Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

the_grungydan t1_iv5wmnq wrote

The obvious counter to that argument is that we compete because we perceive resources as scarce, and therefore something over which to compete. As we grow closer to (and in some ways have already far surpassed) the vagaries of actual scarcity, we must be willing to make conscious change to accept that reality.

Put another way, we only have to compete today because of massive inequality and the enforcement of a scarcity mentality by power structures that benefit from the status quo.

Anyone telling you otherwise is profiting from how things are.

2

TheManInTheShack t1_iv5x0eq wrote

Which resources are not actually scarce but only appear to be? And how is the entire planet being fooled so easily?

1

the_grungydan t1_iv6cps0 wrote

Hint: getting a new flagship smartphone that requires some actually fairly scarce material isn't a human need.

Yes, I'm discussing something that would have to be done hand in hand with reworking what we consider valuable or necessary to some degree.

But runaway crony capitalism and the TV/radio/internet screaming that you "need" the latest and greatest Thing are poisons that will continue to keep humanity from moving beyond primitive "competition" and into a more sustainable cooperative.

It's about a realignment of values, and the value we assign to things. But the idea that "competition" in the modern world is some natural state that isn't the direct result of propaganda and manipulation is ridiculous.

1

TheManInTheShack t1_iv72wol wrote

Over time values will change (that is a virtual certainty) and hopefully for the better. But society needs to change. Our government must represent the interests of the people not the other way around.

2