Who is Really in Charge?

            During our November intensive, we had an afternoon dedicated to the discussion of living systems. Our guest lecturer was Stuart Cowen. Over the course of the afternoon we talked about many things including the structure of the universe, taxonomy of different types of systems, fractal geometry through emergent systems, autopoiesis (self-organization), the conservation economy, and how these all play into resilient local living economies. What captured my attention (and imagination) was the discussion on different system types, namely Newtonian Systems and Living Systems.

            The distinction made between these two system types enhanced the idea that our current economy functions to meet short-term goals and does so in a massively destructive way. When Mr. Cowen questioned our class, “Who is in charge of our system (our economy)?”, a few major players were offered including governments, corporations and top executives of the major money-making institutions around the world. While any of these may be partly true, it is quite clear that there is really one entity that governs not only our economy, but every action of every living being. From fundamental particles to individual organisms to the way our planet interacts with the solar system, nature ultimately controls all the processes take place. This becomes evident when one observes how the natural world reacts when pushed to the limit by humankind. Through our economic system we have achieved great success in speeding up the destruction of the natural world. This is forcing us to face the problems we have generated.

            The living systems model proposes a benign relationship with nature and was described in Mr. Cowen’s presentation using the following terminology:

Wholeness                         Networked                          Open                               Resilient                                                                                  Non-Equilibrium               Nonlinear                            Adaptive                         Threshold/Bifurcation      Autopoiesis                       Fractal Geometry                 Chaotic                           Emergent Properties

           

These qualities paint the picture of how an economy, surrounded and governed by the environment and focused on the long-term, could thrive. However distant we may be from a system that demonstrates these traits, I do believe it is achievable. We are enveloped by nature which provides for us an endless array of resilient patterns and adaptive models that have existed from time immemorial. This does beg the question again though, “Who is in charge of this system?”, and how does it work so perfectly without human involvement? It seems there is one major principle that reigns in nature. Each organism pursues it’s own propagation until it is no longer beneficial for the larger system in which it resides. At that point any number of forces will keep that organism in check to maintain the balance which nature so beautifully strikes.

            If we are to modify or completely create a new economy focused on living systems and the ideas mentioned above, then I believe we will have to abide by the same key principle that nature abides by. We have attempted to create “forces” as I refer to above in order to maintain balance in our current economy. Our individual pursuits and societal laws, regulations and enforcement are too fragmented and have not fundamentally benefitted the system in which they reside, which is and always will be nature. I leave this post with a few questions for any readers as I am curious to hear your thoughts:

1.     What are the forces in nature that preserve its longevity, yet allow for such a diversity of organisms to flourish?

2.     What forces keep us in check, individually or collectively?

3.     While nature is extremely complex, I would argue that it is governed by fairly basic laws. Have humans created too complex of a system to abide by laws of nature?

I watched a short video recently entitled "Sacred Economics". It is also a book by Charles Eisenstein. I believe the quote below puts us in the best mindset to move forward in the right direction.

“We didn’t earn any of the things that really keep us alive or make life good. We didn’t earn air. We didn’t earn being born. We didn’t earn conception. We didn’t earn being able to breathe. We didn’t earn having a planet that can provide us food. We didn’t earn the sun. If we know that life is a gift, then the natural response is gratitude.”

                                                                                                -Charles Eisenstein

Economics and/or Well-Being?

While I find it challenging (and quite frankly scary!) to write about American and global economics I am going to do my best, as I feel this topic deserves my undivided attention. As I dive deeper into the study of economics and learn how it is shaped by our everyday activities, modeled by macroeconomists and how it affects everyone around the world, I realize how much we really don’t know. From the psychology of individual consumers and vastly different cultural boundaries to the value of money in our own country I am continuously baffled by all the variables at play in the global economy. In this post, I am not going to try and use grandiose language or economic jargon to convince you of one viewpoint or another. I will simply be “thinking aloud” and trying to make sense of what I have learned about economics and what I know to be true based on my own experiences in life.

           

To simplify things, I must relate the economic system and it’s complexities to my life and interactions with the world. The influence we humans have on each other in our day-to-day lives is profound. Think about how you feel when someone cuts you off in traffic, makes a joke at your expense, doesn’t listen to your side of the story, invites you to a night out with friends, opens the door for you, or buys you a meal. Now put yourself on the other side. How about when you cut someone off in traffic, you make a joke at someone else’s expense, you don’t listen to someone’s side of a story, you invite someone out to a night with your friends, you open the door for somebody, or you buy a meal for a homeless person. The consequences of these scenarios can be far-reaching and deeply stirring in a negative or positive way. While at first glance these appear minute in comparison to the grand system of our economy, I believe there is great power in such actions and that these form the foundation of a sustainable future. This viewpoint is most likely seen as naïve, but I find great hope for our world (and yes, economy too!) in the intentions and quality of all people. I believe that more often than not it is necessary to simplify our complex perspectives to see the truth in any situation.

Allow me to tie this back into economics and how I have been moved by the everyday marvels of life. Economic models intrigue me because they are based on various assumptions about a system’s variables (i.e. population growth, product supply, consumer demand). I have always disliked assumptions or generalizations because they take away the beauty of the individual, but let’s examine the assumptions associated with the supply and demand curve for a moment. If demand increases and supply stays the same, a shortage occurs resulting in a higher market price. If demand decreases and supply stays the same, a surplus occurs resulting in a lower market price. These are just two of the assumptions made when viewing the supply and demand graph. Now, I understand these assumptions are not set in stone, but only put in place to predict how supply and demand affect price at a large scale. Similar assumptions are made to assess current and predict future GDP (gross domestic product), the value of all goods and services produced in an economy in a given time period. The fascinating part of this is that many governments and corporations see GDP as an indicator of economic “well-being.” Here, another assumption is made. If an economy is doing well (aka, high GDP) then the people that contribute to that economy must also be doing well. This is why I am troubled.

Five minutes of online research will show you that there is much debate over the authenticity of this assumption. Here are some of my questions:

-Has our potential to do good for each other been overshadowed by obsession with economic growth and GDP?

-Is human “well-being” now overshadowed by the “value of goods and services?”

-Does the power gained from economic growth (as measured by GDP) outperform our power to love one another and our planet?

-How do we simplify this complex issue and put our values into action so that dangerous assumptions are displaced?

I realize that I have probably just made many assumptions by asking these questions, but I know that the way we treat each other and the world and how this contributes to our real well-being is not represented by such measures as GDP. Perhaps we can find another way to measure economic growth and the well-being of a community or nation. I sure hope so!