Zero Sum versus Rising Tide

It’s actually quite simple. Patriarchy v matriarchy. Oligarchy v community. Corporation v individual. Two philosophies dividing.

Is this as eternal as the Tao? This schism, this attitudinal canyon, is this the Achilles heel of the human race? The Libertarian point of view espoused by the current version of Republicanism starts with the feeling that “what’s mine is mine, period.” This leads further to “I got mine, now you go out and get yours, and leave me alone.” The response from the excluded majority was articulated nicely by none other than the great entertainer and artist Mr. James Brown: “Open up the door - I’ll get it myself!” What some might call neoconservative-ism, libertarian-ism, Republican-ism (whatever!), is suffused with an egocentrism that says “I am not my brothers keeper, I am not responsible for your well-being.” And at the root of this attitude of exclusion is the concept of zero sum transactions: whatever I give to help others will subtract from what I can provide for “me and mine.”

A fallacy of ancient tribal attitudes, the blind spot of paternalism, the intrinsic flaw of Libertarianism is the blind assumption that transactions are essentially “zero sum.” And the log in the eye of democratic socialism is “don’t tax you, don’t tax me, tax the man behind the tree.” It’s not enough to maintain the status quo. We can’t continue with semi-sacred capitalism as a sacred cow. The “leftist” would simply take the overage from the corporation and spread the spoils among the impoverished, give lip service to improving education, provide support for “green industries” without examining their efficacy, and through failures of imagination, continue our exploitation of the planet without truly addressing the inequities caused by the profit motive and its siren song that leads to greed and lust for power. Where is the middle path? How can we maintain proper levels of human comfort, encourage arts and culture, provide lifelong education, provide medical care for all and cease challenging our very existence by cannibalizing our host, the lovely planet Earth?

We’re all in this together, this thing called “life.” We espouse love, sense of family and security for our family, our kin, our tribe. But if our security, prosperity and growth is impinged upon, challenged by the growth or acquisitiveness of another tribe, soon we adopt an “us v them” viewpoint. This leads to skirmishes, conflict, even full-fledged warfare. In the extreme, histories of bloodshed and concomitant atrocities create continuing enmity and provide a didactic base that argues in favor of standing armies and the warehousing of weaponry. Hence, we devote a good portion of our wealth and personal energy to nonproductive, even destructive endeavors. It is so much easier to destroy rather than build. And the time has come to recognize and redefine the goals of civilized society.

The evidence is in. It’s not open to discussion any more. Humanity, the species homo sapiens, has developed a survival methodology akin to a snake eating its tail. We are destroying the planet that nurtures us. When our numbers were fewer and our knowledge of interconnectedness incomplete, our concept of “conquering” nature appeared to serve us well. We now know that indigenous cultures living in harmony with their geography, biblical exhortations to act as caretakers of creation, these are the voices that must prevail. If not, we will all perish and those who manage to extend their tenancy on this planet will live lives unnatural and foreign to what they once knew, lives tragically circumscribed and ultimately not worth living.