Serendipitous Beneficiaries and the Economy of Needs

In Africa, in an interconnected, interdependent world, the mismatching of needs, resources, opportunities, competition and accountability is undermining the perceived value of education, of labor markets which cannot absorb the vast pools of skilled and unskilled labor, of social infrastructures which cannot at present maximize the multifaceted resources of human capital. Inequality of access and value-of-outcome for individual, or group, efforts and achievements very often lead to financial hardship, gender-based deprivation, perceived/actual disenfranchisement, crime, violence, and larger conflicts.

Technologies in communication, transit, cloud-based information storage and sharing are providing unprecedented opportunities for growth in the knowledge capital of humanity. In previous centuries, humanity experienced the pseudo-sustainability of growth with the advancement and enrichment of a sheltered upper class, with acceptable numbers of jobs for uneducated, semi-skilled and skilled laborers. In the 21^st Century, however, the increasing millions of educated young people eager to apply their talents and skills to forge lives for themselves have clearly demonstrated that neither private nor public sector employment landscapes provide adequate opportunity, compensation, the attainment of life-goals.

Social infrastructures, regardless of climate, location, or resources, depend upon the investment of participants, individually and as communities, to endure. Poor outcomes which commence with gender-based discrimination leading to early child-birth, low-parental education and wealth, poor nutrition, geographic factors of exclusion-by-circumstance are reinforced by the disparities in the next generation of children’s education, and the improbability or even impossibility of obtaining a well-paid job—causing productivity levels and dependency levels to become progressively imbalanced.

Social structures are straining under ever-increasing populations of job-seekers, ever-increasing deficits of funding, and the double-sided swords of instant communication and transit technologies. While communities, states and nations should be building social and economic infrastructures which amplify the rights, and the responsibilities of an interdependent human species, inequality of opportunity continues to exacerbate the poor outcomes of the non-privileged.

Clear expectations of recompense-for-effort are reinforced by media and crowd influences, yet equitable, durable opportunities for educational, economic, environmental, energy and ethical (“universal” freedoms and rights) security are ever-more threatened. At a time crucial to the development of human responsibility and investment in a sustainable, interdependent world, poverty of outcomes is impoverishing, endangering the future of our species on this planet.

From the very start, impoverishments of circumstances affect each child’s probability of receiving adequate healthcare, nutritional, and educational services to succeed in life. Almost inescapably, these same circumstances and subsequent poor outcomes affect the ability of the working generation to support themselves, their children, and their elderly. Opportunities for education and hiring based upon connections, rather than merits, undermine the whole process of building human capital, and evolving from a top-heavy distribution of wealth, resources, power, and access, to a more equitable, merit-based, sustainable assumption of responsibility and recompense.

Investment in dynamic, strategic employment and social infrastructures is essential to impartial, merit-based hiring, to widening access for qualified enterprises and individuals. Investment opportunities to encourage the increase of businesses and agencies which look beyond regional and sectarian considerations, which work together to conserve limited finite resources while maximizing the potential of renewable resource utilization would strengthen infrastructures, and encourage new ideas, and new markets for services created, offered, and utilized.

In an overhauling of current collateral regimes of protectionism and creditor rights at the expense of small-investors, wage-earners, and subsistence- or poverty-line laborers, increased understanding of the economy of needs, rather than wants, reflects a richness of social fabric, rather than a paucity of empty promises.

The concept of serendipitous beneficiaries, of responsible development which considers the interconnectedness of humankind, of other earth species, of limited finite resources, global-renewable resources, and potential for sustainability, is crucial to the “greening” of markets, services, and human occupations today. Value-adding serendipitous beneficiaries to the associated/collateral choices and activities of market-share providers of goods and services enables citizen-consumers to make responsible choices themselves, empowering those enterprises ensuring "green," sustainable practices.

For example, in many nations, young people, unable to find adequate employment in their “home” communities, regions, or nations, tend to leave, congregating in urban centers where they hope to find paying jobs. This leaves the parent-generations cope, alone, with aging grandparents. In nations where poverty and tradition caused young girls to be married to men three and four times their age, this “flight” of the young generation leaves many, many older women, without adequate education or job skills, without financial training, property rights, or any access to healthcare, adequate nutrition, transportation or services, to support aged, dependent spouses alone.

A project to address constraints of youth receiving adequate training to get a job could include considerations of what jobs, projects, products, and collaborative efforts would best benefit the communities inhabited by each group of youths. Appropriate locally- or regionally-based projects could include plans to create new, and provide access to existing education and jobs in product -creation, -sales, -utilization; in service –training, -providing; in education, heritage knowledge preservation and tech-based communications/interconnectivity; in medical services and specialties; in domestic and hospital/hospice-based care and sustainable interventions. Every community eventually will have elder-citizens requiring assistance, inclusion, active care; every community at some point has adult and youth-emergent work forces needing employment and services themselves.

Serendipitous beneficiaries of locating training sponsorship for youth development and skills/vocational training could include infrastructure, energy-and-communications grids, construction, maintenance, and transit-systems/access, water/waste management, and social-services training, as well as specialized/medical field employment. Collaborative development and endorsement of projects with applicable industry sponsors, for equipment and for training, provide opportunities for “green-minded” corporations to invest at the community level in the sustainability and serendipitous outcomes of the populations served by their market-products/services, and build their market share among the young populations to which they offer training and opportunity.  

The elder communities served by such inclusive projects have their own associations of serendipitous beneficiaries, including adult offspring who are more able to contribute in their own jobs, knowing adequate, safe care is available to/provided for the elder family dependents. With more training, connectivity, and jobs available in outspread communities, urban flight and other employment-seeking population shifts would be less likely, with less detriment to the social fabric. Upgrades to “green” and environmentally-sustainable facilities and resource/waste management practices would benefit the ecosystems of the communities served. Infrastructure and service administration practices could become more transparent, as communities actively collaborate with funding sources on the projects undertaken, and employed participants contribute to the longevity of the program(s).

The concept of serendipitous beneficiaries as a measure and enhancement of social responsibility and sustainability could add to the flexibility of social infrastructures, educational programs, to the accountability and responsibility of service, commercial and industrial providers. In an interdependent humanity, on an interdependent planet of limited resources, a “green” approach which includes associated industries and efforts as serendipitous beneficiaries of planned output can result in alleviation of “poor outcomes” for all strata of society, for our shared environment and pool of resources, and can result in a raised quality of sustainable lifestyles for humankind, and our millions of fellow-earth species.

The objectified, the bystanders, and those living within the circle of care-- from the borders of bedlam, to beyond.

