Categoria: English

The era of the great transformations

Leonardo Boff2 Comentários

We live in the Era of the Great Transformations. There are many, but I will mention just two: the first relating to the economy and the second, to the realm of the conscience.

First, the economy: It began in 1834 when the industrial revolution was consolidated in England. It consists of moving from a market economy to a market society. The market has always existed throughout the history of humanity, but never before has there been a society consisting only of the market. In other words, the only thing that counts is the economy. Everything else must serve the economy.

The market that predominates is ruled by competition rather than cooperation. What is sought is individual or corporative economic benefit, not the common good of the entire society. The cost of attaining this benefit is usually the devastation of nature, and creation of perverse social inequalities.

It is said that the market must be free, and the state is seen as its great obstacle. The mission of the state, in reality, is to order society and the economy through laws and norms, and to coordinate the search for the common good. The Great Transformation presupposes a minimal State, practically limited to issues involving society’s infrastructure, the treasury and security. Everything else belongs to and is regulated by the market.

Everything can be relegated to the market: drinking water, seeds, food and even human organs. This commercialization has penetrated all sectors of society: health, education, sports, the world of the arts and entertainment, and even important types of religions and churches, with their TV and radio programs.

Organizing society only around the economic interests of the market has split humanity from top to bottom: an enormous gulf has been created between the few rich and the many poor. A perverse social injustice predominates.

Simultaneously, a horrible ecological injustice has been created. In the eagerness to accumulate, goods and natural resources have been exploited in a predatory manner, with no limitations and a total lack of respect. The goal is to become ever richer to be able to consume more intensely.

This voracity has surpassed the limits of the Earth herself. The goods and services of the Earth are no longer fully sufficient and renewable. The Earth’s resources are not limitless. That fact makes it difficult if not impossible for the capitalist/productive system to constantly regenerate. That is its crisis.

Given its internal logic, that Transformation, is causing biocide, ecocide and geocide. Life itself is endangered, and the Earth may not want us with her, because we are too destructive.

The second Great Transformation is occurring in the field of consciousness. As the damage to nature that affects the quality of life increases, the awareness also grows that 90% of this damage is due to the irresponsible and irrational attitude of humans, more specifically to the attitude of those economic, political, cultural and media power elites that comprise the great multilateral corporations and have assumed control over the destiny of the world.

It is urgent that we interrupt this trajectory towards the precipice. The first global study of the state of the Earth was done in 1972. It revealed that the Earth is not well. The principal cause is the type of development undertaken by society, that has surpassed the limits of nature and the Earth’s endurance. We must produce, yes, to feed humanity, but in a manner that respects the rhythms of nature and her limits, allowing her to rest and to renew herself. It was called sustainable development, as opposed to just material growth, as measured by the GNP.

In the name of this awareness and its urgency, there arose the responsibility principle (Hans Jonas), the caring principle (Boff and others), the sustainability principle (Brundland Report), the cooperation principle (Heisenberg/Wilson/ Swimme), the prevention/precaution principle (1992 Letter of Rio de Janeiro from the United Nations), the compassion principle (Schoppenhauer/Dalai Lama) and the Earth principle (Lovelock and Evo Morales), where the Earth is understood as a living super organism, always ready to produce life.

The ecological reflection has become complex. It cannot be reduced only to environmental preservation. The totality of the world system is at stake. Thus there has emerged an environmental ecology that has as its end the quality of life; a social ecology that seeks a sustainable mode of living (production, distribution, consumption and disposal of waste); a mental ecology that criticizes prejudices and visions of the world that are hostile to life, and proposes to formulate a new design for civilization, based on the principles and values for a new form of inhabiting the Common Home; and finally, an integral ecology that recognizes that the Earth is part of a universe in evolution, and that we must live in harmony with the Whole, one that is complex and purposeful. From this comes peace.

Then it becomes clear that ecology is an art, a new way of relating to nature and the Earth, more than a technique for administering scarce goods and services.

Everywhere in the world, movements, institutions, organisms, NGOs, and research centers have arisen that propose to care for the Earth, especially for all living beings.

If the awareness of caring, and of our collective responsibility for the Earth and for our civilization, triumph, surely we will still have a future.

