The implications for defining the boundaries of what constitutes minimal existence are mind-boggling. The reaction of market manipulators to anything that remotely even suggests such a radical change in social direction is even more mind-boggling. The pissing and sniffing matches where democratic principles are still held sacred would be off the scale; the violence in countries more totalitarian than not would be merciless. I’m starting to ask the questions, is it time to consider such a struggle worth it? Is this the new freedom flag to fly?
I’m not sure what constitutes minimal, reasonable accepted existence: a warm safe place to sleep, one healthy meal a day, free education and the ability to get to it, meaningful work and the health mechanisms in place to maintain the job? How does a socio-economic cohesion balance the need to sustain at least a minimal existence for all at the levels they expect or perceive as a right, and still allow those with the drive and abilities to thrive with applicable perks at the levels they expect or perceive as a right? The right to pursue happiness and what just does defines happiness. In that respect, no system is perfect, and thus my problem with political ideology.
I know our planet is in for a far worse time before it gets better. I saw it in Beijing, Peru, and South Africa. I heard Al Sharpton speaking last night on Democracy Now! He made an interesting statement that poor, racially segregated people will “shut up” when they receive and feel the dignity of justice. Until then, there will be unrest. That was the premise, not the exact quote.



0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home