Skip to main content

Robert Skidelsky's 'How Much is Enough?'

I just finished ‘How Much is Enough?’ by RobertSkidelsky. I certainly do not agree with many of the explanations provided in the book and many of the suggestions made. Yet, it is a thought-provoking book, no doubt about that! Skidelsky has shown courage to develop suggestions, based on explanations, with acknowledged religious overtone. He does now thump the chest while arguing that government policy should cease to be the value-neutral or liberal or efficiency based and it should explicitly move away from mad pursuit of growth. Clearly, his explanation lacks sophistication and is more of a persuasive nature, the style which we miss in the days of semi-formal books published by Economists about everything under the sky.  But he takes on an interesting journey to establish that there is more to life, more to policy-making than some digits.
I have always though that Religion was a way, at least theoretically, to tap the consumption. Why any ancient civilization would have thought to tap off the consumption? Obvious answer is ‘the resource constraint’. But there is more to consumption control than sustainability. There is good moral argument of why any society, whether resource abundant or scarce, needs to promote values different that consumption maximization.
I understand that there is always some totalitarian agenda lurking in moral and non-liberal sounding arguments. But, we must ask that is being liberal is all about following our senses or being free to discover the basis for all our actions, even an action of denying or accepting liberal point of views.

                 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Past

Past is difficult thing to leave. It becomes even more difficult if past that you are trying to forget was what your identity for all years passed. The memories you are trying to erase are what your habits and words for all time passed. It is difficult burden to throw away and more difficult if you know what you are throwing away is still dearer to you. I never made peace with the fact that I worked for RSS. What kept me there are persons who designed the organizations, curtailed and fitted themselves to any task and impulsive responses whenever any social catastrophe happened. What made me to withdraw myself is restricted view towards human being. Sketching human being as religious entity, putting unnecessary benevolence or cruelty on him or holding concepts about humanity much more worth than humanity which created them are not my cup of teas. But even though I fragmented in my attachments, what never changed is my respect and attraction for creative organization of human beings ...

Incompleteness

Leading life logically is what philosopher tried to do for many years. It doesn’t mean they actually lived so. But, somehow, through all their works, they tried to establish some or other cage of thoughts and presented life as some wild but tamed animal inside. How that animal got inside the cage was what not they tried to explain. They elegantly, skillfully and precisely described what to do it once it is caged. But, somehow what matters to most of the living mortals, like me, is how to cage it or whether is it possible at all to cage it. They keep mum, a sacrosanct silence. What is problem in perceiving life system with some tailor made premises? And, if one does not do so, then what is the way to explain social organization? What do we mean by ‘explain’? ‘Explanation’ is bringing something unknown into known. We bring it by various means. One uses analogies, examples, anecdotes or any part of known information to put a frame around unknown. If this frame fits, one ‘knows’. I...

Joy

i am alone, somehow at the balance of memories and dreams, some encounters with reality practically, a room for me, a laptop, movie, food, coffee, cigarettes and loneliness to get kick out of everything.... fucking nice life! missing a mate or complete loneliness!!