TO become resilient, we must first start to identify the weaknesses we face.
Creating an economy and a society that can withstand the challenges ahead is an exceptionally daunting task – or at least it should be. While many scientists, civic organisations and voices from within communities highlight the impacts of poly-crisis, our politicians construct an ever-higher wall, separating them further from reality.
At the absolute worst time, we have business-as-usual administrations in Holyrood, Westminster and across most of the global North.
READ MORE: Don't go with the flow: Why GDP is a terrible measure of an economy
That business-as-usual attitude is formulaic. Here is the playbook. Growth will save us all. We have at length explained why achieving GDP per capita growth is both unlikely and damaging for our society, but it remains the bedrock of the “business as usual” approach to policymaking.
With this powerful growth narrative, policymakers can highlight that had the financial crisis of 2007-2008 not happened, everything would have been so much better. And the pandemic – without that, things would have really been ticking along nicely. That cost of living crisis is just a short deviation from the path that will save us all. Sound familiar?
This approach fails to recognise or acknowledge that these types of crises are built into capitalism and that after each crisis, the wealth of the 1% increases. It is how the system is designed.
Pointing out these episodes as “bumps in the road” enables the wealthiest in our society to increase their wealth and power by ensuring the overall system does not change.
This is a useful narrative for those who want to continue business as usual, as it allows opposite parties to blame whichever political party was unlucky enough to be in power then.
Besides growth, their other powerful framing device is the idea that government money must be paid back. Their version of the last 20 years says that the massive government support in the past means we must tighten the government purse strings. Fiscal responsibility, as our First Minister called it recently. There is no better phrase for identifying the business-as-usual types.
This deep misunderstanding of the purpose of government money hamstrings our society. The government creates new net financial wealth for the private sector, and doing this consistently over the decades will make us more resilient to shocks. To call for fiscal responsibility – AKA austerity – is to continue on a path that has already caused so much damage.
These two ideas, working together, box us into a position where we see only one escape route: the business-as-usual one – or, as MMT economist Stephanie Kelton calls it, learned helplessness.
As we continue along the well-worn road, we abandon everything important to our long-term health and wellbeing. Instead, we try to increase the monetary value of an economy by issuing as little public money as possible. This ensures only one thing: that those who already have the wealth continue to get more of it.
Our institutional design, from the power of markets to the overarching role of interest rates set by the Bank of England and the devolved settlement, ensures we lack the ability to self-organise to change our systems to avoid shocks and disturbances.
The challenge ahead is a systemic one
This period of capitalism has failed to produce the type of society we have all been striving for, and I argue that in the global Noth, it has caused most of our problems.
To observe that damage, just look out the window.
We already see the negative impacts of climate change, as sodden fields lead to failed harvests and flooded homes.
Changing global power dynamics play out on our TVs and in our shopping baskets, and we seem powerless to respond.
A climate emergency has to be something more than a catchphrase.
It is important not to hide from the level of change needed to create a different type of economy. No tweaking can be done in Scotland, the UK or the global North.
A resilient economy will inherit all of our institutions, and we must systematically analyse them all and jettison many of them.
This process will lead to a very different type of economy – inherently a much more socialist one.
Redesigning the economy is a massive challenge; unfortunately, there is no desire for that to happen in Westminster or Holyrood, where business as usual finds very comfortable resting places.
Before creating a new economy and society, we must say this out loud: what we have done for the last 40 years has not worked. It is not enough for economists or communities to say this. The message must come from our political leaders. They must say there is no “breakthrough” point where everything the neoliberal governments of the last 40 years delivered starts to work for us. This is the first step and will be a cathartic moment.
Scotland faces many challenges in creating a resilient economy. Admitting the size of that challenge is essential. With as much power and confidence, we must also say that the current escape route is unrealistic.
Once we say those things out loud, we give ourselves at least a fighting chance of building the type of resilient economy that supports the society we want.
Next week, we outline some of Scotland's specific challenges to create a more resilient economy.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel