When future archeologists/anthropologists sift through our remains they will refer to it’s location as the Styrofoam and plastic layer, one laced with a deadly concoction of toxins.
That may be a fitting designation but a sad legacy to leave behind.
There seems to be some attitude that science will catch up-that it will provide the answers to solve the problems they have helped to create and which we all must face and endure.
I fail to see any wisdom in this as science IS playing catch up and at the same time creating new problems-so I ask, how does that work?
Humanity has existed for millennia, and yet it is only within the context of a mere speck of that time that we have befouled everything to the extent that our very survival is threatened-would any call that progress, or civilized?
So called civilization has produced the greatest of wars and the most horrific of weapons-it has routinely destroyed entire cultures and subjugated others under the guise of bringing
religion, knowledge, and cultural advancement. But the core of it has always been about greed, resources, and power.
Humanity has survived all this, as well as ice ages and devastating plagues long before there was such a thing as modern science, or modern systems of government-now the challenge is to survive what science and it’s bedfellows government and technology have created- and it is the greatest challenge we have faced to date.
I am reminded of concerns leading up the initial test of the bomb-the fear that it could ignite the atmosphere and incinerate the earth, and yet such concerns paled in the
unfettered quest for “knowledge” and what was assumed the power it would bring-a quest that has apparently always considered the welfare of humankind to be of secondary
importance- a risk worth taking.
Some would argue that an increased “comfort” level and longevity balance the scales-but in many instances these are directly associated with status and finances, and that will
increasingly become the way of it as we see all too clearly presently.
So an argument is made that population challenges well being, there’s some truth to that but it is related to the approach we take-whether an emphasis is placed on sustainability,
education, or the the “benefits” of every man for himself and eugenics.
There is enough wealth existing in the hands of the few to radically alter the life of all people-to assist them in developing sustainable agriculture and infrastructure. Monies spent on wars and armaments could if redirected to such an effort as well and have a profound impact.
Yet we know this will never be the way of it based on greed, religion, and the thirst for power.
In my opinion there should be a reset regarding all debt, large and small. It should be declared null and void on a global basis and all start anew.
A radical concept for many but one I believe that has serious merit when examined- of course banks, corps, and their crony economists would squeal in denial and offer up all manner of doomsday scenarios, but I believe it is a simple and workable solution.
A person, a nation, has X number of dollars and debt far in excess of that, do the math, you remove the present debt and still have the same amount of money. It could lead to a boom in housing, jobs, start up small business, and consumer spending.
In discussing this with others some have said it is a communist or socialist approach-I have to kind of laugh at that as I think it is neither, more a commonsense one, and point out that being a member of a capitalist society has it’s own pitfalls.
If I had to assign myself some political designation I think it would be equalist-if such a word exists-as I desire only a level playing field for all people, equity and equality. Not the separate but equal fallacy of past Supreme Court rulings and the reality of today, but real equality.
If that were the way of it we would solve many problems and all things would be placed in their proper perspective.