We can't go on living like this

Even more important, in a market economy what’s developed is what’s most profitable not what most needed. So the development that takes place in the Third World is development of what will maximise the profits of corporations. Look at any Third World country and you see a lot of development but most of it is putting their resources into producing to stock our rich world supermarkets, and little or none goes into the industries that will produce the basic necessities the majority of poor people need. Conventional development is therefore well described as a process of plunder.

Rich countries go to a lot of trouble to maintain a global economy that works in their interests, including using aid, Structural Adjustment Packages, arms sales, support for friendly dictators, and outright invasion. Our living standard in countries like Australia could not be anywhere near as high as it is if these processes did not occur and we had to get by on our fair share of the world’s resources.

What then is the answer? If the question is: how can we run a sustainable and just consumer-capitalist society? the point is that there isn’t any answer. That cannot be done.

We cannot achieve a sustainable and just society unless we face up to huge and radical transition to what some identify as The Simpler Way: that is to a society based on non-affluent but adequate living standards; high levels of self-sufficiency; small scale localised economies with little trade and no growth; co-operative and participatory communities; an economy that’s not driven by market forces and profit; and most difficult of all, a society that’s not motivated by competition, individualism and acquisitiveness.

Many have argued that this general vision is the only way out of the mess we’re in.

The biggest problem of all is our failure, our refusal to even recognise that the pursuit of affluence and growth is a terrible mistake. Despite our vast educational systems, information technologies and media networks, despite having hoardes of academics and experts, there is almost no official or public recognition that the quest for affluence and growth might be the basic cause of our alarming global predicament. There is no recognition of any need to move to The Simpler Way. These themes are almost never even mentioned in the media, educational curricula, or government pronouncements.

We are dealing here with a fascinating and powerful ideological phenomenon, a failure, indeed a refusal to even think about the possibility that we are sitting on the railway tracks and there is a train fast approaching. It would be difficult to imagine a more profound case of wilful mass denial and delusion.

Toynbee analysed the fate of civilisations in terms of their capacity to respond to challenges. What then are our prospects, given that we cannot even recognise that we are committed to fatally mistaken goals?

The greatest tragedy is that we could quickly and easily move to sustainable and just ways - if we wanted to. Essentially that would involve people in suburbs and towns getting together to organise simple but sufficient lifestyles within mostly small, local economies, with small farms and firms using local resources and labour to produce to meet local needs. The economy would not be driven by profit maximisation or market forces, and there would have to be no economic growth at all.

The Simpler Way could be a far more satisfying way of life. Consider being able to live well on two days work for money a week, without any threat of unemployment, or insecurity in old age, in a supportive community. To the conventional mind such claims are insanely impossible, but you might take a look at the detail on The Simpler Way website below before you decide.

These are the kinds of conditions that thousands of people enjoy in eco-villages around the world. Many of these communities are trying to demonstrate the alternative ways to which the mainstream can move. Our chances or persuading the mainstream to them in a society obsessed with growth and affluence would seem to be very poor.

I believe we are now entering a time of rapidly intensifying problems which will impact heavily on the comfort and complacency of consumer society. The coming peak of petroleum supply might concentrate minds wonderfully, but I think we are in for a catastrophic century. Some of the people at www.dieoff.com believe around three billion will perish.

For 50 years you have been told about all this, by many scientists and reports. You have taken not the slightest bit of notice. This indicates that you do not have the wit nor the will to save yourselves. Your chances in the next few decades will depend very much on whether your region manages to build local economies, and whether the people living there are willing to shift to frugal, cooperative and self-sufficient ways. Just ask yourself, when oil becomes very scarce, what shape will you wish your neighbourhood was in? Well you had better get out there and start remaking it.