A system based on infinite growth, in a world with finite matter?

SGR March, 29 (PTK) As the capitalists say, they would not fight about who will receive what much of the pie they have, but instead, would keep increasing the size of the pie. One question is, when the pastry dough is finite, how will the pie keep increasing?

And thus, we come to the real world scenario, where the more fortunate members of the dinner take up the larger section of the pie, while others are illusioned that the pie will grow, and hence, are able to secure a negligible portion. In fact, the pie could have sufficed for all, only if the distribution had had been equal. Similarly, the world produces enough food for 10 billion people. In contrast, the total population of the globe is a little over 7 billion. Yet, however, there are people fortunate enough to eat one hot dog after the other in eating competitions, while more than 600 million people are starving.

Food production cannot be expanded beyond what suffices for 10 billion people. However, we haven’t even reached that population, yet, distribution of food, in this competitive system, is failing.

This system, produces much more than humanity needs, yet fails in distributing the produce. Once in every decade, the production outweighs demand, and recession is caused by this stagnation. As a result, businesses shut, workers go unemployed, lower-middle-class folks are pushed into the lower-class and the lower-class starves. What do we see here? Here we have a system reliant on competition, producing an extraordinary amount of surplus, yet, people are starving?

Does this prove that spontaneous actions are much more efficient? Let’s consider an army, fighting a war. A war has its own intricacies, filled with thousands of tiny events. The efficient actions taken by the army are not spontaneous actions, but rather, actions well-planned by the command. Armed parties relying on spontaneous actions aren’t called armies, they would be even worse off than isolated guerilla fighters, in fighting.

In fact, such a system does not even remain competitive. One time innovations make consumers flock to a particular company. This brings this company, enormous profits, while others go bankrupt and shut. By the time the people feel no benefit in buying from the existing company, the others are already shut. And to prevent any competition from arising, this large company funds politicians. This makes the system degenerate into corporatism, with a few large companies dominating the market. This can be seen in the US, where some decades back, tens of companies controlled the media, while today, most mainstream media there is monopolized by six or so large corporates. When these corporates collude with the Government, Fascism is born.

Can this system even solve social issues? It simply doesn’t! This system chases profit at all costs. Whatever seems profitable, is sought after. For example, not long ago, Coca Cola added a rainbow pride flag on its bottle. Reverse back to 1936 Berlin Olympics. Hitler was in power in Germany, and under his regime, queerfolks faced widespread persecution. Back then, Coca Cola had added the Nazi eagle, on its bottle, for popular marketing. Hypocrisy at its best?

Likewise, the feminist movement has become an opportunity for capitalist marketing, to sell “girl power” shirts. If they saw no opportunities in it, just like how they saw no opportunities in feminism, several decades back, they won’t support it, for they have no interest in women’s liberation. Profit is the only thing they chase. And it is quite profitable to hire female workers for low or no wages, due to the societal order.

Thus we see, social problems aren’t solved by capitalism, solving them requires social co-ordination, which capitalism despises. Let’s have a look at one of the greatest achievements of humanity, space travel. The space race was initially dominated by the USSR, responsible for sending the first satellite, the first animal, the first human, and the first space station to space. US, the home of capitalists, succeeded in putting a man on the moon. But was US’s success possible due to private hands? The space program was a government-run, taxpayer-funded, public program. (PTK)