Free translation from the Spanish by
Servicios Koinonia, http://www.servicioskoinonia.org.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU..

What will our children and grandchildren say to us?

Leonardo BoffDeixe um comentário

Every country, especially those that are experiencing financial crises, such as Brazil in 2015, has a persistent obsession: we have to grow; we must assure the growth of the GNP, namely, the sum of all the wealth produced by the country. This economic growth is fundamentally the production of material goods. It causes a high degree of social inequity (unemployment and reduction of salaries) and a perverse environmental devastation (exhaustion of the ecosystems).

In reality, we should first talk about the kind of development that entails essential non-material elements, principally such subjective and humanistic dimensions as the expansion of liberty, creativity and ways of shaping life itself. Unfortunately we are all hostages of the mirage that is growth. Long ago the balance between growth and the preservation of nature was destroyed, in favor of growth. Consumption is already 40% above the planet’s capacity to replace its goods and services. And the planet is losing her sustainability.

We know now that the Earth is a self regulating living system in which all factors interact (the theory of Gaia) to maintain her integrity. But her self regulation is failing. Hence climate change, extreme events (strong winds, tornadoes, climate deregulation) and the global warming that may surprise us with grave catastrophes.

The Earth is seeking a new equilibrium, raising temperatures between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees centigrade. That would bring on the era of the great devastations, (anthropocene) with rising ocean levels, that will affect more than half of humanity who live on her coasts. Thousands of living organisms would not have enough time to adapt or to mitigate the harmful effects and would vanish. A great part of humanity itself, up to 80% according to some, could no longer subsist on a planet whose physical-chemical base was so profoundly altered.

With certitude environmentalist Washington Novaes affirms: «now it is no longer about caring for the environment, but about not exceeding the limits that could endanger life». There are scientists who claim that we are reaching the point of no-return. It is possible to slow down the oncoming crisis, but not to stop it.

This question is disturbing. In their official speeches, heads of State, businessmen, and, what is worse, principal economists, rarely tackle the limits of the planet and the resulting problems for our civilization. We do not want our children and grandchildren to look to the past, and curse us and our generation because even knowing the dangers, we did little or nothing to avoid the tragedy.

Everyone’s mistake may have been to follow literally the strange advice of Lord Keynes for emerging from the great depression of the 1930’s:

«For at least a century we ought to pretend to ourselves and to everyone else that what is beautiful is dirty and what is dirty is beautiful, because what is dirty is useful and the beautiful is useless. Greed, profiteering, distrust must be our gods because they will guide us towards the end of the tunnel of economic need towards the clarity of the day… After all that will come the return to some of the more secure and certain principles of religion and traditional virtue: that greed is a vice, that profiteering is a crime, and that the love of money is detestable» (Economic Possibilities of our Grand-Children). That is how those principally responsible for the crises of 2008, who were never punished, think.

It is urgent that we redefine our goals and seek the best means of attaining them. They no longer can be simply to produce, while destroying nature, and to consume without limit. No one has a solution to this crisis of civilization. But we suspect that it must be guided by the wisdom of nature herself: respect for her rhythms, her capacity to endure, giving centrality not to growth but to sustainability. If our modes of production respected the natural cycles, there surely would be enough for everyone, and we would preserve nature, of which we are part.

We cover the Earth’s wounds with band aids. Mitigation is not a solution. We essentially restrict ourselves to mitigating, with the illusion that we are resolving the urgent issues that are matters of life or death.

Free translation from the Spanish by
Servicios Koinonia, http://www.servicioskoinonia.org.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU..

How the culture of capital is perpetuated

Leonardo Boff1 comentário

In the previous article –The capitalist culture is contrary to life and happiness– we attempted to show theoretically that the strength of its perpetuation and reproduction lies in emphasizing one aspect of our nature, namely, the urge for self affirmation, for strengthening the ego, so that it neither disappears nor is assimilated by others. But this diminishes and even denies another aspect, equally natural, namely, the integration of the self and the individual into a whole, into the species, of which it is an example.

