Amory Lovins’ Logic in Natural Capitalism
In the first chapter of Natural Capitalism, author Amory Lovins proposes a new method of capitalism that recognizes the importance of natural and human capital in the industrial system. Conventional capitalism places value only on capital that yields financial gain, and ignores the human and natural parts of the equation. Lovins points to this as the reason for many of the environmental, social, and economic problems on our planet today. He argues that the destructive practices of conventional capitalism must cease, and that a new industrial revolution must happen that will change how human beings support themselves and sustain the resources of the planet. In this chapter he offers suggestions as to how to implement such a revolution.
The chapter opens with a passage describing an idealistically perfect world. In this utopian society, unemployment no longer exists and the demand for welfare has dropped. Oil only costs five dollars per barrel due to the discovery of alternate fuel sources. Lovins paints a picture of a world that everyone would like to live in, and says that such a clean world can become a reality if people read his book and follow the suggestions within. He also describes all the bad things happening in the world as a result of conventional capitalism and what will happen if governments and corporations continue on the present path. Lovins explains the relationship between the dwindling amount of natural resources, and the companies that exhaust them for financial gain without concern for sustaining the ecosystem of the planet. The resulting social problems such as poverty, malnutrition, and anarchy are of no concern to the corporations...
... middle of paper ...
...emotional rhetoric than it needs. This chapter is heavily spiced with emotional appeal to sway readers without really delving into the actual argument. The entire opening paragraph and the first few pages contain nothing but emotional appeal. Lovins uses rhetoric designed to sway the emotions of the reader with the utopian scenario that he promises will come from changing the current capitalistic practices, and the vivid descriptions of the horrors of our environmental crisis. However, one should not assume that this chapter is merely emotional persuasion. Lovins bases his argument on rational logic and his informational sources are distinguished experts in their field. He makes a strongly supported claim and his words give me food for thought. I believe it would be wise for people to listen to the logical claim that Lovins presents and follow his suggestions.
Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen S. M. (Eds.). (2014). Social work case studies: Foundation year. Retrieved from http://class.waldenu.edu.
The first part of the metaphor “Pave the Planet” is a solution that resorts to the globalization movement of using the world’s technological advancements. With this method a capitalist society believes that in order to gain more wealth and success it is necessary for the society to keep using the world’s resources, producing products, and consuming these products. This belief of consistent greed and competition to gain more and more wealth is derived from “the fact that humans are fundamentally self-centered” (79). Although these beliefs and values seem immoral and corrupt, this method has proven quite a success for the global economy in the past. For example, “more goods and services were consumed in the forty years between 1950 and 1990 than by all the previous human generations” (80). ...
Bill McKibben's "The Environmental Issue from Hell" argues that climate change is a real and dire concern for humanity. His essay deals with the methods and persuasive arguments needed to spur American citizens and the government on to change to more eco-friendly choices. The arguments he proposes are based largely upon emotional appeals calling for empathy and shame, and examples of what in our daily lives is adding to the changes we're seeing in the climate.
It is a melancholy object to those who travel through this great country to see isolated corners of this fair realm still devoted to protecting the environment. The wretched advocators of these ideals are frequently seen doling out petitions and begging at their neighbours’ doors to feed their obsession, which keeps them in the contemptible poverty that they so richly deserve.
Many people believe that capitalism has made a positive impact on the world, making it a better place to live in. Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, in his article, “Making capitalism more creative” supports this belief. He emphasizes how capitalism has transformed this world and how it would make life better off in the future. Gates also stresses on how governments and different companies can involve new people in the capitalist setup to decrease economic disparity. However, capitalism is not as beneficial as Gates puts it. It has a dark side with respect to economic inequality, government involvement, new markets and social responsibility.
As societal pressures for higher education increase, more emphasis has been placed on the importance of a minimum of a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university. This has led to the increased enrollment of students with learning disabilities over the past decade. According to a recent survey from the National Clearinghouse on Postsecondary Education for Individuals with Disabilities, one in eleven full-time first-year students entering college in 1998 self-reported a disability. This translates to approximately 154,520 college students, or about 9% of the total number of first-year freshmen, who reported a wide range of disabilities, ranging from attention deficit disorder to writing disabilities (Horn).
As a government, Communism was different from anything else and had distinctive goals. Though, as a whole and in simplified terms, what was Communism? Communism violently attempted to take over a country by eliminating all other political systems and the different classes of people in a socialistic way through the use of dictatorships (Ebenstein). Communism’s main goal was to spread Communism from country to country until the whole world was in a Communistic state. In their eyes, this made the world a better place, but it also removed the opposition of countries with different government systems (Overstreet). Communists did not mind going to war and losing thousands of lives if it would help to spread Communism (Communism, the Courts, and the Constitution). Under Communism, everything was owned by the government including farms and factories. This not only eliminated capitalism, but it also gave the government the power to control the countries’ food supply and other...
Capitalism, by definition is known as “a way of organizing an economy so hat the things that are used to make and transport products are owned by individual people and companies rather than by the government”(Marxism). To some, this is the correct way of handling the economic situation in one’s country. But to others, such as Karl Marx and Adam Smith, there are other systems that would be more adequate. Is capitalism really the best way to go? What are the other options that could be better than capitalism? We must see which would be the best for society. If one were to negatively affect it, then it is not an option that should be taken. So, we must see the pros and cons for capitalism and how it can affect the economy and our society.
