|
Aleksandar Malečić
280 days ago |
We must somehow figure out how to create adequate role models for this lifetime, century and even further. The idea of sustainability will, even if other conditions are provided, succeed or fail depending on our collective perception of “fulfiled” or “good” life. It’s a huge task to turn thing upside down and keep them turned that way. I doubt that financially rich people with many divorces and cocaine addicts are very happy, no matter what economy as we know it and its statistics claim. Also, one original (not necessarily useful and valuable) approach to business/entertainment can be enough for a person to earn his/ her “first million”, i.e. an amount of money that is enough for joining the social elite. The easiest money is in organized crime, drugs and similar activities. Education, agriculture and good manners are somewhere near the bottom. There is something wrong in the idea that tech balloons and novelties are a mechanism for social stratification. Rich people are powerful and influential no matter that their profit is mostly based on selfishness (usually not paying enough for coworkers and taxes). It’s absurd to let those who don’t care about anyone or anything to be at the top of human species and all living beings and natural resources.
The approach to “better life” described above is being spread and globalized. It forces nations across the world to ignore agriculture and clean water and fresh air and to become globally competitive in all kinds of novelties just to keep their heads above the surface. Novelties are things that were either irrelevant in the past (in comparison to tight communities and good manners) or gadgets that should prevent technologically advanced societies from falling apart (energy, infrastructure, economy…). This kind of “better life” is very vulnerable, especially if it’s globalized and too big to fail (a system with a huge inertia).
|