Physical health, mental health, mental abilities—among the “normal” and the differently-abled (challenged and gifted)—as the “higher species,” humans have long separated, described, documented, and dealt with (for better or worse) family and community members enduring some state of injury, disease, or condition which alters their ability to succeed, cope, or even survive in general society. Folk lore, arts, writings and institutions have, for centuries, acknowledged, if not improved the condition of the differently-abled within their communities—and have long, if inadequately, recognized the frequent companions of untreated disability/different-ability: poverty, ignorance, and isolation (of individuals, or whole groups). From appearances in nursery rhymes and Breugel paintings, to harsh realities of slave galleys and circuses where the different were paraded and exploited for the amusement and profit of the “normal” or the more powerful, the costs of being different have long weighed heavy on the shoulders of the afflicted.

The catch-term “mental illness” (including Alzheimer’s, dementia, personality disorders, substance-related disorders, epilepsy and other neurological disorders, and other conditions) has often been grouped among  “non-communicable” diseases—running distantly behind global awareness of cardiovascular diseases, lung diseases, cancers, diabetes and organ-deteriorating diseases. Improving genetic study technologies are showing links between maternal health, child health, and possible hereditary and environmental causes contributory to many mental as well as physical diseases.

Despite increased awareness, human-rights and social-justice programs lag in their capabilities to address the physical, mental, and community-health issues, even when deprivation and lack of status contribute to the downward spiral of dysfunction and discrimination, exacerbating health conditions through lack of options, care, and concern. Even crowd-sourcing and internet local-to-global appeals struggle to get the attention of funders, NGOs, research and care institutions and programs… and the families and caregivers of the less-capacitated are caught in what many consider a catch-22 of lose-lose options.

Many people lump differently-abled children and adults, those with birth-related dysfunctions, profound dis-abilities, autism, chronic-or-deteriorating neurological and/or physical afflictions which curtail “normal” communication/participation and social interaction, and severe/debilitating injury due to accident or malpractice together with the mentally ill— if for no other reason than the perceived differences in appearance, behavior and social participation from “The Normal.”

And many people do not want to be associated with mental illness. The centuries of separation, exploitation and exclusion have created stigma associated with “difference” which are sometimes nearly impossible to overcome. Many people think there is no “hope” associated with being differently-abled, ill, incapacitated—without ever seeming to define “hope” itself (using it as a blanket excuse for lack of participation or involvement), for in aligning with the “Many” comes the anonymity of non-responsibility, the safety of escape, the lure of “backing the winner” and avoiding the “loser,” the weaker, the disabled, the “other.”

Yes, there is a “global” health community, albeit, on the non-professional side, loosely-knit and sporadically-joined. Yes, there are local, community, national and online/stateless efforts to raise awareness, funding, and treatment-levels for the panoply of hereditary, communicable, chronic, non-communicable, trauma-related, event-induced (et cetera) illnesses and conditions. World Mental Health Day (held annually on the 10^th of October) helps raise awareness and global concern about mental health issues, awareness of treatment, costs, and related effects and syndromes. And the opportunity to research resources and techniques, to find mentors and affirming/supportive “friendships” online have elevated options and opportunities for care to the realm of possibility even in impoverished, remote, and underserved communities and households.

However, while global estimates of the annual costs associated with mental health/illness mount ever-closer to the trillion-dollar mark, mental illnesses and programs to improve mental health and chronic-illness treatment/care options struggle to get the attention of funders. Perhaps part of the problem is exactly the nearly-overwhelming burden of simply beginning to combat the massive imbalance built through years of inadequate care, and lack of confidence for a sustainable future—for the afflicted, and for the family/caregivers.

So, what are the costs of medical challenges, to those who endure the injury or condition, to those who love them, to those who provide care? Attendant costs, in some economic strata, of care planners, legal teams, “entitlement” specialists, social/medical-aid procurement specialists, public/private health liaison specialists, therapy/rehabilitation providers, procurement/cost specialists, personal-coach/counseling specialists… and tertiary costs: extra expenses for transit, equipment, training, specialized wardrobes, site-accommodations, service-accommodations, costs associated with inabilities to handle exigent circumstances… and “hidden” costs: lack of access, the huge resources of time/grooming/support needed to overcome perceived and actual discrimination, the postponed realities of geriatric care for individuals who have spent their live energies and life capital supporting the attendant costs of a disability or chronic condition (whether as care givers or care recipients)—leaving few if any provisions for the solitary shouldering of the entire burden of care when old age separates need from sufficiency, “retirement” from security, and adds the burden of “silencing” the marginalized by leaving them in isolated backwaters seldom noticed by the flowing tides of people competing for money, power, and life in an ever-evolving marketplace.

Without the capacity to change the circumstances of an ongoing condition, the physical and mental realities of the daily and nightly struggle to live in a body so afflicted, those who endure illness or trauma already face, with aging, the liabilities of depleted assets of strength, affluence, even basic inter/intrapersonal life/communication skills.

Those who are able to rely upon a network of support may have an easier journey in the short term, but unless they are able to achieve and maintain a level of self-reliance or committed-ongoing support, their apparent autonomy is tenuous, at best—and might collapse with the removal of the assistance, accommodation, and/or access-due-to-affluence to services needed to maintain a life of best-possible circumstance.

Sometimes the realities of this dependency so paralyze the afflicted individual that they are unable to assume a level of independence that they otherwise might have reached—perhaps fearing the removal of support if they become “too successful”—and fearing, more, the day when their abilities again are insufficient for the demands of the lifestyle they have attained, this time, striving and struggling or even failing without any network of support, because they have presumed to be “normal.”

Sometimes, the bubble of support so encourages the chronically or permanently differently-abled that they fly, like Icarus, to heights beyond their capacity to sustain… and the sudden or gradually-escalating demands for additional intervention by caregivers become so unbalanced within the level of resources actually available, that these efforts collapse, again insufficient to the demands of the lifestyle—this time having exhausted and/or lost the network of support which had previously been available.

Of course, there are myriad stages in between, where the socially-aware and the self-or-insular-focused dependent/differently-abled individuals alike find some balance which permits the continuation of daily life, and myriad stages between the levels of quality, or lack of quality, of those lives. And afflicted and care-giver alike encounter all the myriad stages of feelings of dependency, frustration, guilt, rage, wishes to escape or self-harm or suicide attendant to afflicted lives, as well.

And so the afflicted capable of doing so, and those who love the afflicted, the differently-abled, struggle to provide, to constantly reassess needs, and constantly realign degrees of care, support, autonomy, community in the fragile balance between security and challenge, comfort and control, predictability/sufficiency and collapse/chaos. Massively-invested family- and caregiver- circles pour life resources of time, energy, attention, affluence and affection into the pooled experience of life with a differently-abled circle-member. Other kinds of family-caregiver circles assign the expenditure of resources to exterior providers, and the differently-abled circle-member is relocated to an alternate place of residence/care, and must form a new circle of experience, trust, expectation and hope (or lacks thereof).

