Mettere in discussione, da profani, il sistema economico vigente significa innanzitutto comprendere dove ci ha portati.
1. The current economy is very violent towards the environment: pollution and waste produces, destroys biodiversity, is dissipative, it uses the common resources regardless of their natural life and ignores the imperative to allow these resources to future generations.
2. is violent towards the peoples of the South: a large part does not take into account the most basic human rights such as the right to food, water, education, work in decent conditions, the just reward for their work , the ability to express dissent.
3. is pathogenic and often alienating to the people in the wealthy West con la loro adesione acritica a tale modello economico alimentano l'ingranaggio stritolante dello sviluppo senza limiti in un mondo finito. Pena l'esclusione sociale e la perdita di ruolo.
L'economia attuale è violenta dunque anche in casa nostra, in termini di cronica mancanza di tempo, di insoddisfazione diffusa, di degenerazione dei rapporti, di nevrosi quotidiane, di psicosi e di sociopatie che si esprimono con varie modalità, e sempre con una mortifera mancanza di senso.
Le tendenze drogastiche di una società che non accetta il limite si scontano inoltre con l'incalzare di generazioni che fanno delle droghe il loro spavaldo, onnipotente vessillo.
children, including our own, an economy of violence.
At the macro level, globalization of the market increasingly sees the intertwining of economic interests involving multinational corporations, governments of major powers, linked to local authorities in developing countries, Handbags, World Bank and local banks, organizations for trade, and the result is a tangle of wires that we are unaware, with plans discussed above our heads, lucidly constructed parallel to the table top or summit of the great promise and great commitment. The actors know, how did Bush or simply proclaiming agendolo such as governments and the good old Europe, which does not do anything that might harm their economy.
In Italy, for example, we are not much to quibble whether this or that bank within the arms trade, as our democratic republic houses and funds, directly or indirectly, wars, weapons factories near and far, present or future. We cringe even if some of the most important Italian companies open offshore companies in countries "on tax benefit, or outsource to companies who in turn use cheap labor, with no guarantee of dignity for the last links of the chain.
The important thing is to grow the GDP.
Europe continues to lower the alert level against GMOs and against the use of chemicals in agriculture. To increase GDP do not hesitate to create conditions more favorable to humans and the environment. In Italy there are calls from various parts of the increase in weekly working hours. If the GDP grows it can withstand even the decay of relationships. Indeed, in a way that feeds the uncomfortable business-disease-prevention therapy.
Ivan Illich, speaking of health professionals (including psychologists, ed) clearly showed this phenomenon, calling iatrogenesis social, which "occurs when the medical bureaucracy creates ill-health by increasing stress, multiplying dependency ratios that make inabili, generando nuovi bisogni dolorosi, abbassando i livelli di sopportazione del disagio o del dolore, riducendo il margine di tolleranza che si usa concedere all'individuo che soffre (...) o quando il soffrire, il piangere e il guarire al di fuori del ruolo di paziente sono classificati come una forma di devianza” (I. Illich, Nemesi medica. L'espropiazione della salute, Boroli ed., pag. 48).
Iatrogenesi, ossessione per la crescita, alienazione, ingiustizia a livello sociale, conflitti intra e inter comunità fomentano un circolo vizioso, e molti si chiedono se sia ancora possibile costruire un'altra economia. “La misura in cui saremo in grado di affrontare l'era della globalizzazione (e perhaps the very possibility of knowing how to deal with) will depend on how we respond ethically to the idea that we live in one world. For the rich nations not to take a global ethical viewpoint has long been seriously wrong from the moral point of view. Now is also in the long term, a danger to their safety "(P. Singer, One World, cit., P.169).
(From CarmelaLongo, for a solidarity economy, milkweed of the third millennium, 2008)
0 comments:
Post a Comment