A new paradigm of political change:
The political methods of the 20th century are, it appears, less and less effective for the world of the 21st.
The nature of globalization is without precedent: accelerating interconnectedness, with billions of people interacting constantly in a massive, dynamic, and barely comprehensible process.
Yet the assumption persists that the political processes and institutions designed in the 20th century, or earlier, remain appropriate and effective in this profoundly different state of affairs. In fact it appears that the ability of national governments and international authorities to manage the severe problems arising from this new dispensation are declining, despite their claims to the contrary.
Take climate change. The annual climate summit has just ended in Durban, after dozens of "preparatory" meetings and thousands of diplomatic discussions. Its output was a decision to agree a treaty in 2015 to introduce emissions limits in 2020. Oddly, many governments (and commentators) are claiming this as some kind of victory.
It is traditional to blame individual states (the US, China) for the failure to agree to more robust measures, and these do bear some responsibility. It is however also apparent that the process itself is the problem, and has been since its inception. The negotiation echoes traditional models of state-based interaction. Governments treat it as a bargaining process, where commitments to curb emissions have to be matched by other countries. The net result is that nothing is done.
The correct measure of Durban is not the declarations of success by the participating governments, which are required to trumpet their own effectiveness and negotiating prowess. The only output that matters is the concentration of carbon in the atmosphere. This has grown with unprecedented rapidity by more than 10% since the first such conference, the so-called "Earth Summit" in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.
Effects in the real world should be the test of such processes, and indeed of all political methods, including government's. By this measure, efforts to curb financial volatility or terrorism have been similarly ineffective. Experts say that the internationally-agreed Basel III rules to reduce risky banking practice are insufficient, and they are already being watered down by banks' lobbying. Ten years after 9/11, and despite the killing of Osama bin Laden, we find ourselves in a condition of never-ending threat, multiple conflicts and the seemingly permanent embrace of an intrusive and hugely expensive security state.
There is a more pernicious consequence of the repetitive but tenuous claims to effectiveness made by the practitioners of conventional politics and government: everyone else is dulled into stupefied inaction. If "the authorities" claim to be on top of these problems, what does it matter what we do? And here's the rub. We have been pummeled into a kind of dazed apathy, endlessly badgered by politicians that they can fix it, when in fact we are the most potent agents of change.
At home, democracy has been subverted. Corporations donate copiously to both parties to insure their influence. Politicians initiate legislation in order to extract rents from big business. Private prison owners lobby for longer sentences. There are now lobbying organizations representing the interests of lobbyists.
This legal corruption is deeply entrenched in our supposedly democratic political system, resisting all attempts at reform. It is naïve to expect decisions from this system to reflect the interests of ordinary people. And this is what we see: tax regimes that tax incomes of the poor more than the accumulating wealth of the rich; healthcare legislation whose primary beneficiary is the healthcare industry; a comprehensive failure to regulate the banking industry to prevent further violent crises such as the '08 credit crunch.
Cynical despair would be a perfectly understandable response to this dismal picture. But this reaction entirely suits those who profit from the status quo. Instead, this analysis leads to one clear prerogative: there is no choice but to act ourselves. If we are not to stand by while the world's problems deepen, there is only one alternative: action based upon on our convictions, uniting with others for greatest effect. And as we shall see in the next post, such action is in fact far more powerful than any other method of politics in effecting real and lasting change.
A former diplomat, Carne Ross is the author of The Leaderless Revolution: how ordinary people will take power and change politics in the 21st century, published by Blue Rider Press (Penguin), ebook now available, hardcover to be published in January 2012. For further information and videos explaining the book, visit www.theleaderlessrevolution.com. This is the first in a series of four posts.
Follow Carne Ross on Twitter: www.twitter.com/carneross
How do we go about overthrowing Goldman and Sachs?
Insanity
We will have to put aside our petty differences and make concerted, focused efforts to make things change. People with money and power have never given up even a morsel without a fight. Non-violent, coordinated protests, strikes, and boycotts are the only effective weapon that can be used against these sociopaths. Such a movement will be easy to confuse and control if the 99% falls for the old belief that we need a leader. Leaders can be bought and disappeared way too easily. Single issue movements are doomed to failure because they are like a three legged stool...knock out one of the legs and the stool falls over. Only the use of free speech via the internet can succeed. While we still have the right to talk we need to use it.
You have the same opportunity that everyone else has. You can do something with that opportunity, or you can just sit back and whine that others have been better stewards of the opportunities we are all born with.
They don't have to cheat or steal to do that.
Yes they do. They have managed to steal several generations of sweat equity and legacy savings.
The Occupy Movement is the perfect vehicle to confront the Global Corporate Tyranny. People across the globe prove they are on the same page in passion they exhibit in confrontation with the 1%, There are no leaders necessary, when all lead together. That is what Critical Mass is.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
Mahatma Gandhi
We are the most potent agents of change.
We are the most potent agents of change.
We are the most potent agents of change.
If we can find our collective voice that respects the homeless, the poor, the starving, the sick no different than the millionaire. When the last mouth is filled, we shall all be full. Idealistic, yes but the intention should be from this energy, not from fear and division.
I have never heard them formulate a response to the nineteenth century: laissez-faire capitalism, the robber barons, the cartels and trusts, and the absolute lack of consumer protections.