Distributism la puterea a treia

Dincolo de capitalismul de stat (socialism) si capitalismul corporatist (liberalism) exista capitalismul civic, popular (distributism).

Dr. Ovidiu Hurduzeu – O pledoarie pentru competenţă, distributism şi economie civică:

Economia civică nu poate fi impusă „de sus“, precum modelul neoliberal al „băieţilor de la Chicago“ sau politicile etatiste de sorginte socialistă. Sub radar, fără să se ceară voie de la Bucureşti sau Bruxelles, modelul distributist al economiei civice a început deja să prindă contur.

Cu aceasta ocazie vreau sa ii transmit unui oarecare „Karenin” anonim ce bantuie pe acest blog ca distributismul se opune centralizarii tehnologice si economice a puterii. Dupa cum noteaza Alexandru Racu in eseul intitulat Transumanismul – spre o noua utopie a ororii (Rost p. 48-56), neoliberalismul „elitei” (Patapievici, Volo Tismaneanu, Baconski, Neamtu, Aligica, Cartarescu, etc), operand in termeni darwinisti de „competitie” – nu cooperare – , conduce direct la transumanism.

Acest lucru se observa si din „profestiile” nihiliste / conspirative ale profesorului Nicholas Boyle de la Cambridge: ‘World could be plunged into crisis in 2014’: Cambridge expert predicts ‘a great event’ will determine course of the century.

Ce trebuie observat din ce spune Boyle e ca „the U.S. will become the key player in a series of make-or-break decisions and either condemn us to a century of violence and poverty, or usher in a new age of global co-operation… peace is only possible if the world realises that an age of individual nation states is over and an effective system of global governance is introduced. […] The only conceivably peaceful route to that goal is through a continuation of the pax Americana.”

Ce spune Boyle e neoliberalism: sfarsitul statelor-natiune in folosul statului-corporatie (guvern mondial), pax Americana. Adica ce spune Boyle e transumanism. Despre originile transumanismului sau a dictaturii stiinifice puteti citi aici un capitol din cartea „The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship: An Examination of Epistemic Autocracy, From the 19th to the 21st Century„. De asemenea, informatii despre cine finanteaza (corporatiile) transumanismul gasiti aici si aici.

Ceea ce le scapa insa neoliberalilor e ca Pax Americana a murit, chiar daca autorul articolului cade in capcana de a exagera puterea statelor asiatice in dominatia globala:

Much of America’s decline can be attributed to its own self-defeating policies, but as the U.S. stumbles, others—notably China, India, and Russia—are rising. This shift in the global balance of power will dramatically affect international politics: the likelihood of intense great-power security competitions—and even war—will increase; the current era of globalization will end; and the post-1945 Pax Americana will be replaced by an international order that reflects the interests, values, and norms of emerging powers. […] We attempt to tame the world by exporting democracy because—we are told—democracies do not fight each other. We export our model of free-market capitalism because—we are told—states that are economically interdependent do not fight each other. We work multilaterally through international institutions because—we are told—these promote cooperation and trust among states. None of these propositions is self-evident. Indeed, there is overwhelming evidence that they are wrong. But they are illusions that “express the deepest beliefs which Americans, as a nation, hold about the world.” So we cling to the idea that our hegemony is necessary for our own and everyone else’s security. The consequence has been to contribute to the very imperial overstretch that is accelerating the United States’ decline.

Cunoscutul jurnalist de la NYTimes, David Brooks, minte lucida, a observat aceste schimbari radicale. In editorialul sau din aceasta saptamana el scrie:

These days we are transfixed by the struggle between BP and the U.S. government. This is a familiar conflict — between a multinational company trying to make a profit and the government trying to regulate the company and hold it accountable. But this conflict is really a family squabble. It takes place amid a much larger conflict, and in this larger conflict both BP and the U.S. government are on the same team. […] The rivalry between democratic capitalism and state capitalism is not like the rivalry between capitalism and communism. It is an interdependent rivalry. State capitalist enterprises invest heavily in democratic capitalist enterprises (but they tend not to invest in each other). Both sides rely on each other in interlocking trade networks.

David Brooks a mai scris si aici un text despre distributism. Si daca mai citim si Marea problema a marii finante, cam stim ce se intampla. Pana si Soros a admis: „Colapsul sistemului financiar este real”.


3 răspunsuri la „Distributism la puterea a treia

Lasă un răspuns

Completează mai jos detaliile tale sau dă clic pe un icon pentru a te autentifica:

Logo WordPress.com

Comentezi folosind contul tău WordPress.com. Dezautentificare /  Schimbă )

Fotografie Google+

Comentezi folosind contul tău Google+. Dezautentificare /  Schimbă )

Poză Twitter

Comentezi folosind contul tău Twitter. Dezautentificare /  Schimbă )

Fotografie Facebook

Comentezi folosind contul tău Facebook. Dezautentificare /  Schimbă )


Conectare la %s