added per request of Beth 10/30/17
This page is for everyone to work with. Please add at least one solution for every problem you add. You may also add your solutions to those of someone else, or offer a new, improved version of an existing solution: Solution #2. Or, Problem Modified: may be added to better state a given problem.
Capitalism is a construction which manifests some of the worst characteristics of human nature, or perhaps it is better to say our animal nature. It is an organized form of aggression, accumulation and power of a few over the many. This organization is largely supported by the many despite its disadvantages because it provides a sense of safety and leadership thus relieving the many of the need to think and plan and solve problems. The system persists as long as it provides essential needs and a sense of 'someone at the wheel'. That is now missing.
People must become more willing to take responsibility and work together. We tend to work within small groups where we feel familiar: family, friends, colleagues who share some of our interests. While it should not be necessary to abandon this behavior, we need to expand our view to include those who have different habits and beliefs. This is something humans do to some extent when they do not feel threatened. But currently we all feel threatened, and identify others as the enemy.
We could theoretically feed all 7 billion plus people on the planet, but if all of those people are using resources such as fossil fuels and forests and creating plastics and other pollutants at the 2017 rate in “first world” countries, we have no hope of averting catastrophe. Since people who enjoy the first world way of life are extremely reluctant to give up their conveniences and pleasures, one solution would be to greatly reduce the population on the planet. The question is how to do that in a way that respects the rights of all peoples.
From the Huffington Post:
Ecologists explain that the collapse in global biodiversity is linked to overpopulation. China, Mexico and Brazil have been singled out as extreme cases of species loss. Brazil’s population grew four fold during the past sixty years; little wonder the Amazon is feeling the pressure. Mexico and China’s growth is comparable. Israel offers a microcosm of the global situation: A meeting point of three continents, at the middle of the twentieth century, this tiny country was still home to an astonishing assemblage of mammals, birds and reptiles. That’s because in 1949 there were one million people living in Israel. Today there are eight million. The equation is simple: more people means less wildlife. Accordingly, about a third of the country’s 115 indigenous mammal species today are either endangered or critically endangered. The amphibian population is almost entirely extirpated.
Education regarding the problems of human overpopulation. Free clinics for family planning information and birth control. For developing countries: improved access to good nutrition, housing and health care. (This in itself is a big problem to be discussed in the context of developing a world wide democracy.)
Problem: Unequal distribution of wealth
It's fruitless to ask the wealthy to give up most of what they have. They think they have earned it and that they deserve it.
Stop paying taxes. That's asking a lot of one person, but if millions did it together, hey, they can't put us all in jail. Not if we don't build them. Not if we don't work in them. We need to talk to each other.
Stop buying the products we don't need. Stop putting our hard earned money into banks which pay low to no interest. Build our own money system. We need to talk to each other.
Problem: People are all different.
This is both a problem and part of the solution. We are where we are because we pay lip service to the importance of individuality, but we don't really value it. We do not take full advantage of what everyone has to offer. We tend to limit our admiration to those who “succeed” in the system, and this despite the fact that their success often means our loss.
Likewise, we do not identify those who are destructive to society and to each of us personally. I have thought a lot about this since I have had close friends and family members whom I consider to have antisocial character structure. The Sociopath Nest Door by Martha Stout is a good read for opening one's perspective. She says that 4% of the population fits the criteria. That's one in 25 people that you know. I would suggest it ranges from Bill Cosby to Bernie Madoff. They are smart, charming and completely without conscience. We love them. We trust them. We follow their lead. We vote for them.
This is one aspect of the larger problem of how and why we got to the edge of the precipice over which we now peer.
Firstly we have to be willing to recognize the problem. Then we have to be on the alert. We need to appreciate our own ideas and talents, even when they don't make us rich or famous. And we need to question the motives of anyone who is charming and pleasing to be around. We have to stop contracting-out our judgements, just as we must stop voting for other people to represent us. They never will.
But as well, we need to listen to people who express different opinions and desires. Even very different ones. Because somehow we have to all live together.