Long term stewardship of the earth as an enormous, connected, 'closed' system, with a fine, near constant, energy flux provided by the sun. What we see our 'economy' ('market'?) do to the various non-renewable resources seems like "eating ones seed corn". Or living high on start-up capital, without realising that if one does not make the proper investments, the party will come to an end one day, and one is left them without assets. Coal and hydro-carbons has offered us a bounty of concentrated, high-quality energy. The real tragedy is the failure to invest this energy in a way that it may perpetuate itself longterm.
How does one argue successfully for this? This is, um, difficult... This is about opinion formation, i.e. we need good propaganda (pdf). The people must be taught/told what to think, just as they must be coerced into buying pianos:
If, for instance, I want to sell pianos, it is not sufficient to blanket the country with a direct appeal...The modern propagandist therefore sets to work to create circumstances which will modify that custom. He appeals perhaps to the home instinct which is fundamental. He will endeavor to develop public acceptance of the idea of a music room in the home.... The music room will be accepted because it has been made the thing. And the man or woman who has a music room, or has arranged a corner of the parlor as a musical corner, will naturally think of buying a piano. It will come to him as his own idea. Under the old salesmanship the manufacturer said to the prospective purchaser, "Please buy a piano." The new salesmanship has reversed the process and caused the prospective purchaser to say to the manufacturer, "Please sell me a piano."
Under the old salesmanship the manufacturer said to the prospective purchaser, "Please buy a piano." The new salesmanship has reversed the process and caused the prospective purchaser to say to the manufacturer, "Please sell me a piano."
I wouldn't call your example coercion, unless one wants to stretch the term to include almost all social processes that shape human preferences and behavior. But if one did, what word would we use when someone says "Give me everything you own in exchange for this piano, or I'll blow your brains out and kick your dog"?
I'd like to reserve the word "coercion" for using force to force action. Persuasion and social pressure deserve a nicer name. Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.
I object to stretching the use of this term for the same reason that I object to the debasement of WMD. If (as was recently argued) nukes = nerve gas = burning phosphorous = (why not?) napalm -- all of them "weapons of mass destruction", haven't we eroded, at least somewhat, the moral line that sets nuclear war off limits?
Likewise, if discrimination = genocide (as I've heard from time to time), isn't the concept, and horror, of genocide cheapened? Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.
The 'coercion' in the piano example is the process whereby the ownership of a piano is established as a norm for those in a particular socio-economic segment. Much in the same way, 'correct' ideas and opinions on the extraction and stewardship of natural resources, the environment and economic activity need to be established as a norm of 'all right thinking individuals', as the 'markets are best' mantra is right now.