Is not enough however to end with this type of reflection. Along with this original point there exists another force that guarantees the perpetuation of the capitalist culture. It is the fact that we, the majority of society, internalize the “values” and the basic purpose of capitalism, namely, the constant growth of profit that allows for unlimited consumption of material goods. Those who do not have, want to have, those who have want to have more, and those who have more say: there is never enough. And for the great majority, competition, rather not solidarity, and the supremacy of the strongest prevail above any other value in social relations, especially in business.

The key to sustaining the culture of capital is the culture of consumption, of constantly acquiring new products: a new cell phone with more apps, a more sophisticated computer, a different style of shoes or clothing, more bank credit to facilitate buying and consuming, the uncritical acceptance of product advertisements, etc.

A mentality has been created whereby all of these things are taken as natural. In parties among friends or family and in the restaurants one eats to satiation, while at the same time the news speaks of millions of people who are going hungry. Not many notice this contradiction, because the culture of capital teaches us to care for one’s own self first, and not to worry about others, or about the common good. This, as we have already said many times, has existed for a long time.

But it is not enough to attack the culture of consumption. If the problem is systemic, we have to put forward a different system, one that is anti-capitalist, anti-production, and anti-unlimited lineal growth. To the capitalist credo: «there is no alternative», we must posit a humanist credo: «there is a new alternative».

Alternatives can be seen everywhere, of which I will only mention three as examples: the concept of “living well” of the Andean nations, which has endured for centuries, notwithstanding many attempts to eliminate, subordinate, or assimilate them; but which some sectors of society have recently come to acknowledge and appreciate for their gifts to humanity, including the harmony and equilibrium within all the sectors of the family, within society (community democracy), with nature (the waters, soil, landscapes), and with Pachamama, Mother Earth. The economy of the Andean nations is not guided by accumulation, but by producing only what is enough and decent for everyone and everything.

A second example: eco-socialism is growing daily. It is unrelated to socialism as it previously existed (that in fact was state capitalism), but stems from the ideals of classical socialism, of equality, solidarity, subordination of exchange value to the value of use, together with the ideals of modern ecology. It has been brilliantly presented by Michael Löwy in, What is Eco-Socialism, (Qué es el ecosocialismo, Cortez, 2015) and by others in several countries, including the significant contributions of James O’Connor and Jovel Kovel. They postulate the economy as a function of social needs and the need to protect the life-system and the planet as a whole. The objectives of democratic socialism, according to O’Connor, would be democratic control, social equality and the prevalence of the value of use. Löwy adds that «such a society presupposes collective ownership of the means of production, democratic planning that allows society to define the objectives of production and investments, and a new technological structure of the forces of production» (op.cit. p.45-46). Socialism and ecology share qualitative values, such as cooperation, reducing work time so as to live in a state of freedom to coexist, to create, to pursue culture and spirituality, and to restore an impoverished nature, values which cannot be reduced to market value. This ideal is in the realm of historical possibilities and embraces practices that anticipated it, (such as those of the Andean nations, mentioned above).

A third model of culture I would call, “The Franciscan Way”. Francis of Assisi, updated by Francis of Rome, is more than a name or a religious ideal; it is a project of life, a spirit and a mode of being. The Franciscan Way understands poverty not as the condition of having nothing, but as the capacity for always being able to detach from oneself, so as to give and give. It embraces the simplicity of life, of consumption as shared sobriety; of caring for the destitute, of universal fraternizing with all of nature’s creatures, respected as brothers and sisters, of the joy of living, of being able to dance and sing, even Provencal cantilenae amatoriae, songs of love. In political terms, it would be a socialism of sufficiency and decency rather than of abundance; consequently, a project radically anti-capitalist and anti-accumulation.

Utopias? Yes, but necessary, so as not to drawn into crass materialism. They are utopias that may turn out to be inspiring reference points, after the great systemic socio-ecological crisis that will inevitably come as a reaction of the Earth herself, that can no longer endure such devastation. These cultural values will sustain a new experiment of civilization, finally a more just, spiritual and human one.
Free translation from the Spanish by
Servicios Koinonia, http://www.servicioskoinonia.org.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU..

The capitalist culture is contrary to life and happiness

Leonardo Boff5 Comentários

The demise of the theory underlying capitalism as a form of production started with Karl Marx and grew throughout the XX Century, with the emergence of socialism. To realize its main purpose of accumulating wealth in unlimited form, capitalism speeded up all available productive forces. But as a result, from the beginning capitalism paid a high price: a perverse social inequality. In ethical-political terms, it causes social injustice and the systematic growth of poverty.

