There is hope Opinions

It may seem strange to talk about hope in these dark times. In Palestine, the horror of the Apple violence is associated with the exciting specifications of Western powers. In Sudan, the war is prepared, as the Darfur people again face war crimes on a large scale. While in the United States, Blitzkrieg took the proceeds of the Borregevish tyranny of surprise and left the destruction in his aftermath.

However, I hope there will be. Because, across the iceberg of political repression, reaction, green buds flow to the possibility, with movements of different types indicating a typical transformation that puts people before profit, and thus draws a path for the two progress.

The last example is the victory of Zahran Mamdani in the initial elections of the Democratic Party of the New York Mayor’s race. Mamdani was successful because he focused on the economic difficulties facing the poor and middle class and promised free and foundational basics, such as public transport and child care. More importantly, I suggest paying the price of all of this by raising taxes on companies and wealthy people.

In the United Kingdom, after years of wild, progressive of various types gather behind Zac Bolanski’s attempt to lead the Green Party. After announcing his intention to challenge the leadership seat, the party’s membership jumped by 8 percent in the first month alone, as people adopted his call to curb the authority of companies, impose taxes on the wealthy, and make sure that the state serves 99 percent instead of 1, and now and in our future that was moved to the climate.

In the global south, there are similar trends in evidence. In India, in the recent elections, the Congress Party recently managed to stop the ruling islands of the Bharatia Jatata Party through the promising of unconditional support for each poor family as well as non -monetary global health insurance. This came after one of the world’s largest income experiences in Hyderabad, very exciting results fueled by Congress thinking, with policies funded by more redistribution taxes.

Likewise, in South Africa, the country’s anti-country struggle inherited a movement at the country level to demand what was initially the relief grant in emergency situations during the Covid-19 pandemic into a permanent basic income designed to ensure economic security for all. Regardless of the increase in progressive taxes, one of the most exciting ideas that come out of this struggle for economic justice was framing (and financing) the basic income as a “legal share” because of all citizens as part of the country’s wealth.

What unites all these different developments?

To start understanding them, we first need to remind ourselves that the two main questions of all policy are simply the one who gets what is decided. In our current global capitalist system, the very wealthy () decide, and allocate most of the wealth for themselves. In turn, like rulers throughout the ages, they incite those who have less, and maintain their dominance through the gap and the base.

At the heart of this strategy, a founding lie falls, which is ultimately repeated by the structure of the wrong information of companies. The lie is: There is not enough to wrap, because we live in a world of scarcity. From this terrible hypothesis, the violent division in the world saves the “we” and “they”, which is the line between one and the other determines who will be determined and will not get what is required to live a decent life. From there, it is a short step to the disciplinary idea of “entitlement”, which adds the ethical justification crust to uncomfortable exceptions.

The contemporary height on the far right is more than just an expression of these foundational tensions. When people struggle collectively to meet their needs, they demand more, and when they do so, those who control the reservations chains in addition to the narration that doubles on the story that people in a world of scarcity can only get more if some of them deserve “less merit.”

In this historical tragedy, the extremist right plays a left role, and protects the rich and strong from resentment through the division of sowing between the disadvantaged. While the medium-extends to the unhappy partner-plays from the useful idiot, which is not up to its acceptance of the legendary of scarcity, and thus is judged by an attempt to forever impossible: treating symptoms of inequality without treating its primary cause.

The alternative to this delighting episode policy is clear when you stop thinking about it, and this is what distinguishes both the exciting examples mentioned above. The first step is a clear confirmation and confident of what most of us know in a way that it is real – that the abundant wealth is present in our world. In fact, the numbers show that there is more than enough to wrap. The issue, of course, is that this wealth is badly distributed, as it dominates the highest 1 percent over more than 95 percent of the rest of humanity, with many richer companies from countries, and with these trends only exacerbates as the excessive elite writes the rules and manipulates the political game.

The second step, the most vibrant, is to restore the issue of distribution in the center of politics. If the ordinary people are struggling to cover their expenses despite the abundant wealth, this is that some have a lot while most of them do not have enough.

This is exactly what progressors did in the United States, the United Kingdom, India and South Africa, it is clear that it is a major impact. This should not be surprising – data appears over and over again that equality is popular, voters such as fairness, and people who greatly support the limits of intense wealth.

The third step is to framing progressive demands as policies that meet the basic needs of people. What unifies care for free children, health care and transportation? Quite simply, each of these direct measures will benefit incapable of the poor, and the vast majority and will do so specifically because they represent the indisputable daily expenses and that restrict the power of the spending of public people. In the same manner, the basic income is attractive because it is simple and because it provides a promise to the founding economic security of the majority who are currently lacking.

However, what also unites these policy proposals and the platforms they reached is that they are all in important and unconditional ways. It is difficult to overestimate a radical extent: every aspect of global social policy is conditional on one way or another. Providing the basic basics guaranteed to all without exclusion contradict the idea of scarcity and its high companion, and they deserve.

What he says is that we all deserve because we are all human beings, and because of this, we will use existing resources to ensure that we all have the basics that compensate for a decent life.

In this radical message, hope abounds. Our mission now is to take care of it and help it grow.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the editorial island.