I was just thinking while walking the dog that I have probably, because of the unique time in which I was born, witnessed both the rise and fall of the United States. I read Small is Beautiful when it first came out, and had forgotten the part about Buddhist economics. However, for a variety of reasons I have been living that way for the past decade.
But I am under no illusion that these lessons of high intensity have cooled enough in the past 5000 years to make people hold them. Touch them, maybe, but still draw back from their heat. In the long view, Buddhist economics should rule the world but doesn't. Example: cap-and-trade legislation and the quick formation of carbon markets. Need I say more?
cgerrish
· 4 months ago
A 'cap' is a method of moderating growth. Value accumulates under the ceiling of limitation. Optimizations of carbon emission are an expression of values through an industrial market. But as you note, the game hasn't changed-- they've just slightly changed the dimensions of the playing field.
hardaway
· 4 months ago
They've converted an idea for purification of character (limits to growth) into a way to make money, zero sum game that doesn't look like one.
Lance Strate
· 4 months ago
What a great blog post, McLuhan, Schumacher, not to mention Heraclitus and Eliot. Perhaps we could talk about this some time? My email is strate@fordham.edu.
SLCarner
· 4 months ago
The Buddhist economic theory of a man's character being formed by a man's work is organic in nature and unfortunately in this age it is a very simplified notion. In my opinion, the Average Joe working for a living is not thinking about the larger system and the contributions his labor extends outside himself. It is rather a means to an end. There are no real guidelines or values placed on human resource in the purest sense of the term, hence many are quite disgruntled that their is no dignity to be found in their toils. In fact, in today's economy there are more people working to cheat the system than to make 'an honest dollar.' Thus the cultivation of the human spirit is marred by the unfit soil in which he must plant which lessens the chances of bearing any fruit of his labours. Ideally speaking what value and worth can be placed on a man's work when there are so many injustices and discrepancies? Is it for the love of money and what money can buy or the intrinsic values attained by hard work? And more importantly how do we cultivate the intrinsic values into one's everyday work? I suppose volunteering represents a higher order, but who can afford to volunteer, unless their needs have been adequately met, in a system that rapidly ups the ante on what is fair and unfair game?
All Comments
But I am under no illusion that these lessons of high intensity have cooled enough in the past 5000 years to make people hold them. Touch them, maybe, but still draw back from their heat. In the long view, Buddhist economics should rule the world but doesn't. Example: cap-and-trade legislation and the quick formation of carbon markets. Need I say more?