One of the contradictory realities which caregivers and circle-members also face is the division between urban/rural care-opportunities/resources, urban monetary-costs-of-living, urban costs-of-quality-of-life, and the potential gross separation between individual care and mass-cost-saving/profit alternatives. Uninformed, “qui tacet consentire videtur” and/or participatory support for care-provider neglect, malpractice or the flagrant misuse of power contribute to additional injury/affliction. These include mental-care/health-care “providers” who increase dependency to build economic inflow of predictable patient rolls; care providers, educators, and others in the train-attain-ladder who withhold/deny care/funding—or grant it based upon skewed demands for favors and other abuses; care “givers” who hide behind appearances of adherence to protocols and established practices while extending sub-standard, deleterious or even damaging assessments/therapies/regimens-of-treatment to patients in their care.

In the quest for change, with national economies teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, and national health-care plans nearing insolvency, with health care providers hoping (logically) to work where the amenities and necessities of care are available, the precedent has been flight of intellectual and talent-based capital to urban centers. However, increasingly overcrowded, food/water-and-resource-dependent urban centers have become unsustainable, and a rebalancing of concepts of time, value, remuneration, of monetary-vs-social credit might redefine concepts of “ability and dependency,” of “success” of mastery of skills and the providing of care.

Cultural demands to care-for-your-own, fear of the suspicion, stigma and sanctions associated with differences/and visible-vs-invisible injury, illness and needs, and burgeoning global poverty/limited non-renewable resources might, serendipitously, coalesce to provide a sustainable solution to the mounting challenges, costs and considerations of mental illness and mental, community, and social well-being.

That is, rather than turning to self-attributions of self-imposed guilt (or sadly, even self-hatred) for being dis- or differently-abled, or for self-imposed guilt or blame/hatred for somehow contributing to the condition of the dis- or differently-abled dependent, individuals, care-givers and communities can learn from the focus of those coping with life-long afflictions—who strive to find the balance between living in their “reality” and creating the environment of joy whenever it is possible to pursue those activities/avocations/vocations they most love… Not all the differently-abled are able, or want to find what might be enduring questions of voyages of life, of interdependence on a global scale, of corporate, social, legal, and “humanitarian” responsibilities for levels of care and the quality of life—and whether that care is viewed as burden, sacrifice, obligation, labor-of-love, continuation of life-as-it-is, or opportunity.

Many humanitarian projects and programs, whether crowd-sourced/funded, privately-endowed, or beneficiaries of micro-loans and other self-help sponsorship/aid-partnerships have provided accumulating evidence that ground-to-boardroom community-involvement is crucial to the successful introduction, implementation, and continuation of the work/projects to-be-accomplished. Inclusion of the challenges of care for the differently-abled of our global community among the inception-to-completion planning procedures of humanitarian projects might sound glib and facile, but in many of the best global healing traditions, the differently-abled, from child to elder, maintain some sort of role or status in the community, involved with not only healing rituals and shared responsibilities for self- and assisted- care, but non-exploitative work or social-value contributions are encouraged, with opportunities offered, and assistance provided, so each, child to elder, can feel a part of the community network. This not only mitigates the tensions and tolls of care for the immediate family, but affirms the awareness, acceptance, and encouragement of the extended family, larger community, and provides backup links and support for interactions with the professional care-providing community.

While community and family-based care cannot provide extreme interventions which may be required for specific cases, the value of an inclusive social network, which does not disparage the efforts of the differently-abled to live their lives at whatever level might be best for them, which does not disparage nor diminish the efforts of the family and community of care-givers to diminish the stigma, discrimination and exploitation associated with extraordinary needs and the differently-abled, and which does uphold the best of the traditions of healing and humanitarian care in a manner which can lead to greater productivity of all the networked family-and-care-circle members, lead to lowered costs and attendant costs, in time, money, resources, and quality of life, and which can help bring greater stability, through increasing reliance on networks of care, and on internet-communication reinforcement of care and life-partnering, and a lowered consumption of resources, time and money, as well as lowered costs.

And where extreme interventions and extraordinary levels of care are required for specific circumstances, there will be a more globally-equitable availability of measurably-reliable care available, rather than supporting a huge network of procurement-management-specialists, rather than the actual providers of care. In our increasingly interdependent global society, the importance of sustainable mental and physical health can be an overwhelming burden, top-heavy with high-end corporate and associated-costs and charges, or a challenge and opportunity to actually deliver sound services and care, needed for the health and well-being of each of us, in the smaller and larger circles of community surrounding the differently-abled.

Providence...has chosen YOU as the guardians of freedom, to preserve it for the benefit of the human race -- Andrew Jackson

Ultimately, some theorize, the root of the dysfunctions in the free (democratic) political and economic systems of today's world powers may not be along ideological, racial, or gender lines, but along divisions by economic class. Without economic independence and stability, educational goals, political and ideological freedoms, and other so-called human rights advancements are neither truly secure nor sustainable. From this perspective, the politics of the global issues emerge as a principal barrier to arriving at decisive solutions and actions to correct the endemic problems the issues represent. Skepticism and allegations that governments placed on lists of global "violators" (by nations or collections of nations through, for example, the United Nations, or through "watchdog" groups like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Transparency International...) lack the political will and governmental capability to use resources sent in support of free economic development (and other programs) eventually leads to the denial of resources-- to a potential downward spiral into the very political dissolution said resources were planned to prevent.

But piecemeal politics, foreign policies developed with situational (value-laden) judgements about the speed or adequacy of responses to alleged human rights or global issues violations cause people and governments to react with increasing confusion, contradiction, and inefficiency to global issues and crises. National responses, national cooperation and support-- which require time, organization and long-term vision-- are the sine qua non of effective policy development and execution. Long-term goals should be defined, backed with long-term resource commitment and economic, educational, and social development compatible with the diverse cultures of the nations with which established free nations are being asked to work. Somehow, definitions of crises, of crimes, of terrorist acts, must be arrived at, and actions to prevent the occurrence of such crises must be taken. Somehow, the world's resources, human potentials and creativities, equities, freedoms and environmental stability must be, similarly, defined, and their dissolution prevented.

Competition over economic, educational, environmental and other resources, over democracy or totalitarianism, will, logically, lead to escalating conflict and depletion of those resources, freedoms, and power (if you will) for autonomy. Such competition and conflict diminishes the effectiveness and legitimacy of democratic systems of government, endangers the survivability and sustainability of security for values, institutions, and programs of (international) support and development.

