I'm not the only one unhappy with economic systems based on constant growth and endlessly increasing exploitation of finite resources -- systems that concentrate wealth in the hands of a few while so many people struggle.
Since Sept. 17, protests have spread from New York to a growing number of cities across the United States, Europe, and Canada, in a movement dubbed "Occupy Wall Street." The protesters' aims aren't always clear; in some case they seem downright incoherent or absurd -- such as calls for open border policies and increased trade tariffs at the same time.
It's interesting that those credited with spurring the movement did so with a single question: "What is our one demand?" The question was first posed in my hometown of Vancouver by Adbusters magazine. Editor Kalle Lasn said the campaign was launched as an invitation to act more than an attempt to get an answer. Focusing on a single demand may or may not be a useful exercise, but the conversation itself is necessary. Thanks to the attention these protests are generating, union leaders, students, workers, and others have a public forum to raise questions about our current economic systems.
Why have governments spent trillions of dollars in taxpayers' money to bail out financial institutions, many of which fought any notion of government regulation or social assistance, while doing nothing for people who had life savings wiped out or lost homes through foreclosure? And why have governments not at least demanded that the institutions demonstrate some ecological and social responsibility in return?
Why do developed nations still give tax breaks to the wealthiest few while children go hungry and working people and the unemployed see wages, benefits, and opportunities dwindle -- and while infrastructure crumbles and access to good health care and education diminishes?
Why are we rapidly exploiting finite resources and destroying precious natural systems for the sake of short-term profit and unsustainable economic growth? What will we do when oil runs out or becomes too difficult or expensive to extract if we haven't taken the time to reduce our demands for energy and shift to cleaner sources?
Why does our economic system place a higher value on disposable and often unnecessary goods and services than on the things we really need to survive and be healthy, like clean air, clean water, and productive soil? Sure, there's some contradiction in protesters carrying iPhones while railing against the consumer system. But this is not just about making personal changes and sacrifices; it's about questioning our place on this planet.
In less than a century, the human population has grown exponentially, from 1.5 to seven billion. That's been matched by rapid growth in technology and products, resource exploitation, and knowledge. The pace and manner of development have led to a reliance on fossil fuels, to the extent that much of our infrastructure supports products such as cars and their fuels to keep the cycle of profits and wealth concentration going. Our current economic systems are relatively new -- methods we've devised both to deal with the challenge of production and distribution for rapidly expanding populations and to exploit the opportunities.
It may seem like there's no hope for change, but we have to remember that most of these developments are recent, and that humans are capable of innovation, creativity, and foresight. Despite considerable opposition, most countries recognized at some point that abolishing slavery had goals that transcended economic considerations, such as enhancing human rights and dignity -- and it didn't destroy the economy in the end, as supporters of slavery feared.
I don't know if the Occupy Wall Street protests will lead to anything. Surely there will be backlash. And although I wouldn't compare these protests to those taking place in the Middle East, they all show that when people have had enough of inequality, of the negative and destructive consequences of decisions made by people in power, we have a responsibility to come together and speak out.
The course of human history is constantly changing. It's up to all of us to join the conversation to help steer it to a better path than the one we are on. Maybe our one demand should be of ourselves: Care enough to do something.
Dr. David Suzuki is a scientist, broadcaster, author, and co-founder of the David Suzuki Foundation. Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation editorial and communications specialist Ian Hanington.
Learn more at www.davidsuzuki.org.
Occupy Wall Street | NYC Protest for American Revolution
Occupy Wall Street - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Occupy Wall Street : Pictures, Videos, Breaking News
Occupy Wall Street | September 17th | #OCCUPYWALLSTREET ...
Wonkbook: What does 'Occupy Wall Street' want? - The Washington ...
When I was young, people could count on the government if they needed help. Now people have to protect themselves from their government. Political power is now power over the direction of public money, instead governing for the people.
Frankly, Mr.Suzuki, I believe the opportunities are too lucrative for the corporate and financial elders to not have their own horse in the race. I think true democracy is gone. And it's not coming back.
