should continue to provide the opportunity to realize their economic creativity. Therefore, should the owners be offered under these two conditions as wide a space for the optimal use of his property.
The taxation of land and soil is an important "redistribution" of the natural income can be achieved. After the sun's energy is the only "tangible" income of the nature of our planet so, it must be collective income (that indeed every human being as "inalienable birthright" is entitled to!) Are distributed according to the company. Who the essential Production factor for the use of that income managed, must therefore make this charge to the community.
Of course, this tax is not simply a "tax hectares. You must land productivity, but also investments in "higher returns in the future (such as compost and the like) are charged, as well as soil degradation by sealing or monoculture. The aim should be to cover the basic security for all of this source largely to meet a basic idea of joint management of natural income.
would automatically be a sealing engagement against speculation and possible exploitation: every one of his property not uses, it must pay tax anyway. Each of the soil would have sealed the loss of functionality of the soil also contribute to ground control. Thus, both speculative and sealing and Bauwahn is expensive.
Finally, a tax on resources essential to ensure they have especially for the infrastructure in material terms (roads, public buildings, etc.) and intangible ways (education, health, safety, etc.). So that they will replace the tax on labor as the basis of Finanzgebahrung society.
resources are directly related to our removal from the wild (and we stress the nature of the drop at the end of each product life cycle) connected. If we assume that every resource "ownership" of all people (also not yet born!), It must bring in who they "take possession of" this "owner" in return. Here is ample scope for the "greening" the tax system. This is not simply to achieve in that we pay a few cents more for fuel. Rather, it must be to evaluate resources on the basis of their environmental impact and their future availability and to tax. This is the material flow management, our company are finally brought in a sustainable foundations. Again, we are probably one or the other forward post to write!
Does all this have to a sustainable, self-organizing society? No, certainly not! But there are fundamental elements of such a future society that is also required, of course, also a new political order system and a new education system, all objects of our further discussion. But I do know that a reorganization of the tax system will also affect our social system substantially (and in turn is only possible to do so if this transformation is the goal citizens!). In fact, I think
that this transformation is already starting very soon. The financial crisis is in us, thankfully, relieve the need to reduce 95% of speculative assets. The question of new sources of revenue will inevitably go to the taxation of "property" and so slow to make "ownership", with all its consequences. The question of eternal growth will do well in Europe "by itself". This raises so at the end of this post less forward the question of how we come to such a sustainable economy, but again how can we organize ourselves in such best to make it to a better society.
That's it for this time of my beautiful Perlsdorf where the world still (and again!) is OK. Your
Michael
0 comments:
Post a Comment