{"title":"The great reset: Could Henry George be the antidote to the world economic forum?","authors":"Clifford W. Cobb","doi":"10.1111/ajes.12538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Great Reset, as envisioned by the World Economic Forum, involves another step in the evolution toward a system of close cooperation between the national security state and key corporations that can manage information and limit dissent. In return for allowing state control of many facets of personal life, the state offers to take care of the needs of citizens who are in compliance with their assigned place in the social order. Already citizens have given up considerable autonomy and allow constant surveillance, mostly through smartphones. The only true alternative to a paternalist trajectory is to imagine a different kind of great reset, one in which society is organized around genuine principles of self-governance and self-reliance. This idea can be traced to the American social theorist Henry George and further back to roots in ancient China of the philosophy of <i>wu wei</i>. The main idea is that higher-order systems are designed to offer both stability and freedom to lower-order systems. Rather than trying to abolish an intrusive state apparatus, the aim is to create systems that obviate the need for a welfare state or a warfare state. This is a tall order to fill, but it is worth striving for as a way of preserving the distinctive human capacities for both individual initiative and social bonding. Unless millions work to create a decentralized world order, we are almost surely doomed to endure a technocratic future of increasing surveillance and management of our private lives.</p>","PeriodicalId":47133,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Economics and Sociology","volume":"82 5","pages":"513-522"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Economics and Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajes.12538","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The Great Reset, as envisioned by the World Economic Forum, involves another step in the evolution toward a system of close cooperation between the national security state and key corporations that can manage information and limit dissent. In return for allowing state control of many facets of personal life, the state offers to take care of the needs of citizens who are in compliance with their assigned place in the social order. Already citizens have given up considerable autonomy and allow constant surveillance, mostly through smartphones. The only true alternative to a paternalist trajectory is to imagine a different kind of great reset, one in which society is organized around genuine principles of self-governance and self-reliance. This idea can be traced to the American social theorist Henry George and further back to roots in ancient China of the philosophy of wu wei. The main idea is that higher-order systems are designed to offer both stability and freedom to lower-order systems. Rather than trying to abolish an intrusive state apparatus, the aim is to create systems that obviate the need for a welfare state or a warfare state. This is a tall order to fill, but it is worth striving for as a way of preserving the distinctive human capacities for both individual initiative and social bonding. Unless millions work to create a decentralized world order, we are almost surely doomed to endure a technocratic future of increasing surveillance and management of our private lives.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Economics and Sociology (AJES) was founded in 1941, with support from the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, to encourage the development of transdisciplinary solutions to social problems. In the introduction to the first issue, John Dewey observed that “the hostile state of the world and the intellectual division that has been built up in so-called ‘social science,’ are … reflections and expressions of the same fundamental causes.” Dewey commended this journal for its intention to promote “synthesis in the social field.” Dewey wrote those words almost six decades after the social science associations split off from the American Historical Association in pursuit of value-free knowledge derived from specialized disciplines. Since he wrote them, academic or disciplinary specialization has become even more pronounced. Multi-disciplinary work is superficially extolled in major universities, but practices and incentives still favor highly specialized work. The result is that academia has become a bastion of analytic excellence, breaking phenomena into components for intensive investigation, but it contributes little synthetic or holistic understanding that can aid society in finding solutions to contemporary problems. Analytic work remains important, but in response to the current lop-sided emphasis on specialization, the board of AJES has decided to return to its roots by emphasizing a more integrated and practical approach to knowledge.