ABSTRACT
Marx and Hayek both believed that no one could at will transcend the material and cultural conditions of their times if they wanted to effect some actual social change. I agree with this as a general proposition. However, I believe it needs to be modified because the times we live in are unique in the sense that never before has humanity been confronted by a disaster of such potential global proportions. At no other time in the history of humankind has the total population faced the same emergency at the same time and, although awareness and preparedness to do something about it is growing, the response has so far been inadequate. This is a form of globalisation that, while including the world economy, also surpasses it. In the long-term the global aspect has the potential to propel economics towards becoming internationally more equitable and human – and naturefriendly. But, as I have argued throughout the book, before this can happen, we need to reject the two ideologies that until now have dominated how we think and act. The first relates to Marx’s proposition that there is a known destination towards which human society is inexorably tending. The second is the Hayekian contention that we are on the verge of arriving at a desirable point and that all will be well with the world as long as we accept that the best way to get there is to rely on the spontaneous forces of the market and of society as a whole. The pressures upon us are great and urgent because, within less than
fifty years, it is likely that global warming will have reached the critical point of establishing a self-perpetuating loop. This will lead to more warming while demands on the planet’s resources will have increased by a factor of three or four. We therefore require more than just a general vision: we need to put into effect some very specific and concrete measures to enable us to prevent the destruction of humanity and our planet.