In the event of such competition for power, of such conflicts over the concepts of national security, it will, apparently, be the Western, democratic societies which will suffer the greatest loss of credibility and legitimacy from the dysfunction of efforts at promoting this same democracy through such cause-driven decision-making. That is, since it is the Western philosophies which espouse the rights to make individual choices, seek individual liberties (within the bounds of civil society), and yet promise the development of a better life for all, America, and other Western nations become targets of convenience upon which to blame the economic and social problems at large -- should (western) attempts to promote (ecologically sustainable) democratic institutions and market economies fail. Established, Westernized nations can be seriously threatened by assuming too great a role as "brokers of peace" in evolving political/economic environments. In a coercive environment (even one upholding the ostensibly laudable goal of establishing and developing peace and democracy), a political climate can be created in which anti-democratic, radical elements can thrive-- denigrating and possibly destroying the paths to human rights and freedoms.

This denigration of well-intentioned efforts to promote democracy may succeed because target-conditional domestic and foreign policy making, far from increasing national or international freedom of choice, tends to impose increasing restrictions of social and economic "discipline." Rather, policy-making should be informed with the vision and realization that definitions of democracy and security within and between nations should view and enhance the well-being of these nations as a whole-- considering individuals and groups as human beings-- and each nation's systems of natural and technological resources.

From this perspective, in the situational/epochal environment of global issues and politics, it becomes apparent that problems of violence, of the abrogation of human rights and freedoms, are not culturally specific, or rooted in specific societies. As such, unilateral actions against nation-states conducting egregious violations against global issues, against human rights, may not be wholly successful, because such concerns and conflicts are transnational in nature.

Therefore, since it appears that in human society there are larger requirements for liberty, for human (and environmental) rights which have, at least, zonal (east-west; north-south, for example) central lines, and which can not be mitigated by specific, unilateral action, it would also appear that transnational (for example, a majority of nations participating in the United Nations) actions-- embargoes, peace-keeping forces, security "monitors" against the promulgation of instruments of mass destruction (be they weapons, technological incursions, or other) may be necessary. Where moral lines may not be drawn, again, due to the murkiness or sensitivity of the issues of global needs as opposed to some issues of national sovereignty, again, definitions of crises, of terrorism and related crimes, of security, stability, and sustainability of national and international autonomy and human rights must be established. To elaborate-- if short-term, systemic devices or deprivational solutions are employed as unilateral, rather than transnational (or global-majority) fail-safes to conflicts of freedom of choice, of national sovereignty, and of international crimes, then it appears that this need-based decision-making will result in international crimes; it appears that this need-based decision-making will result in a short menu of violence or apathy, or in a new type of barbarism, a war of all against all.

Without recognizing differences and agreements of principles, no lasting, viable action may be taken to offset the ravages of intra-and inter-societal violence. As the decisions to establish freedoms of choice, to establish the "rights" to safe, secure and sustainable existences outlined by the "global issues" require the participation of all levels of society-- from the policy makers, to enforcement officials, to the voting or represented public, and through any peripheral or semi-disenfranchised groups-- so, too, the establishment and maintenance of the political will to safeguard these freedoms must involve all strata of the societies upholding and benefiting from them. Working within viable infrastructures to ensure freedoms is a sine qua non of civil society. Defining those areas of disruption and violence through socially-accepted channels of policy, legislation, and enforcement requires the consideration of, and, when appropriate, the participation of all levels of that civil society. Stemming the flow of terrorism and crime (political, economic, environmental, informational, etc) must be a participatory responsibility as well.

In arriving at an introduction to an understanding of security, sustainability, and stability, of conditions for peace, then, it may be useful to consider these issues in a national, and, where possible, global context. Those who make spoken and implicit promises to establish and secure the well-being of a people and a system of governance but cannot advance the human condition of those living within those systems will generate grievances when expected standards of improvement of human rights, environmental and holistic sustainability are not met. A political will for establishing a uniform financial market-- to establish a single market (or style of market) in banking and securities, in rights to financial privacy, and in uniformity of money laundering laws, reporting and enforcement efforts (to promote the greatest degree of legitimate market freedom for the greatest number of legitimate market participants)-- is taking shape. Any political will to safeguard existing freedoms and legitimate economic growth, as well as to encourage increasing freedoms, must accompany efforts to develop a collective stewardship of democratic institutions and free, market-driven economies. Any global economic security must remain mutual, and would not be enhanced by rigid conformity to current conditions, regimes, or concepts of old hierarchical structures (economic, political, or informational).

Developing this pluralistic concept of security and of mutually beneficial relationships entails the establishment of conditions which permit orderly change, which will allow and encourage the flourishing of democratic (free, human-rights oriented) institutions and of free, human-rights oriented economies. Increasingly, it appears that concepts of a "global community" are defined not so much by governments, alliances, or ethnic divisions. Rather, emerging ideas of a global community increasingly involve, and are defined by concerns of commerce, the environment, communications, public and private sector interactions. To a great extent, impetus for this change has risen from increasing capabilities in the global mobility of people, commodities, information and ideas.

This concept of mutually-beneficial security, however, also entails a recognition of the mutual dependence and responsibility which the world's nations hold for the world's environment. If former notions of sovereignty-- over territories, over people-- are changing, so, too, are notions of control over, and of the distribution or protection of, the earth's natural resources. It appears that the whole concepts of security, and, hence, of strategic analysis and tactical support, are transforming-- undergoing a radical reformulation of the definitions of the concepts.

That is, "peace" means not just "freedom from conflict or war," but also an amelioration, and a cessation, of those conditions (economic, environmental, social) which tend to engender outbreaks of violence (civil or national/international). If this is so, then "security" should not mean only "protection from civil or military aggression." A paradim shift which would redefine peace to include life-enhancing qualities (the global issues: human rights, environmental protections, et cetera) and conditions would also require statesmen (and individuals) to recognize a redefinition of security to include protection from influences and occurrences (terrorism, physical, financial, environmental, or other criminal activities) which would jeopardize these life-enhancing qualities.

Traditional concepts of security seek to protect a nation as a sovereign state-- secure from external threats of violence or power seizure; these concepts seek to protect a nation, within its borders, from internal threats which would disrupt or destroy the "status quo" through violent, or illegal means. These concepts, traditionally, have focused less upon individuals, groups of diverse human beings, or environmental realities, than upon protecting and enhancing "the powers that be."

Psychological analysis of the causes of dissatisfaction, of disillusionment and of rebellion among rural, urban, or even national groups of individuals has led to the development of theories concerning individual/group trust in, and dependence upon, ideologies, comparative value- and rights- judgements. Also considered are the users and abusers of trust (and the abrogation of trust), of coercion, of existing and alternative organizations and purveyors/controllers of "power."

With increasing freedom of and access to information, individual and group expectations for achievement reise to the highest common denominator (in general). And with the promulgation of group/human values and global concerns come correspondent increases in expectations for the timely fulfilment of goals and values.

Thus, the expanding definition of security would postulate a refined concept of what would constitute an "external threat"-- viewing more direct threats to and opportunities for security that just military actions, causes of war, and the like. Similarly, an expanded definition of security must view internal security as more than the maintenance of an established political order (or the orderly, electorally-driven transfer of political power).

Additionally, the refined definition of security, if true to the espousal of "global" values of human rights and environmental conservation (etc), must also include the enhancement of the well-being of the nation (or global community) as a whole. Individuals and diverse groups of human beings, the nation's systems of education, commerce, and communication, and the natural resources and technological advancements of the national, international, or global, community, must be considered in promulgating regulations to protect, and definitions of threats to, the secure and stable development of the community (however large that is) and its economic and environmental well-being and sustainability.

Numbers and Language, Access and Visibility, and Responsibility in Social Causes

Thoughts on Global Giving, trafficking, social responsibility and Ashton Kutcher Versus the Village Voice: Why Numbers and Language Matter in Social Causes | BlogHer
www.blogher.com
 Perhaps one of the disconnects between the impulse to be involved in humanitarian aid/outreach efforts and the ability to achieve results is less grounded in the access of the famous and wealthy, than in the recognition of all the levels of the work which needs to be done.
And having the fortitude and funding needed to overcome all the disconnects between served and marginalized, capable and needy, exploited and autonomous.
According to the BlogHer article, Penn is living in a tent-- onsite, aware of and connected with the necessities and challenges confronting accomplishment of each micro-goal.
Not every person can live/work onsite; some, like the staff in GG, work generally in an office suite, connected by paper, landlines and internet. Some, like the GG Project Leaders, work wherever their interests/abilities and commitments allow them to go.
Some, like the stars, royals, former politicians and persons of "Fame" who run and fund foundations, visit sites, and continue with their own careers or avocations, relying on staff to keep them involved and informed.
The tissues connecting recognition of needs, and realization of progress might be visibility, credibility, and responsibility. Misuse of funds, misdirection of information, mis-appropriation of trust (which include universal human rights, precluding trafficking, exploitation, economic/educational/energy impoverishment, etc) cannot be sustainable.
The "tough issues" of trafficking, drugs, the user-funded addictions and exploitations which create their own marginalized worlds of crime and isolation are unlikely to be solved by a hand-slap, a cessation of willingness to post ads selling services similar to those purchased at the cost of dehumanizing and endangering segments of our shared populations.
And obviously, not everyone can live or even talk with people living in the peripheries of our 'social strata.'
Unfortunately, humans and the civil or tribal societies we create seldom come with an inclusive litmus test for ascertaining the fairness and humanity of our choices and actions.
The responsibility for learning, for enabling access and education so all can learn, to make sustainable, equitable, supportive choices rests with Each Of Us.
Millions of species on this planet are Earthlings. One species is human. Our choices, due to serendipity or access, enable our one species to effect the evolution, continuity and/or extinction of almost everything else on this planet.
What do I think about the tough issues? We need to face them, and take responsibility for our choices.
And continue to work so that organizations like Global Giving, credible sponsors, NGOs and other groups continue their efforts to promote inclusion, to aid, assist, to undertake philanthropic and humanitarian activities to improve the condition of our shared and interdependent existence

On Palestine, a Green and Sustainable Peace

Yesterday, US President Barak Obama delivered a speech calling for a renewal of peace talks between Israel and Palestine, and the establishment of a sovereign Palestine. “The status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace…The dream of a Jewish and democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation.”

Tony Blair, the former British Prime Minister, part of an international effort to secure an Israeli-Palestinian peace, said security assurances, provisions for lasting peace cannot be resolved without addressing issues of territory.  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a statement that “without a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem outside the borders of Israel, no territorial concession will bring peace.”

Around the globe marginal populations and refugees are at risk from looming crises of hunger, water access, environmental deprivation, poverty, urban and rural infrastructure failures continues in many sectors. The need for access, redress and inclusion of foundational populations, those with whom the stability of the entire pyramid of society rests, has been accelerated through the benefits of internet communication, information sharing, even video-chat. And the so-called Arab Spring, beginning most notably with the tragedy of the fruit seller in Tunisia, is resonating throughout communities around the world.

The challenges of the at-risk, foundational, refugee and disenfranchised groups are global, and include many races, circumstances and centuries of struggle. The challenges of the at-risk, foundational, refugee and disenfranchised citizens of Palestine can also be traced for decades and centuries of a struggle-- to live, raise families, and find the futures which fellow citizens around the world also seek. The people of the region are strong, enduring, and able to see a present and a future which can move beyond the traps, and the missed opportunities for peace, of the past. We can face these struggles together; we can attain a sustainable foothold along the pathway to life, in Palestine, in the region, in the world—common ground can be found. Through small steps towards sustainability, large steps in finding and celebrating our coexistent lives can be taken.

Part of what makes partner nations in the UN great is the strength of our shared, and ‘Universal,’ human rights, our freedoms. The enrichment of our cultures and communities stems from the contributions of all members of our societies. A walk through the “Main Streets” of any community will show people, families and neighbors who want to live their lives, and achieve better lives for their children.

We, the peoples of the partner nations, can see the similarities in our lives. We are governed within national frameworks which uphold sovereign rights, and complicated balances of trade, finance, resources, environmental responsibility.

Yet we, each, and all, are party to the decisions of the governments which pilot the paths to our futures. We, each and all, share the terrible costs of war, pollution, depletion and exclusion. We, each and all, share and are responsible for securing and achieving the global potential for peace,  security and sustainability for all our peoples, our environments, our economies and societies—for our survival.

What if we could take steps to bridge our differences, to walk together towards a more peaceful and sustainable world with expanded understanding, enriched cultures, improved environments? What if, in the case of Palestine, we could walk together, work together, to help the ordinary people of Palestine build a green, sustainable, sovereign state? What if scholars, scientists, experts and citizens, could work together to enable the people of Palestine sustainable access to work, education, medical care, adequate food, water, energy and resources? And, since projects based in reason, sustainable infrastructure and environmental practices, and community-based/nationally-supported responsibility are replicable, what if a green-solution for Palestine could become a blueprint for bringing security and sustainability to peoples around the world?

There are so many educated young people, in Egypt, in Lebanon, in Libya, in nations around the world, caught between a vision of a future filled with joblessness, disenfranchisement, fear and violence—or a future filled with possibilities, where time could be spent in service to benefit their home communities, their neighbor’s communities—while they learn to utilize their skills and trades to find solutions to deprivation and depletion. There are many young people, and parent generations, in Palestine, in the region, around the globe, who could work together, supported with internet technologies, sharing experiences, preserving indigenous and cultural heritages. We can work and walk together, to learn skills, trades, arts which can enrich lives and, finally, to achieve a goal of generations and attain adequate resources, peace, and a hopeful future. In Palestine, right now, there is a chance to attain a safe, secure, and sustainable future that could be, should be, shared— with families, neighbors, and society at large.

