Sunday, April 15, 2012
Economics do not define who we are (#1171)
Economics does, in many ways, define what we allow ourselves to become. There is a big difference between who and what. Who is the generalized nature of humanity. We have senses, we can think, imagine, we are able to survive as a rule and we care for each other and other species as well. When we focus less on who we are and instead allow the what we become scenario to dominate, it is then that we have allowed ourselves to be swept up in a dynamic that literally strips of us our humanity and replaces it with an illusion and attraction of being more special than others. An ego trip, if you will. Often we we are guided by the thought that what we have become is destined and that the proof of that destiny is that it happens to us and not to many others. We were some how ordained by fate to be of "nobler" status because of our ability to proceed through life with little effort and great reward. I often think of the economic systems most societies use, which are the most lop-sided paradigms in not granting equal opportunity, favored over granting opportunity. That in itself is the beginning of the destruction of who we are, and the growth of what we allow ourselves to become. There are a few examples of exceptions, like in any equation of life circumstances, that defy the rule but only on the surface. Tactics that are used to keep ourselves from being who we are, sometimes are used to allow for some to get through and defy the rule of opportunity granted. Yet, as a few do survive into an economic system that favors us losing our humanity, the rest of us are swallowed up into a gray morass of inequality. We who are still who we are have at least the comfort of truly being human, yet is that the hallmark of a society that calls itself civilized? When will we allow the economics of our natures to be the rule and expose the brutal inequality of economics as the exception. Soon I hope!