I liked Bob Herbert's op-ed in today's NYT, which shines light on a much neglected "problem " at the very core of our society (Working for a pittance).

 

It is a "problem" whose roots go very, very deep - in fact, right the way back to man's "more animal than human" nature, which still provides (mostly denied or unrecognised) many of the values, attitudes and aspirations on which our society and economy are based.

 

We are the planet's "Greatest Ape " and although we have a good deal of social behaviour programmed into us, it evolved to enhance the survival of the family and clan, not society at large (let alone our whole species, which is why our efforts to address global problems - particularly those relating to our impact on climate and the environment, which are threatening our very survival - are so hopelessly inadequate).

It is our "animal nature " which insists there can be no limit to personal wealth or income, and employs our great intellectual ability to rationalise and justify it.

In contrast, our higher, more enlightened, human nature tells us that there have to be "limits ", now that we have become so powerful and numerous. Otherwise the ever increasing drain and strain we are placing on Earth's limited resources and carrying capacity will be exceeded and we (or our children and coming generations) will be in very serious trouble indeed (which is a gross understatement, of course).

There has to be a limit to the number of "straws " each of us is allowed to place on the "camel's back " (here symbolic for Earth's finite carrying capacity). There also have to be limits on wealth and income differentials.

Before we can do that we have to change some of the values, attitudes and aspirations which are rooted in our "more animal than human" nature, for ones based on our more enlightened, human nature.

I'm talking "revolution " of course - but it is either that or extinction. Which doesn't really leave us a lot of choice.