The root causes of terrorism, disenfranchisement, refugee status, of impoverishment and exclusion could and should be addressed. The root causes of environmental depletions, inadequate supply and sourcing of water, food, energy and resources could and should be addressed. The root causes of fear between the precariously balanced peoples of Palestine and Israel could and should be addressed.

What if we, ordinary citizens, scholars, experts, could harness the knowledge necessary, recruit the corps of business, scientific and educational partners required, and forge service projects which could bridge gaps between an impoverished and endangered present and a stable and resilient future? There is no single straight line between our concerns, conflicts, and crises today, and the potential for the realization of human rights, peace, stability, security and sustainability tomorrow. But what if we could agree on a place to start? Or what if we, simply, decided to begin to build a green and resilient future?

What if Palestine could become a shining cornerstone of our shared development, utilizing renewable technologies, sustainable food and water and resourcing, universal concepts of rights and balance between peoples and species on our interdependent planet? Would then the relationship between neighbors, and neighbor-nations see a cessation of the reasons for conflict? Our shared cultural intelligence should promote the concept that our progress as a species, our peace and sustainability, must be attained in concert with the development of all ‘others’—the foundational peoples of our shared existence.

The service projects, in Palestine, and wherever else needed, could and should foster collaboration between specialists, scholars, and the young people of many nations, to mitigate the threats to shared borders between Palestine and Israel, the regions of the Middle East, and the world at large. To mitigate the threats to our human development, to contribute to the development of sustainable practices—creating green jobs, arable soil, secure water supplies, renewable energies, developing medical solutions to health crises, digitizing the huge compendium of human knowledge and records, of Palestinian culture, of regional culture, expanding partnerships among Palestinians and the commerce of the peoples of the globe—now is the time to work, in Palestine, in all endangered, foundational communities, to create healthier environments, better lives, secure futures.

Experts, scholars, elders from each nation, from each community could guide the selection and development of those projects most needed to improve the sustainability of life in each community, in each segment of the sovereign societies of Palestine, and, by extension, the region, the world. Based in community, founded in individual strengths and responsibility; working together, these vital contributions could build, each upon the other, the quality of life for those in the communities. The young people from host and neighboring nations and communities, working without the baggage of prejudice and years of national/international distrust, could realize their similarities, serve together to achieve common goals, improve and enrich the condition of life for all.

Palestine cannot survive as it is. The world cannot stand by and let Palestine perish. The recognition of shared responsibility, of shared effort and shared achievements could transcend misunderstandings and divisions between sects and locales, habits and beliefs, between poverty and potential, between crisis and stability.

Over the centuries of our shared history, many people have grappled with the problems facing the world’s peoples, challenging their religions, their governments, testing their shared responsibilities and their perceived differences. The knowledge of the ages rests in the writings and speeches, is seen in the choices and actions of these visionaries, scholars, and leaders. In our shared march toward the future, can we undertake to support a partnership of service which could form a corps of young people, and the generational foundations of all peoples, and through investing in the futures of these young people, invest in the future of humankind?

In his “On a New Beginning” speech in Egypt, 2009, US President Barak Obama spoke of forging new levels of trust based “on the sharing of common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and dignity of all human beings.” And, as he concluded, “It won’t always be easy, but if we make an effort to bridge our differences rather than resigning ourselves to animosity, we can move forward toward a more peaceful world over time.”

Palestine can find a place for a sustainable future, and the security of Israel, the region, and all our shared planet will be more assured, our peace, economic, and environmental frameworks more sustainable, through building a resilient green corridor, which can extend from Palestine, to Israel, through the region of the Middle East, Northern and all of Africa, and the world. We have but to begin, to take a step, together.

Forests: Nature at Your Service

You don’t have to be a tree-hugger to value trees, forests, and the life-systems that our green canopies sustain (http://www.treehugger.com ). With the approach of World Environment Day, the UNEP is eager to increase awareness of the importance of forests for all of earth's inhabitants. Embodying “Nature at your Service,” as the UNEP declares, forests are as varied, multi-populated, and multi-purposed as nature itself. I am neither scientist, nor naturalist, but, having lived near many forests around the world, I hope to share some of my experiences and love of the life forests sustain.

Anyone departing the impermeable surfaces of inter-city connectors for shaded suburban forests can immediately feel the refreshing fragrance of green-forested spaces. Oak woods in Maryland and Virginia offer welcome relief from the heat and hustle of Washington, DC. Running through the pine forests of the Carolinas, the aspen groves of the Rockies, or through the pine, birch and maple forests of the northern states (8 gallons of maple sap boil down to 1 gallon of syrup in sugar houses that smell like distilled summer in the snowy, leafless brilliance of a north-country winter’s day), seeing the passage of seasons in the flaming foliage of fall, people can glimpse the brilliance and simplicity of nature’s renewable forest systems. Old trees drop, decay, support animals and ground-life while the seeds or root systems of vibrant trees spread new life for the canopies of future years.

In the sequoia forests of the America’s west coast, trees hundreds of years old stretch towards skies so distant the tree tops are obscured. And the bases bear marks of burrowing creatures, forgotten humans who hollowed out tunnels, fires which raged in years long past. In Japan, too, stand ancient pines. Many temples are bounded by towering gates constructed of trunks of trees so immense it takes the arms of many people to ring their base. Seeing huge sakura (cherry trees), rainbow-colored azalea, and grape-scented wisteria cascading down the rugged mountains and hills is surpassed only by walking along the forest floors, hearing and seeing the birds and other wildlife living within and below the shaded branches.

In Thailand, forests vary in character from north to south-- fruit, palm, rubber, ancient species all mingling and supporting orchids, mosses, humans, occasional elephants, and other wildlife among trees new and old. On Goh Samui, there are wonderful trees with roots tall and thin as walls forming mystical houses for forest denizens, and adventurous hikers alike. The bamboos stretching from China across many countries in hundreds of varieties, provide food, shelter, building and art materials for our world. And in Senegal, where the Sahel leads to the vast Sahara, massive baobab trees stand vigils in an arid land, forming mini-forests themselves when their leaves sprout and spread, and still giving shelter when their dry branches shade the earth below. And forests of prickly pear cactus form life-zones for smaller creatures, finding water, rich soil, and habitation where they can.