I want to start by saying that I have also had a job since I was 14, I have paid my way as much as anyone else, I paid my breaking my back when I was young and I have a decent paying job today, but it isn't all about me. You seem happy with the table scraps, but for a lot of us we see our countries great wealth going to a select few. Wealth inequality in this country (Canada) has grown faster than in the US over the last 20 years because a system has been put in place that ensures that the concerntrations of wealth are ensured, so when the economy takes a turn for the worse the losses only come from the bottom. That is you and me! sister! Wake up and smell the crude. The Captain isn't going down with the ship, he gets the only life boat and is rowing to another ship close by as the women and children drown (while you thank them for the cool swim... "hey, they didn't invent sharks! Don't blame the captain!").
This isn't about giving lazy people handouts, it's about NOT giving greedy people handouts. Nobody wants your meager wages, they want the great wealth that is accumulating in this country to be shared (increasing your meager wages FYI), because oil companies don't make oil, they take it from our lands, banks don't make money, they squeeze it from our savings.
I did not have that luxury growing back in the former Soviet Union where your dream of equality was implemented pragmatically. If you think that all people are equal, that they are not. Some of us smarter, quicker, less lazy and they deserve make more, even much more money than you (not you particularly, it's a figure of speech). You want fairness, go to North Korea, you'll find it there. The way to hell is paved with good intentions...sorry, but it's true. Don't try to find all answers in conspiracy theories which now available to everyone who has a connection. Any jerk, pen-pusher now has the place to be published and read. Re-distribution of wealth was the 1st motto of Russia, Chinese, Cambodia, North Korea, etc. revolutions. You know probably were did it lead. Hope you got my point, nothing personal.
The proper thing to have done would be bankrupt the badly managed banks, with the government running them as trustee. The bank's shareholders lose their investment, bond holders will probably take a loss, possibly even a total loss, depositors will be protected up to the CDIC or FDIC limits. The bad debt would be written off and the bank sold to new owners. The greedy management is unemployed, and we have a new bank with a clean balance sheet.
And the taxpayer is on the hook for little, if any, of the cost.
Instead, with a bailout, we have the same crooks running the same banks and playing the same risky games with other peoples money - secure in the knowledge that if they screw up again they can count on the government to clean up their mess. That is insane!
This concept of bailing out banks is nothing more than another example of money buying government policy. In other words, the bankers didn't want to be on the short end of a bankruptcy, so they successfully lobbied government to have the taxpayer bear the cost of their risky bad management. We do need a banking system, but we really don't need these particular badly managed banks or their greedy management.
As for the us high infant mortality rate vs other western countries who use similar vacines, the reason is much more likely a combination of economic and social factors rather than US babies being over vacinated to death. healthcare not being universal and eben if it is dont you still end up paying some? (a retired teacher and her husband a former ww2 and Vietnam war vet. she hurt her knee and had a minor "surgury" they didnt even cut her or anything. and she still had to pay 600 despite being a teacher and him a vet. so when people say that all those poor people and others are draining it through their overexpensive overspending programs they are liars. i prefer to use the statisticals that back this up and agree, recent statistics on this sort of thing, as wlel as income gaps is quite enlightening to any of the ignorant to say the situation is otherwise.. this is something we get free in every other developed country the fact the US doesnt ahve healthcare is an abomination
And knows about what?
Maxime Bernier was president of the Montreal Economic Institute before he became a Conservative Cabinet Minister (and was then turfed for leaving secret documents at his girlfriend's house). Another president, Tasha Kheirridin, moved on to the Fraser Institute. So his "policy" isn't a call for union financial transparency; it's part of the organized right-wing attack on all unions. It's an attempt to make it nigh impossible for any party that does not serve the interests of corporations to raise enough funds to mount a political challenge. The collusion between the institute's ideological biases and Harper Conservative's ideologically driven pre-emptive attacks on worker's right to strike' seem crystal clear.
In one word, Justice!
Whatever our solutions are to Peak Oil, global warming, oceanic pollution, etc. we are certain that they will not only work, they will work with more people making each problem worse.
To suggest that Canada should be exempt from such protests is ludicrous, one must only look to the environmental disaster in Alberta to realize that money talks or actually shouts here too.
I agree with Dr Suzuki, get off your butt and do something or shut up...