HOW REAL IS THE POSSIBILITY FOR THE SUBSTANTIAL SOCIAL CHANGE

Environment

Support this proposal

Adapt this proposal

17 May 2010

Location: Serbia

The situation concerning the social, economic system, and democracy in general seems to get more and more serious every month. In spite of that, there seems to be no viable solutions on the horizon.
No such solutions which could deliver truly functional changes, and changes which could both inspire the good part of humanity, and, in the same time would not lead to intensification of future clashes and struggles within humanity.

Whoever thinks of the problems involved - including environmental hazards- and also the lack of spiritual values, risks either to be labeled as idealist, or to fall back to the old fashioned Socialism - Capitalism chasm. The real problem is that the most of the words have lost their original meanings as the tools for true thinking, and have become the catch phrases emptied of the most essential ingredients which would be taken as the healthy food for thoughts.

First of all, there is no doubt, that we are standing today in front of the fully developed World Economy.

In the face of that World Economy all local State economies have the functions analogue to the functions of the cells in an organism. There is very limited potential for healthy growth here, but there is a lot of possibility for healthy redistribution of what is already being produced, and, what is being produced is always the fruit of the combination of applied intelligence on working the Naturural resources.

In order to do what we should – we must learn to work willingly and freely for the others in an associative manner, truly caring for each other, because - anyway - we get what we need from the work of the others.
Today the division of labor is present almost everywhere, no one works only for him/herself.

No man/woman is an island!

Money is nothing but a tool which helps the exchange, and that is for the economy like blood circulation for an living organism.

Money does not have to be produced by the states or banks, but could be anything that people can reach the agreement to call the money, and which would stand for certain value.
So, the beans could be the money, for example, if it is so decided.
Today, it is obvious that money has many hidden properties in it which do not rightfully belong there. Mainly its value is being constantly falsified for the benefit of certain particular interests, and of course it is not being done transparently. The true price of the commodities is mostly hidden. The true price should always be decided in living communication between the producers, distributors, and consumers.

Without this relationship being made lively and healthy, we have no healthy future, nor what is produced shell be fully consumed, or, – to put it more precisely – there would be no mechanisms to produce what people truly need to consume.

More and more people realise that very significant change in the atttudes and values prevalent in modern society is urgent. Many people have hope in high spiritual values of unselfishness stemming from the great world religions, like Buddhism, Christianity and Islam, for example.

There is also the beautiful, ever growing field of Free Spirituality, which has enriched lives of so many people presently. But we can not hope that this Spirituality would become truly effective if we do not guard attentively its freedom.

That means that we cannot allow economic and corporative particular interests of those who have the economic power today to decide what and how should be taught in our Schools and Universities. Also, our Science and investigations should not be financed by those particular interest players, so called «stakeholders», which have amassed the fortune.

To put it simply the Economic and Spiritual part of the society should engage reasonable independence in following their particular paths. Spiritual life and production has to be free, but the economy must not be free in the same sense. The guiding principle for the economy should be the common welfare.

The true democracy must be restored and inpowered in order to be able to achieve this, and it is also necessary for controling this process in the best way. For the democracy it is important that all people should be considered equal in their human rights, which involve right to be informed and to make effective decisions concerning their lives and common welfare.

So, everyone's voice should be heared and considered in the matters that concern everybody's interest in society. This is where majority should rule without exception.

So, basically we have three types of making decisions or governing within society. Majority rules in political sphere, Freedom for everybody in spiritual sphere, where majority should not interfere, and Associative approach in economic sphere where people should allow the prices to be freely formed on the market place where producers, distributors and consumers should equally have their qualified opinion based on their particular economic position.

So, does it look like Socialism or like Capitalism?

Or, maybe it has the good sides of both? Actually, the idea I have just presented is not entirely new. It has been developed between 1917 and 1922 in the aftermath of the World War I by the Austrian Philosopher Dr. Rudolf Steiner.

It is the idea of Social Threefolding or Threefold Social Order.

The same man, Dr. Rudolf Steiner, has created and initiated, now wide spread, Waldorf education, and he is recognized nowadays as the initiator of Biodynamic agriculture which is the most ecological and sound way of working the Land today.

He thought that the modern society would not allow to be organized differently, and that, by its inherent nature, it requieres to be organized in this Three Fold manner, unless it should sink into dictatorship and decadence.

Some people say that Steiner believed that it would not be possible to introduce the idea of Social Threefolding effectively before the beginning of 21 century. Steiner seemed to believe that by the beginning of 21 century economical and social crisis would call for the introducing of these social reforms urgently.

These days, many excellent people like the Dalai Lama, for example, and many others from different fields of life are exploring the possibilities for better future. There are some refreshed attempts to extort some positive fruits from Marxist theory.

However, besides some valuable insights, there are a few impotant ideas inherent in Marxist worldview which are not entirely friendly to the freedom of the individual, and which have been duly described and criticised by its opponents.

I think it is important to learn all the possibilities which are in front of us, if we want to take the action.

Who knows, the future might really be better than we can imagine today?

If we are really attemting to mend our society, and to help our planet and all the life on it, including ourselves, I think that it is much better not to rely on such concepts as class struggle and simmilar, but it is far more desirable to find out how we can improve without necessary sinking into violence or any kind of warfare. We have had enough of that kind of «progress» in the 20th century, already.

Extra reading: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17826