Soon, we will work and live near the cork woods of Morocco, and see the trees spreading through the work of the http://www.highatlasfoundation.org/ and their One Million Tree Campaign. The medicines, the valued plants and animal species that inhabit the forests, rainforests and jungles of the world, even the sea-weed forests of the ocean floor, are unique and irreplaceable. Join with the UNEP in celebrating World Environment Day (http://www.unep.org/wed ). Find a way to partner with local communities, with a global effort; help preserve our Environment, so we can all share the benefits and beauties of our forests on our interdependent planet.

Nationalization and the Perfect Storm

As Danish Physicist Niels Bohr (1885 – 1962) noted, “Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future.”  Bohr himself often attributed the saying to Danish artist and writer Robert Storm Petersen,  (1882 – 1949), also known as Storm P, who was said to have borrowed the quotation from another source.

Human societies are close to creating a nearly perfect storm of government, educational, economic and environmental redefinition. Increasingly dense populations, consuming ever-greater quantities of hard and soft goods, natural resources, and services have pushed the boundaries of supply/demand market concepts. As with air and water, in cases where the laws established by the governed do not prohibit or otherwise discourage pollution, assets are at risk of being squandered.

Although there is no absence of price signals that most resources are valuable, given the rising costs of fuels, precious metals and other mined/extracted commodities, people as a whole, represented by the UN, by larger, allied-government interests, are coming to view extractives as finite resources. Some, like fuel, wear out, or are wholly-consumed with use. Some, like precious metals, do degrade, but can be re-fined and re-used. Some, like minerals and energy catalysts, fall within a murky territory of degradation and/or depletion through consumption, while also often producing pollutants and by-products which further degrade or damage the environment as a whole.

Because of these characteristics, extractives are becoming public goods, consumables intermediated by the market, therefore theoretically beyond price. Normally, when human societies produce goods of this kind, they may not be sold. Private companies have no incentive to produce goods which cannot be sold. Logically, then, production/use/reclamation of mined, finite resources must be conducted through government intervention.

But, as the U.S. baseball-playing philosopher Yogi Berra said, “it’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.” 

No market can cling to the past. Everyone is affected by something apparently as changeable as the weather-- the future. Is there a perfect storm looming? Let’s look at some of the factors involved.

Widely available internet connectivity; a wired-in economy with radically-shifting concepts of value costs, and processes of production; contrasts between private (goods that can be used by only one economic entity/consumer at a time, and which wear out with use) and public (goods which contribute to our wellbeing, and which, through non-rivalry in consumption, may increase in utility or value with use) goods/products .  Efficiency of distribution is increased because access is so widespread and mobility practically unlimited; efficiency of procurement is increased because with increased knowledge and access come increased confidence in consumption; yet efficiency of market controls, self-selection mechanisms of price, availability, and responsibility have reached a point where accountability is avoided at almost all costs, and so the terrible costs of mis-appropriation or unrivaled assimilation/consumption are being passed on to all individuals, whether they have consumed or profited from use of the resources, or not.

And these costs, of un-limited commercial exploitation, are borne and felt most severely by the public on the periphery of economic well-being, by the subsistence-consumers, by those least able to afford alternatives, and least able to claim the protection of their leaders and governments to prohibit this exploitation.

On our shared planet, we are coming to understand that water and air are valued commodities—yet still “public” resources—characterized by non-exclusivity in access, non-rivalry in consumption. We would perish without water and air. Yet people pay a premium for goods claiming a low “carbon footprint,” pay a premium for “pure water,” pay king’s ransoms for vacations or living spaces with crystal-clear air, sparkling water, nature untrammeled by the noises of an industrial, clamoring public, intent on earning a living, achieving some measure of leisure and entertainment, attaining some security for an increasingly unstable future.

In tinsel-town, on the silver screen, disasters only last as long as the film is running.  In the looming perfect storm of our globally-wired-in, socio-economic biosphere, our lives increasingly resemble a big-screen disaster film: almost predictable in the unprecedented number of shortages, instabilities, black-swan events, and natural disasters. Movie mogul Samuel Goldwyn, credited with his own version of “never make predictions—especially about the future,” might have loved this real-life “script.” Except that this digitally-powered revolution of the market is likely to last long after the excitement disappears, and attendance for most of us is neither voluntary nor painless. Many of our old economic and consumption habits appear to be walking with us on a path toward extinction.

 We do not need every generation to reinvent concepts of social, environmental, and economic responsibility. We can stand on the shoulders of the giants of the past, and dedicate our energies and collective intelligence to moving forward.

Aristotle (384 – 322 BC), wrote in his Politics that: Civilization is a group of good people working together to do good things. While legislation proposing the abolishment of private property and the holding of all things in common appears attractive and might be thought humane [philanthropos], the opposite will prove true. Every state is a sort of partnership [koinonian], and every partnership is formed with a view to accomplishing some good [agathou]… the partnership entitled to the state [polis] and political association [koinoia he politike] would include all the others, work the most of all, and aim at the most supreme of all goods and good things.

Aristotle placed a low value on political innovation, and highly valued balance and stability. He warned against recourse to civil war as a means of correcting political imbalance, because through revolution “the bonds of civil society [politiken koinonian] are loosened.”

If confidence measures the level of trust needed for the economic health of individuals and nations, and monetary systems consist of mixed values, such as: precious metals; resources; production, trade and service assets; trust (confidence)-based paper money, loans, debts, and credit-- then reciprocated-confidence/mutual-trust is a cornerstone of continued economic balance. When work, savings, and investment have been remunerated with favorable returns, then confidence in the soundness of economic behavior, and trust in the continuation of increased wealth grow.

When elements beyond the reasonable expectations of those individuals and nations to maintain their wealth jeopardize or efface economic well-being, individuals are reluctant to abandon their trust in their monetary systems and the politicians and agencies appointed to oversee and run them. Nations are often slow to protect the cornerstones of the credit and economic systems, and in times of economic turmoil, politicians, economists and media pundits offer a confusing and often contradictory barrage of accusations, opinions, and possible solutions. Leaders and businesses are  called upon to rectify bad decisions and economic losses, in exhortations based largely, again, upon “trust” that our collective, national, regional, and community bonds of “civilization” will empower, impel, even compel all the “good people” involved to do “the right thing.”

Possibly because the alternatives, acknowledging the loss of life-savings, fiscal balance or even national economic sovereignty are too frightening to masses of financially-untrained people accustomed to comfortable sustenance or even moderate affluence, confidence in the power of a charismatic voice to re-establish economic order raises even further.

Panic ensues when undermined economic systems, returns for work, trade and investment, insurance against calamity, collapse. Confidence gives way to increasing distrust, in leaders, media, banking and business systems. Unlimited distrust threatens the cessation of services, production, provision, and protection. Local and national economic system failures spiral toward infrastructure crisis, and provide opportunity for a new cadre of leaders to gain the confidence, sway the loyalty, and seize the reins of economic, political, and often, resources/production and military control, either through rebellion/impeachment, coup, or revolution. And the old order is replaced with a new order.

