(under a pavilion surrounded by wild field, a group sits for the last time with Dr. Capra) 





I disagree with the caracterture of the global economy you gave in last nights lecture. You have posited it as something else besides the organic evolution of market relationship.


If we are to believe in the interconnectedness of all living beings, as well as all organizing social structures, setting up globalism, with an inherent judgment value, as being a force working in the opposite of sustainability; we are still operating within the Cartesian dualities that we pretend to be escaping. 


Capitalism & global trade have experience the same sorts of cellular mutations that you described in the tide pools one million years ago. Where slavery once existed as a sound economic practice, moral justness and the essential rights of human beings soon became more pertinent, and thus the marketplace adjusted accordingly. Banning slave labor and so on and so forth.


Various examples of a moral marketplace can be made, from the retraction of Europe throughout the colonies, to child labor laws. It is easy to forget that only seventy years ago children worked ninety  hours on end in NYC.


Casting capitalism as the “other” is to cast it as a social structure that we are not intricately complicit in through every single facet of our daily transactions.

If we are to understand the web of life, there is no room for moralizing the evolution of market dynamics. In the way that it was accepting of slave trade four hundred years ago, the global economy has been accepting of environmental degradation for the past fifty. it is wrong to think that our consciousness has reached an evolutionary highpoint; as men and women across the earth our consciousness evolves into higher states as time and knowledge proliferate; it is reasonable to assume that the marketplace will mutate towards a more sustainable structure.


Fritjof Capra: 

As to not dominate the discussion, anyone else?