...e unnecessary moneymakers, products of lies and deception behind the scenes, orchestrated by powerful and rich men who usually never suffer but, rather, gain from their machinations to create war. I support a National Service Obligation system that would draft all persons, at age 18, to serve for 18 months in some form of public service. This would allow American citizens to contribute to the country in different ways. But it should be one?s own decision how to contribute to the country. As said before, I believe that reinstating the military draft will not increase patriotism or a sense of duty, but will rather decrease the effectiveness of the military and will create huge protest feeling among country?s citizens. Therefore we should explore every possible way to contribute the country?s future instead of just putting our future and ourselves in the Meat Grinder.
Article writer Stewart Walker believes when President Nixon ignored the fact that an all-volunteer army is very expensive, he made a big mistake (Walker, 6). The budgetary cost may be lower for a draft military than an all-volunteer army (higher pay is usually an incentive for enlisting); however, draftees have a lower reenlistment rate (Goodman, par. 2 & 5). Thus, efficiency is diminished and training costs are raised (par. 2). Walker also believes the argument that the draft undermines patriotism since every citizen should feel obligated to serve (Walker, par. 6). Americans are endowed with the right of individually liberty, but the draft constricts the very thing we are fighting for (Should, par. 5). Innocent Americans are having their liberty taken away so that they can be used as human shields to fight a war they wanted no part in (Henderson, par. 2). Walker even mentions that over thirty percent of Vietnam War deaths were draftees (par. 8). Americans are also endowed with the freedom of religion. Many religious worshippers are pacifists, and forcing them to fight would take away a common American freedom. A draft also contradicts American’s importance on voting (Editorial par. 2 & 5). Every year, politicians stress urge young Americans to vote; however, the draft registrations scares young votes (par. 2 & 5). Despite disregarding innocent humans dying, Walker mentions how
Despite the increasing amount of scientific evidence that support global climate change, many countries still use fossil fuels. The U.S. in particular is considering the revitalization of the coal industry instead of focusing on the production of clean energy. This inability to change will eventually lead to our downfall and our world will become like that of Lauren’s. In order for our survival, we have to seek out other planets because we are not changing fast enough for the sake of our planet. As our world’s climate continues to change rapidly, our resources are running and we are starting to split the world’s population into two groups: the wealthy and the poor. This is a sign that our world might become like that of Lauren’s dystopia. We cannot continue to live in this world with the belief that there is a world after death, like Lauren says, “We'll adapt. We'll have to. God is Change” (Butler, 147). We, human race, have to adapt and change or else we will eventually disappear. There is no supernatural being that can save us from our own destruction because the human race refuses to change. Even if we manage to move another planet, we will eventually turn that planet into another hell. The problem is not with the world, it is with
(Isaac, Newton). Analogous to the duty of Americans to protect and serve for interest of country. Two years of compulsory service can provide useful skills to young adults for a life time and the reason to enact conscription. To most young adults the first question is,” how is this going to benefit me?” “What do I get out of it?” First, military service can give a young adult direction in life. If a young man or women is not sure of where or what they want to do or be in life they can fulfill their commitment to two years of service while they decide what they want to pursue in life. Service can also provide opportunities to pursue new interest, new trade skills or finite and master skills. Compulsory service can also provide a young adult with life skills that can be beneficial throughout life. A two year commitment can insure communications skills which will be beneficial in the future and are essential skills to both personal and professional lives. Additionally, implementation of conscription builds leadership and the keys to success. Service can also provide young adults with healthy choice in life, whether it be physical fitness, mental stability, being an active member of society or having self-confidence. These are all attributes earned by serving and a reason that compulsory service is useful to young
Capitalism dominates the world today. Known as a system to create wealth, capitalism’s main purpose is to increase profits through land, labor and free market. It is a replacement of feudalism and slavery. It promises to provide equality and increases living standards through equal exchanges, technological innovations and mass productions. However, taking a look at the global economy today, one can clearly see the disparity between developed and developing countries, and the persistence of poverty throughout the world despite the existence of abundant wealth. This modern issue was predicted and explained a hundred and fifty years ago in Karl Marx’s Capital.
One of the major points that Kaplan makes and he focuses on heavily in the beginning of the article is how environmental scarcity plays an impact on people’s decisions. There is a finite amount of natural resources in the world for people to use, and we are fast approaching a point where the world can no longer support our growing population. All of this is spurred on by an increase in practices that cause deforestation, soil erosion, pollution and global warming. A great analogy within the article is that we are robbing from tomorrow’s future to support the present, which is shown in that “…man is challenging nature far beyond its limits, and nature is now beginning to take its revenge.” (Kaplan, 1994) The new major threat that every nation and person has to be aware of is how the immediate results of our mismanagement of the environment can have a tremendous backlash, not only within our lives but the lives of future generations. All of these environmental concerns are dots that connect with Kaplan’s other main arguments.
A rising topic of argument among the United States is whether military service should be mandatory or remain completely voluntary. This is a topic that has been discussed among the people for a very long time. Currently, it is not mandatory for a United States citizen to serve any time in the military. Similar to any other topic of debate, there are many people who disagree, and there are people who agree that military service should not be mandatory. Fifty-two percent of people believe that military service should be mandatory, leaving forty-eight percent saying that it is a choice, not a premade decision. (Debate.org) Both arguments have valid points, but there are a few points that rise above others. Do we want unproven citizens weighing the strongest and most feared military down?