Rules enforcing transparency, financial accountability, and shared responsibility have some role in whether or not safeguards against ensuing insufficiencies of replacement, continuing depletion, corruption and repeated collapse are established and implemented. However, if no citizen-wide, community-to-nation enacted agreement exists to recognize the assessment, arbitration and authority of these rules or powers of enforcement, the fragile re-establishment of economic health and sovereignty remains in jeopardy.

So where does this leave us?

Libya is currently in turmoil; assets frozen, current leadership and a “Libyan Opposition” fighting for their concepts of economic freedom, political sovereignty, individual human rights. A treasure trove of natural resources are at stake. Similar scenes in Egypt find crowds revolting against years of established rule and practices, oil pipelines exploding, futures uncertain. The uneasy peace in resource-rich Sierra Leone, blessed with deep-water ports, a wealth of resources, and struggling to develop a recently-war-wrought, newly-empowered population. Consider also the contrasts in Namibia: poverty and promise, resources, deep-water ports, established elites and emergent populations. And increasingly visible is the unrest in Uganda—with private corporations of foreign nations involved in drilling and mining for oil and resources, profits widening gaps between elite classes, urban dwellers, and some of the most isolated peoples on earth, straddling the horizonless sands of the desert, the endangered waters at the sources of the the Victoria and African Great Lakes, the Nile and other great rivers of the region, experiencing load-shedding and power outages, water pollution, and apparent government clamp-downs on information/internet/communications access and public gatherings.

What of South Africa? Seen as a middle-income, emerging market, South Africa enjoys an abundant supply of natural resources (value estimated in the billions of dollars), well-developed financial, legal, communications, energy and transport sectors; a profit-oriented infrastructure which supports the distribution of goods and services to major urban centers throughout the region.

In 2007, South Africa began to experience an electricity crisis. The 18^th largest stock exchange in the world, trade and trust began to be disrupted. Confidence had blossomed between 2004-2007, as South Africans enjoyed macroeconomic stability, a global commodities boom, and increasing microeconomic development and security among its formerly-excluded, least-advantaged citizens.

Legacies of problems from the apartheid era: poverty, lack of economic empowerment for most of the disadvantaged groups, a shortage of public transportation and services for most of the disadvantaged groups, aged power plants, lack of economic mobility and opportunity for most of the disadvantaged groups, and lack of education and communication, which has largely kept isolated and allowed the exploitation of the disadvantaged groups.

At an economic panel at the World Bank on Thursday, 14 April, 2011, Jay Naidoo, founding General Secretary of the Congress of South African Trade Unions and the former Minister of Communications for President Nelson Mandela’s cabinet said, “Global governance cannot be determined by elites… civil society cannot simply be relegated to side forums… “ Reiterating the fact that the core of the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa was the struggle against a labor system that exploited black workers, Naidoo continued: “Of course there will be attempts to co-opt these movements but I am confident that the leaders know what they want.” http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=55284

On Monday, April 18, 2011, Minerals Minister Susan Shabangu announced that South Africa has found widespread violations during an audit of miners and other mineral rights holders in the country.  Over 400 notices were issued for prospecting violations, and over 700 for environmental violations. The notices include intentions to cancel previously awarded prospecting and related rights licenses. Shabangu was speaking at the official launch of a new online mineral application system that aims to ensure transparency and end administrative blunders. The eastern province of Mpumalanga, which is rich in coal and other minerals, has caused particular concern on the environmental front.

But Minister Shabangu also said that she was disappointed that, “despite our genuine effort to engage them…  BEE (Black Economic Empowerment—a policy in South Africa to expand economic ownership to historically disadvantaged blacks) partners did not even honor this call. “  South African mining companies must be 26 percent black-owned by 2014, and many are scrambling to meet that target—and “fronting”—where black investors are named beneficial owners, but the company is really owned and run by white miners—remains a problem.  http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/18/us-safrica-mining-idUSTRE73H2QF20110418

The process of grafting transparency, economic parity, environmental security and political stability can be very painful. While skill, union or other affiliation, racial or linguistic background, education and access formerly excluded some, and assured others of secure places in the economy, transitions to modern, wired-in systems of education, communication, and exchange have virtually ensured that an entire new ecosystem of public and private goods, holdings and distribution must be developed.

While transition in a few areas may not pose excessive problems to stability, if a large number of economic sectors are challenged, stressed, and fail simultaneously, that perfect storm of instability, crisis, and revolt could ensue. With the price of industrial products becoming, in the digital age, intangible: patents, design, branding, marketing, the price of limited resources, and finite resources is even more intangible.

Who can gauge the cost of depletion or extinction? There is no replication, there are no grafts or infusions or quick fixes to the eradication of something that had been plentiful, which no longer exists.

The competition of the market, for goods so precariously balanced, is fierce. The message is clear. The high profits and privacy margins of industry are in danger, threatened by open source technologies, communication, and accountability. People are able to “unbreak” the misguided misappropriations of resources, access, and distribution of the past. No sector can truly hold itself separate from the perfect storm of information sharing, of digital access, of nearly instant application and accountability.

If the brokers of information are trustworthy, the authorities elected to represent the citizens, to stand in the governments and infrastructures which uphold public values, public and private interests and freedoms, human rights and biosphere-sustainability will be well able to at least guide our progress to the future. The rules of physics have yet to be transformed; Niels Bohr is still correct—“it is very difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.”

But when governments can integrate the advances which internet-enabled collaboration and verification have commenced, states can also use the internet, the coordination of wired-in systems of infrastructure, to safeguard the markets, the possible nationalization of finite resources, the re-assessment of resources and products as private goods produced in coordination with the public good… Individuals can, in a wired-in world, pursue their specific interests, maximize their abilities, and still have time and the knowledge to affirm that the states and officials whom they elect and support are safeguarding the interdependent systems which connect us all.

Should South Africa nationalize its mining and extractive industries? We all share the problems of scarcity, depletion, pollution, human rights access/violations, bio-security, which face all humanity. We are not necessarily burdened with the task of deciding who should benefit and profit from extracting and using the minerals and resources buried in the earth of South Africa, any more than global citizens are responsible for deciding the sovereign affairs of the unsettled situations in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Uganda, and elsewhere. Where there can be a black market of goods traded over the internet, as well as a reconfigured open market accountable through access to the internet, the economy will be challenged, will require reconfiguring from old models of ownership and profit through exclusivity, to more equitable, open, sustainable systems.

We may not have the advantage of being able to forecast the future, but we can protect our futures, requiring those handling the goods, services, resources, and profits of our individual efforts to maintain transparent, equitable, accountable and responsible practices