Today one of my contacts on Facebook published a note that stated “the human being is the only species that has to pay to live on this planet”. Since money is not an invention from nature but something that we thought up our selves, the ones that control the money control the human living on Earth. This is a rather disturbing thought. No Darwin, no evolutionary awareness, no God, no consciousness or genetics, faith or karma, just some political or greedy banker who grants permission to live, against certain contractual conditions.
Right now it can be scientifically demonstrated that the organized greed around money and money based systems devastes nature and our human evolution. Our dependence on money is so controled that it has become nearly impossible to even imagine a human world without it. Just try it in your own mind. Where would you get your basic needs from (food, water, clothing, housing, etc)? How would you organize your life to get access to the perceived abundance that you seem to have today? How would you ensure sustainable evolutionary progress without damaging our habitat and providing equal chances for all the members of our species? If you do not depend anymore on the permission to live of those who control the money based systems, how would you assure your own and evolutionary survival? Our vulnerability is clear here. Will you remain among the lucky ones?
Still, inside the economised world permission to live goes hand in hand with permission to die. The human life is seen as a productive asset as well as a costly burden at a later age. “People are dying well these days” an economist said when referring to the graying population and the tendency of living longer and longer, thanks to effective healthcare and scientific progress. For those who can afford life death becomes negotiable too. Lots of elderly people are being kept alive against their will while painful operations and recovery are continuously done “because it is scientifically or medically possible”. A discussion has started as to when someone should be allowed to die a natural death or kept medically alive? In times of crisis the costs of keeping people alive is making the discussion even more morbid. “After age 70 we donot provide new hips” a doctor said. “Can’t treat your urgency sir, you still have an outstanding debt” the dentist said. People with money go health shopping in other countries were transplants or operations are done for the highest bidder. Poor people are not even allowed near a doctor or hospital. Children in poverty die because they have no access at all to expensive medicin and they are no market for pharma industries. Those children could be the 21st century Einstein through pure statistics.
Permission to live and die is now a matter of economics, not of evolution. The natural selection of the species goes via the bank account. What genetic disorder will that provide over time? Undoubtedly the gen of greed will florish which will just have a further impact on the level of human agression and criminality in the world. The survival of the greediest. That does not promise much good for our species. It will be interesting to study the long term genetic impact of capitalist economics.
Permission to live is in this economic sense contrary to the freedom to evolve. We develop the tendency to pass on the worst of ourselves, not just in culture or behavior but also genetically and morally.
[…] preceded with a large period of overall political, executive and public negation which will cause death and disaster beyond any historic precedence. Those who are to blame will still be alive when all this happens […]