Redesigning our economy for a more equitable future

Lorrain.seaport.jpg

A capitalism-socialism dichotomy makes the American setting vulnerable to destructive division as any polity and its complex systems cannot rely on any one way or code of conducting itself. The previous centuries have presented a front that exploitation as a means for superfluous gain is most in touch with dynamics of human nature. The logic that feeds into this history and is reinforced through its outcomes is one that some express as “elegant simplicity”: through vertical, positivist, capital-based organizational structures, civilization will continuously ‘achieve’ higher degrees of prosperity.

Yet, as we move further into the twenty-first century and globalization, continental economic expanses, digitalization, and the movement of peoples and technologies develop and set in—as peripheral, hybrid, and asymmetrical warfare and non-Western economic and innovative competition become increasingly palpable—there is an intensifying demand for complexity, for societal horizontal flexibility. There is a stark imperative to re-imagine wealth in the becoming post-industrial age as more than sustainable energy, informational space, and information itself, but also through the number of and organizational capacity for flexible, creative, mathematically trained, and open minds within our North American polity.

Civilization has never known the privilege of a confluence of an emergent gender-inclusive enlightenment discourse, post-colonial and across-culture consciousness, the advancements of cognitive and neurological sciences, and the becoming of a post-industrial economy. Right here in North America—in a state of heightened emotion and intellectuality—I put forward we jointly fold the dimensions of positivist verticality with horizontal flexibility.

Such a folding is the next chapter of the American story. It should entail driving sources of American innovations to the next level through opening up our school system to become more liberally conducted and learner-centered. We should acknowledge that the European values of health, well-being, and “untouchable” human worth and dignity is a brilliant source of strength; the American setting must match this in the way of humanizing our incarceration system as well as de-racializing and de-capitalizing our healthcare system. We should think creatively beyond hierarchical work to interdigitated work as the latter better realizes women as an equal resource of productivity. Finally, we should revisit a sort of mandatory military service for both genders under the circumstance of this proposed reconstruction.

The twenty-first century belongs to those most intensively engaged with analytical and comparative reasoning and not with the gross reduction of all and everything through the ‘strong’ headman. Only through recommitting ourselves to an enlightenment can we bridge and coalesce opposite yet paradoxically complementary dimensions. We must pick each other up and talk about possibilities for anyone for whom the system isn’t working. If one doesn’t like working under the verticality of McDonald’s, then the discussion is, ‘how can we talk possibilities?’ to move this person in a way in which he can use his God-given potential. If one does not like stocking shelves at Walmart, then, ‘lets talk possibilities’ perhaps about getting into a trade apprenticeship or college and study of interest. Managers of vertical structures should thus have a tremendous awareness of their employees’ broader ambitions as persons.

If a child is bombarded with forty percentile math scores (a forty-percenter), ‘how can we talk possibilities?’ to get this child away from the negative feedback loop—perhaps learning math through the outdoors or sports. When we hear a child say, ‘math is stupid’ (what a thing to say), we should ask ourselves, ‘how do we redirect this child so that he likes learning?’. That is a fundamentally different approach than asking ourselves, ‘how do we pump up his test score?’ probably so that he can become a Walmart manager and not a Walmart shelf stocker.

Finally, we should ask ourselves, ’how do we make constructive?’ our potentials on the plane of horizontal flexibility. It’s insufficient to merely write an abstruse dissertation comprehended only in esoteric circles. Surely such pushes human intelligence to its brink—within that particular niche—but what does it amount to so long as it’s largely vacant in the social world? Or, ‘how do we make constructive?’ an app so that it doesn’t unintentionally undermined the very community it should enhance. Human potential must add to society and not be used to elevate the person at the expense of others as this leads to throwing away the plane of human potential for reduced systems of ubiquitous marketization of everything and anything in a deeply racially categorized society.

These are the tension points at hand. These are balances we must strike.