A Review of the Considerations that Determine a Choice of Political Economy

Sustainability

Sustainability is the first consideration in choosing a political economy.  It is this alone that disqualifies capitalism and other market systems.  We have shown that market systems require economic growth, whereas what is needed in the United States is market shrinkage or degrowth initially until whatever sized economy is taken to be optimal is reached after which a steady-state economy seems to be most desirable.  To accommodate a few people who imagine that an economy can grow in perpetuity without encountering intolerable scarcity and other undesirable conditions it is necessary to prove that this is impossible.

The Defects of Capitalism: My List

Thus, we see that I was attracted to the moral basis of dematerialism; and, in the beginning, I did not realize that dematerialism might be sustainable whereas other political systems were not.

 

Axiomatic Morality

There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so. – Shakespearce's Hamlet

Nietzsche came to this sentiment rather late in the day and Mary Baker Eddy gave it second place on her Frontispiece in Science and Health; but, the authorities are not needed, as one can verify the truth of it with a little reflection.  However, when I began writing On the Preservation of Species, I was not the devout atheist I have become. I was still an agnostic but an agnostic with a decidedly Christian bias. I did not notice the Christian bias even as I was writing disparaging papers to convince someone, undoubtedly myself, that Christianity could not be true – even though “On the Separation of Church and State and the Case Against Christianity and Other Improper Religions” began as a multipart serial piece in The Truthseeker until after two or three installments the editorial staff realized I was anti-Capitalist as well as anti-Christian and shut me down. Nevertheless, statements like “Human nature is inherently good and generous.  The evil deeds done by humans come from the defects in society” betray my heretical Christian bias and the idea that I could distinguish “good” and “evil”, despite Church doctine. Thus, at that time, I may have been an agnostic; but, I was a Christian agnostic on his way to becoming a Christian atheist, as strange as that sounds. Let us say that I am beginning to overcome my Christian bias with great difficulty. I doubt that I shall ever come to despise or disparage The Sermon on the Mount.

Pronouncements of moral judgments are termed “normative”.  Laws, then, are made for the convenience of the community and to discourage nuisances. In my philosophy, I ask that they be few in number, readily derivable from a minimal set, and satisfy the three criteria: reasonableness, utility, and beauty as discussed ad infinitum.in.Chapter 3.of.On the Preservation of Species. The not-quite-independent set of minimal principles to which I subscribe can be rendered in slang as follows: (1) live and let live, (2) tell the truth to those who have a right to know it (Hemingway, Green Hills of Africa), and (3) protect the environment. These and their corollaries deserve a great deal of elucidation and they get it in Chapter 3 (above) and throughout my papers and book. For example, I have tried very hard to show that precept number one demands economic equality.

One if the reasons for the necessity of economic growth given by Delaney was the need for workers to expect to be better off in successive years despite the rich growing richer. This cannot be true if the economy can no longer grow. After the limit to growth has been reached economic equality is necessary to achieve the stability previously achieved by growth. In particular, when unlimited acquisition is possible, the superior players of Money Games will end up with practically all of the money as in the popular game of Monopoly in which one player ends up with everything. Then, we shall have returned to Feudalism, which we didn't like when we had it. In this fashion the Economic Equality Corollary to the Freedom Axiom is validated. It is the moral choice because its omission is inconvenient – to say the least.

Finally, I believe we should avail ourselves of well-defined physical quantities as much as possible in stating the requirements of the law. In cases, where no judgment can be made based on first principles, we should defer to equality, e. g., the division of residential property or shares in the sustainable social dividend (the net production of useful goods and services by the community).

Dematerialism Satisfies Moral Requirements and Is Sustainable

Thus, dematerialism satisfies moral imperatives that we might adopt because of an inspired reading of the Sermon on the Mount, a clear appraisal of the needs of the community, and an understanding of what convenience amounts to for an entire community. I, for my part,¹ test every public policy against the three criterea discussed in Chapter 3 Toward Axiomatic Morality of On the Preservation of Species, namely, reasonableness, utility, and beauty. Nevertheless, every political economy upon which we hope to build a lasting civilization must a fortiori be sustainable.