Imagine there’s no countries, it isn’t hard to do, nothing to kill or die for, and no religion too.
How did countries come about? Originally we were individuals, then loose groupings, then tribes. The people who grouped us into countries were Kings, or Priests, or Landowners, all looking for ways to legitimise their established advantages. It enabled laws (initially on things like slavery and surfdom), taxes and tithes, trade, and borders – to keep people in, and to keep people out.
Now we need laws, and taxes. And we benefit from trade. But most of the rest of that list only do harm to development. And what if the good bits – laws, taxes and trade – could be managed within a single global country? Why not?
The start of this line of thinking was to look at the mess democracy is currently making. Democracy itself is not the problem – indeed it seems better than other systems – but we have allowed it to become misused.
A lot of this is about language, and the use of language to pursue tribal goals (for the modern day Kings of course). Democracy becomes associated with freedom. What sort of freedom? In some countries freedom becomes associated with God, a God who somehow is on our side.
I’m sorry to be blunt, but this is almost akin to fascism. Freedom is a relative concept, applicable only to insiders and within defined boundaries. How can we espouse freedom when we invade others, build fences, lock up so many citizens, allow an explosion of inequality, and allow our establishment to peddle lies?
Good concepts have been taken over for tribal ends here. It was interesting this week to read that Egyptians are not hankering for democracy and freedom, but for dignity and justice. These are better goals, and the system should be shaped to deliver those goals, rather than be the goal itself.
So what system best delivers dignity and justice? I think I would add a third goal, something about development - a sustainable positive evolution of living standards. That is a bit wordy, but it covers things like health (eg. infant mortality) and other such progress.
Let us learn from other systems that have lasted to course. Families can be functional or dysfunctional, but their strength is their compact self-support mechanism. A lot of our dignity comes from our family, at least when it works well. Families distribute blessings with some justice, and protect the weak.
Churches have perpetrated some of the worst evils on the world over the centuries. But, at their heart and when well-run, they promote values supporting dignity and justice. They help our sense of belonging, distribute blessings, and make us humble.
Companies allow development through innovation. They rape the world’s natural resources and have little sense of sustainability, and, unchecked, can lead to terrible inequality. Yet I would argue the best run companies do more good than harm. And we know that families, Churches and governments would have struggled to give us the internet or modern medicines. So let us embrace them.
So what about countries? Unlike companies, they rarely evolve. Few people change country, few countries perish or merge. Unlike families, their system of redistribution is inefficient, and, unlike Churches, their values are almost always tribal. If you doubt that, just look at David Cameron this week, defending a national interest over a greater good, and a national interest based on a parasitic sector of the economy driving shameful inequality, no less.
Elsewhere, we have Belgium that took 500 days to form a government, Greece and Italy where bankers have taken over, a USA where Gingrich might become president. And let us not just knock the West. Russia, DRC, or Venezuela or hardly role models. China has at least managed the macro-economics a bit better, but at the expense of dignity and justice.
No, countries, you are the weakest link, goodbye. Imagine what might have happened in Durban if everyone had not been constrained by tribal economic or political interests. Europe has got itself in trouble over the Euro, but let us celebrate the single market and Schengen as the wonderful drivers of dignity, justice and development that they have been.
Most of the economic mess comes from imbalances between countries. Each country tries to optimise its own affairs, and it is the structural imbalances that have resulted that led to the system clogging up. A single currency and central bank, like the Euro but backed up by a fiscal framework, could respond as required. Global austerity would never be needed. Globally, we could also have a balance sheet as well as a current account, with scarce assets valued, and, for example, a carbon price.
What I would propose is a global governance for global issues, run by technocrats using universal principles. We need one currency, one central bank, one monetary and fiscal framework, one energy framework, one supreme court and so on. There would be free movement for all, a single competition framework for business, and no trade restrictions. Then, within that framework only, allow communities to form and run their affairs using democracy, with powers to raise taxes. Using modern technology, we could change our chosen teams easily, thereby facilitating good competition. Things like health and education implementation, rubbish collection, police and fire and so on could all be managed very locally.
Great changes like this have traditionally only followed wars. This morning I looked up the visionary fourteen points of US president Woodrow Wilson in 1918, which sadly became watered down by inter-country rivalry. In the late 1940’s, we did a bit better, with some sort of UN, a global declaration of human rights and the Marshall plan. Sadly, as always happens, the existence of countries has meant we have backtracked from there ever since.
So there is little chance of a such a change without another war. The Economist this week had a chilling comparison of the current global economy and policies to the 1930’s. Hopefully, this one won’t need a war to sort out. But we can dream, like Lennon. Next exercise will be to dream up fourteen points for today, as a sort of global charter
No comments:
Post a Comment