In recent decades, society has also come to realize that not only social injustice exists, but also ecological injustice: the devastation of whole ecosystems, the depletion of natural resources, and, lastly, a general crisis of life and of Earth-systems. Productive forces have been transformed into destructive ones. Money is sought for its own sake. As Pope Francis warned in well known sections of the Apostolic Exhortation on the Ecology: «in capitalism it is no longer man who rules, but money and hard money. The motivation is profit… An economic system centered in god-money requires the depletion of nature in order to maintain its inherently frenetic rhythm of consumption».

Capitalism now has shown its true face: we are dealing with a system that it anti-human life and anti-natural life. And we face a dilemma: either we change or we risk our own destruction, as the Earthcharter warns.

Nevertheless, capitalism persists as the dominant system around the world, under the name of neo-liberal market macro-economy. On what do its permanence and persistence rest? In my opinion, they rest in the culture of capital. The culture of capital is more than a mode of production. As a culture, it embodies a way of living, of production, of consumption, of relating to nature and human beings, a way of creating a system that manages to constantly reproduce itself, regardless of the culture where it is installed. It has created a mentality, a form of exercising power and an ethical code. As Fabio Konder Comparato emphasized in his book, A civilização capitalista, (Saraiva, 2014), that deserves to be studied: «Capitalism is history’s first world civilization» (page 19). Capitalism proudly affirms: «there is no alternative».

Let us quickly review some of its characteristics: the end goal of life is to accumulate material goods through unlimited growth produced by limitless exploitation of all natural resources, by marketing everything and by financial speculation, all realized with the least possible investment, seeking to obtain the greatest possible profit, through efficiency, and within the shortest possible time. The motor is competence, stimulated by commercial publicity; the final beneficiary is the individual; the promise is happiness in a purely crass materialistic context.

To this end, capitalism takes over the whole lifetime of the human being, leaving no space for gratuitous activities, for fraternal coexistence among persons and with nature, for love, for expressing solidarity and experiencing the joy of life through simply living. Since those realities are not important to the culture of capital, but are the realities that make happiness possible, capitalism destroys the conditions ncessary for that which it proposes: happiness. And thus, capitalism is not only against life, but also against happiness.

As can be deduced, these ideals are not properly what are most needed for the ephemeral and only time we have for our life on this small planet. The human being is hungry not only for bread and wealth; the human being also carries other hungers, such as for communication, enchantment, loving passion, beauty, and art, and the hunger for transcendence, among many others.

But why does the culture of capital appear so persistently? I would say without hesitation that even though it does so in a distorted form, it persists because the culture of capital realizes one of the essential dimensions of human existence: the need for self affirmation, for strengthening the ego. Otherwise, it would not subsist and would be absorbed by other dimensions, or would disappear.

Biologists and even cosmologists (let’s just mention Brian Swimme, one of the finest) teach us that in all beings of the universe, especially in the human being, two forces prevail that coexist in tension with each other. One is the individual’s will to be, to persist and continue within the process of life; for which the individual must self affirm and fortify his identity, his “ego”. The other force is of integration in a greater whole, within the species, of which the individual is a representative, forming networks and systems of relationships, outside of which no one can subsist.

The first force revolves around the ego and the individual and creates individualism. The second is based in the species, the “us”, and fosters community and society. The first is the basis of capitalism, the second, of socialism.

Where is the genius of capitalism found? In the exacerbation of the ego to the maximum possible extent, of the individual and of self-affirmation, neglecting the greater whole, integration and the “we”. In this way it has thrown off balance all of human existence, due to the excess of one force, ignoring the other.

In this natural fact resides the force perpetuating the culture of capitalism, because it is founded on something that is correct, but accomplished in a disproportionately unilateral and pathological form.

How can we overcome this situation, that comes to us from centuries long past? Fundamentally, by recovering the equilibrium of the two natural forces that form our reality. Perhaps an endless democracy would be the institution that does justice simultaneously to the individual (the “ego”), but within a greater whole, (“we”, society), of which the “ego” is a part. We will return to this theme in the future.
Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar,
done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.