Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
AS THE WORLD ECONOMY CRASHES AGAINST DEBT AND RESOURCE
limits, many countries are
responding by attempting to salvage what are actually their most expendable fea-
tures—corrupt, insolvent banks and bloated militaries—while leaving the majority of their people to
languish in “austerity.” This has resulted in a series of uprisings, taking a variety of forms in differ-
ent nations. Such conditions and responses will lead, sooner or later, to social as well as economic
upheaval—and a collapse of the support infrastructure on which billions depend for their very sur-
vival.
Nations could, in principle, forestall social collapse by providing the bare essentials of existence
(food, water, housing, medical care, family planning, education, employment for those able to work,
and public safety) universally and in a way that could be sustained for some time, while paying
for this by deliberately shrinking other features of society—starting with military and financial sec-
tors—and by taxing the wealthy. The cost of covering the basics for everyone is still within the
means of most nations. Providing human necessities would not remove all the fundamental prob-
lems now converging (climate change, resource depletion, and the need for fundamental economic
reforms), but it would provide a platform of social stability and equity to give the world time to
grapple with deeper, existential challenges.
Unfortunately, many governments are averse to this course of action. And if they did provide
universal safety nets, ongoing economic contraction might still result in conflict, though in this in-
stance it might arise from groups opposed to the perceived failures of “big government.”
Further, even in the best instance, safety nets can only buy time. The capacity of governments
to maintain flows of money and goods will erode. Thus it will increasingly be up to households and
communities to provide the basics for themselves while reducing their dependence upon, and vul-
nerability to, centralized systems of financial and governmental power.
This will set up a fundamental contradiction.
When the government tries to provide people the
basics, power is centralized—but as the capacity of the government wanes, it can feel threatened by
people trying to provide the basics for themselves and act to discourage or even criminalize them
.
Theorists on both the far left and far right of the political spectrum have advocated for the de-
centralization of food, finance, education, and other basic societal support systems for decades.
Some efforts toward decentralization (such as the local food movement) have led to the develop-
ment of niche markets. However, here we are talking about not just the incremental growth of social
