Shiva Dave
The repressive European feudal regimes, rife with casteism, injustice, and conflicts, gave way to capitalism in the late 17th century. Internal strife, serf rebellions, and general system inefficiencies, along with the effects of the crusades, eventually gave rise to mercantilism and communication. As a result of these changes, there was an enormous amount of trade and wealth, which led to the development of towns, the middle class, an improvement in the lives of peasants, and finally, the birth of capitalism. Feudalism was seen as obsolete when the masses were exposed to science, art, and economic independence, particularly during the Renaissance, and the foundations of capitalism were laid.
Since its inception, capitalism has uplifted hundreds of thousands of people, offering them a glimmer of hope and transferring authority from a small number of elitists like monarchs and nobles to the general populace. With the advent of capitalism, our world has become more connected than ever, thanks to massive waves of trade, riches, and globalization. Despite its advantages, we are reverting to the previous methods as inequality is once again, more out of control. Our planet's continued existence is called into doubt as our greed consumes the world while the quality of our lives declines. We must reconsider our approach to capitalism for a more sustainable and prosperous society.
Today, eight people own as much wealth as 50 percent of the global population of 7.4 billion. In the USA, the richest 1 percent own 34 percent of the wealth, and the wealthiest 10 percent own 74 percent of the wealth (Hodgson. 2016), while 71% of the world's population lives in countries where inequality has risen (UN. 2020). These numbers clearly show the vastness of the wealth gap and the direness of the inequality in our world.
Economic inequality is surprisingly linked with unsustainability in two ways. Firstly, those living in poorer regions are much more vulnerable to disasters than their more affluent counterparts. According to a recent World Bank study, impoverished countries and people are more susceptible to disasters such as droughts, floods, and heat waves than their wealthier counterparts. For example, the infrastructure and preparedness for environmental disasters are almost always better in higher-income countries. In the US, 91% of farmers have crop insurance to cover losses from extreme weather; however, only 15% of farmers in India and 1% of farmers in Malawi have crop insurance, according to a new World Bank research. Countries with higher incomes also recover from disasters considerably more swiftly than nations with lower incomes. Unlike Haiti, which is still suffering homelessness, cholera, and severe food shortages following its 2010 earthquake of comparable scale, Japan rebounded from its 1995 earthquake quickly, with railways operating at 80 percent capacity within a month. And mass food shortages from its 2010 earthquake of similar magnitude (Thersa, 2017).
However, things don't stop there. It turns out that inequality itself negatively impacts the ecosystem. Due to their propensity to produce more carbon dioxide, excessive meat consumption, and waste generation, the more wealthy nations produce more pollution. On the other hand, in their more egalitarian counterparts, such as South Korea, Switzerland, Sweden, and Germany, not only do the wealthy pollute less, but the pollution level is also lower on the whole (Guardian,2017).
This might be the case since status anxiety is fueled by inequality, and people in unequal societies tend to spend money quickly on unaffordable commodities in an effort to live up to the standards of success set by the wealthy and the rest of society. Individual consumption accounts for 64% of world emissions, even if growing nations like China and India account for a sizable portion of greenhouse gas emissions (Oxfam, 2015).
Despite the fact that capitalism may have provided a break from feudalism and offered prosperity to the masses, we often miss the more sinister aspects of what it has evolved into in modern times. It is currently a system that repeatedly uses unsustainable methods to promote social or environmental instability. The question is "Whether capitalism is sustainable for the world any longer."
The solution to that question would be "Social Finance." According to Europa.eu, Social Finance can support sustainability by "channeling private investment into the transition to a climate-neutral, climate-resilient, resource-efficient, and fair economy as a supplement to public money." This basically means investing in and prioritizing sustainable development goals, including environmental conservation, through an increasing financial flow to green policies, projects, and initiatives. This would result in increased transparency and funding for environmental projects, increasing employment and opening up novel economic options, reducing inequality, and improving quality of life.
Comments