Davos Forum 2023, from the crudeness of economists to the lack of ideals: the commentary
Today, January 18, 2023, is the third day of work at Forums in Davos. Scrolling through the myriad of interesting information, I come across this sentence: “Governments and central banks may face inflationary pressures stubborn over the next two years, also in consideration of the potential extension of the war in Ukraine, ongoing bottlenecks caused by a persistent pandemic, and economic wars spurring supply chain decoupling. (Omitted) Even if some economies experience a softer-than-expected economic landing, the end of the era of low interest rates it will have significant consequences for governments, businesses and individuals”.
The note continues: “The knock-on effects will be felt most acutely by the most vulnerable groups of society and already fragile states, contributing to theincrease in povertyfrom the fameof the violent protestsdell’political instability and even to the collapse of states. Economic pressures will also erode the earnings of middle-income households, spurring unrest, political polarization and calls for greater social protections in countries around the world.”
The statement concludes: “Governments will continue to face a dangerous balancing act between protecting a large swath of citizens from a protracted cost-of-living crisis, without incorporating inflation, and covering debt service costs, while revenues are under pressure pressure from the economic downturn, an increasingly urgent transition to new energy systems and a less stable geopolitical environment. There new economic era which will result could be characterized by a growing divergence between rich and poor countries and the first setback in human development in decades.”
I share this analysis here, by no means original, to underline what is completely missing: a political vision. The “potential prolongation of the war in Ukraine” and the “persistent pandemic” are (among) the assumptions that could lead to the “first setback of human development in decades”. The world governed by economists it’s like this: totally free of the first ability required of one who has the responsibility to govern his fellows: a political vision.
In the mercantilist society of the West – entirely based on the interest rate mortgage – our relationship to society is limited to what economists see. A philosopher would argue that society is not just a series of economic relationships, a politician that society can be shaped by corrective action based on an ideology, a jurist that the foundation of civil coexistence is in the social contract. An economist analyzes economic reports (for the benefit of the status quo, at least if invited to Davos) and it stops there.
What is transhumanism
Il transhumanism it’s a cultural movement which advocates the use of discoveries scientific and technological to increase the physical abilities e cognitive and improve those aspects of the human condition which are considered undesirable, such as the disease and ageingalso in view of one possible post-human transformation.
In my view, the absolute supremacy of economists is obscenely crude. As a jurist, I would prefer someone who cares about ideas or rights. If I were religious, I would opt for religious leaders. The only humans they have still an ideal charge (and I’m sorry to note it: since as an agnostic I cannot share it) it is precisely the latter. Nevertheless, our fates are decided by economists.
We have let modernity be governed solely by economists and computer scientists. So – again, as it happened to me after reading the three books of Klaus Schwab – I turn off the computer convinced that dissidence can do nothing against the excessive power of the economy. Il the result will be transhumanism.
Subscribe to the newsletter
