History shows that not all change has been beneficial to humanity or to the integrity of the planet’s life support systems. For this reason, many desire a return to earlier and simpler times. But it has been demonstrated that any effective, large-scale, and permanent social transformation cannot be achieved through small, cooperative, and hand-tooled economies. Cooperative venture have been tried throughout history by both religious and secular interests. Most failed to achieve or sustain their goals. The reason for the failure was not human nature or greed. The primary cause was the most participants, although sincere, had little information about the factors responsible for human behaviour. Although individuals throughout history have proposed many ideal social arrangements – from Plato’s Republic to modern Utopian – no industrial nation has ever adopted an arrangement that improved the lives of the people and built a truly civilized nation. This is not difficult to understand when one considers the principles governing most social systems. Government’s principles are based on ownership and the accumulation of wealth, power, and property. Visionaries with sincere intent write and speak eloquently about the world moving forward in unity and brotherhood. Many expect a worldwide epiphany or transformational event. Others expect reason to prevail. Only a very few propose plans to achieve unity, some of which appear incomplete and pose a threat to existing institution and to national and self-interest: the architects of such plans are often classified as agitators, impractical utopians, and disrupters. The few bold attempts to achieve world unification failed because movement leaders had no real understanding of the forces shaping social evolution. Significantly, they sought solutions within the framework of the monetary system, never realizing that physical resources – not money – are what matter in the ability of a social system to sustain its people. Although money helped to eliminate old, cumbersome methods of exchange in a barter system, it is not the final answer. History shows continuing evolution and adaptation. No single answer works for all time, all people, and all problems. Our social, political, and international order is outmoded today. Outworn social institutions cannot adapt innovative technology to achieve good, nor can they overcome the in equities forced upon so many. Competition and scarcity instill an atmosphere of jealousy and mistrust among people and nations. Concepts of proprietary rights, manifested in the corporate entity and in the sovereignty of nations, inhibit the free exchange of information necessary to meet global challenges. Many people fear change and yearn to return to a simpler time of “traditional” values. Their vision is faulty. Those times were not, in fact, so good. In the first fifty years of that “simpler” time, we waged two world wars. In the intervening years a major agricultural and economic disaster sent million to soup kitchens and breadlines. If they are honest, I t is not the fantasy of the “good old days” that they wish to see realized, but more simplicity. Our problems today are enormous and global in their scope and impact. They cannot be solved by any one nation. The concept of common good is global in nature, but local in implementation. We cannot hope to backtrack to traditional values which no longer apply. Any retreat into the past would condemn millions to a life of misery, toil, and suffering. I am not advocating that these older institutions be overthrown: it is just that they are becoming unworkable. Unfortunately, it will probably take a social and economic breakdown to bring about the demise of the old system and its institutions. At this point, significant social change will probably only occur when a sufficient number of people, through economic failure, lose confidence in their elected officials. The public will then demand other alternatives. While we would like to think that this could usher in a bright new chapter in the human drama, it is far more likely that the most probable course will be a form of dictatorship, perhaps even an American brand of fascism presented to the people as a way of protecting them from the products of their own inadequate culture. However, it is not enough to point out the limiting factors that may threaten the survivability of all nations. The challenge all cultures now face in this technological age, some more than others, is to provide a smooth transition towards a new way of thinking about ourselves, the environment, and the management of human affairs. It is now mandatory that all nations engage in the joint venture of planning on a global scale for new alternatives with emphasis on the nature of our social arrangements. This is our only option if we are to avoid a decline of the civilized world. If humankind is to experience mutual prosperity, universal access to resources is essential. Along with a new orientation toward human and environmental concerns, there must be a methodology for making this a reality. If these ends are to be achieved, the monetary system must evolve into a world resource-based economy. To effectively and economically utilize resources, cybernated and computerized technology must be applied in order to ensure a higher standard of living for everyone. With intelligent and humane applications of science and technology, we will be able to guide and shape our future for the preservation of the environment and ourselves for the generations to come. It is not enough to advocate the cooperation of all nations. We need a global society based on a practical blueprint acceptable to all. We also need an international planning council capable of articulating the blueprint and the advantages that would result from world unification. The design must be based upon the carrying capacity of the planet, its resources, and the needs of its inhabitants. To sustain our civilization, we must coordinate advanced technology and available resources with a humane systems approach. Many professions familiar to us today will eventually be phased out. With the rate of change now taking place, a vast array of occupations will become obsolete and disappear. In a society that applies a systems approach, these professions will be replaced by interdisciplinary teams – systems analysts, computers programmers, operations researchers, and those who link the world together in vast communications networks. We have the skills and knowledge to apply interdisciplinary teams to problem. But only in times of war or national emergency do we assemble interdisciplinary teams to find workable solutions to social problems. If we mobilize the same resources for social problems as we do during a war, beneficial effects on a large scale can be achieved in a relatively short time. This could easily be accomplished by utilizing universities’ training facilities and staffs to best determine different methods to solve problems. This would be an important initial phase to define the parameters for the future of civilization. The process of social change must allow for changing conditions that continuously update the design parameters, and for the infusion of new technologies into evolving cultures. Design teams, using socially integrated computers, can automatically be informed of any changes in conditions. In this world of constant change, it is not a question of whether we choose to make the necessary changes. Our survival demands that we act on this challenge and accept these new requirements.
Posted on: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:49:03 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015