Ecolism Philosophy

Ecolism Philosophy

Religions have merged gods into one, Ecolism unites the religions into one.
Henri Maalouf

Ecolism is my creation of a new, ethical socio-economic system that balances power among the poor, the rich and rulers. It is not designed for an Eco-city only but can be implemented anywhere else in the world with some variations to suit each culture.

Ecolism is the balance of the extremes between conflicting ideologies and socio-economic systems, such as communism and capitalism, in addition to extracting the best of all other ideological socio-economic systems or isms.

Note: By ‘isms’, we mean capitalism, communism, socialism, totalitarianism, Buddhism, Judaism, Hinduism, Sikhism and atheism, but also democracy, Islam, Christianity and all the other sects of religions and the variations of the world’s socio-economic systems since history began.

Ecolism is a new concept or a religion, of an Eco-socio-economic system that extracts the moral values and ethical principles from all faiths and ruling regimes. It narrows the big gap between the rich and poor, limit the powers of rulers, yet proportionately balances and distributes the wealth, power and responsible freedom among them all.

The followers of Ecolism could live in either an Eco-city or an Eco-community under the new Eco-socio-economic system, following the ethical Eco-principles described in the series of Ecolism books.

Most regimes of the socio-economic systems or ‘isms’ throughout the centuries are likely to have some sound principles in them. However, they also have abusers of the laws and have failed to provide optimum justice, true equality and responsible freedom for everyone to live happier lives in a sustainable and secure human ecosystem from birth till death.

Ecolism is a new Eco-socio-economic system, which is self-sufficient, self-governed, sustainable and organized to formulate a new way of living in a more-civilized human ecosystem, unaffected by political, religious or financial influences.

Ecolism does not impose its will or systems on others, neither does it accept the influences of other systems. However, with an open mind, it could logically assess what would be best for the Ecolists to evolve to an advanced form of more-civilized existence. Ecolism means to live better and consume less, avoid unnecessary waste, reuse before recycling, give others what you do not need and help the Ecolists to live in a better Eco-socio-economic system.

Ecolism believes that every human is a valuable asset and recognized identity, regardless of status in society. It is the responsibility of the wealthiest and rulers to ensure that the necessities for survival in our demanding world are freely available for everyone as a minimum human right. In return, people must work and become productive to pay for a dignified way of life in an Eco-socio-economic system.

The Eco-socio-economic system does not deprive the poor of the necessities, such as warm accommodation, nutritious food, communication means, continuous education or training in skills, health and social care, security and protection. At least, it gives people what they reasonably need without extravagance or greed. It is unlike democracy, which is trying to do all the above but failing to do so for everyone, under the influence of capitalism and the narcissistic greed for money.

In our modern and demanding world, communication means, such as the internet, computers, phones and transport, are necessities that everybody needs to survive to a reasonable standard of living. Front-line services, such as free healthcare, education, skills training and unemployment benefits, are indispensable for sustaining the social ecosystem.

The minimum pre-requisites for modern living are a decent home, water, electricity, food and security, which are critical for the self-sufficiency and sustainability for each one of us to survive in a competitive world.

Ecolism does not treat the poor as helpless or slaves and impose on them further penalties to intensify their misery. Instead, it treats them as the children of life, learning to grow and cope with a demanding civilization; helps them to solve their problems; and re-educates them to adapt and thrive in a harmonized society.

It is like what Jesus Christ said: “Those who never sin, let them throw the first stone.” The wisdom that comes out of what Jesus said and its application to modern life in the 21st century is that everyone makes mistakes (or sins), fails or offends in an imperfect socio-economic system. That does not mean penalties are the answer, but, instead, we should reform, re-educate and remove the root causes. So, this is the best answer for a better solution to prevent the re-occurrence of social problems.

Ecolism’s principles advocate selecting Eco-city councilors or leaders according to their academic qualifications, achievements, abilities, merits, specializations, ethics and track records of achievements. Then, whichever candidate is chosen by the majority of the Ecolists, based on their manifesto or a promise to deliver what is better for the community, the Ecolists decide if they want to elect that candidate.

It is also the Ecolists’ voting majority that can remove leaders from power when they abuse their trust and do not fulfill their pledges. Eco-councilors do not autocratically appoint any person in authority whose decisions affect others but propose candidates who meet the specified criteria of selection, then leaders are elected and deselected by a majority, depending on their achievements or failure.

One might say, “Well, democracy is like that, what is new!” In my opinion, democracy is becoming autocracy in the name of the law that is designed to favor the elite few and the rich. The proof is in the outcome, not in what is announced and, as always, the devil is in the details. The truth is not in what you hear; it is hidden behind what you do not know or prove. The cat might lick abrasive sandpaper that causes blood to be drawn from its tongue. It thinks, it is delicious food, but, in fact, it is the blood from its tongue, not the sandpaper.

The essence of freedom in Ecolism is the consensus on disciplinary rules and principles that treat humans with balanced equality. The rulers cannot play the role of God and solely impose policies without people’s agreement or approval. Legislating a principle or policy without people’s consent becomes an autocracy that appears to be a democracy.

The wealthy and powerful should be equal to the weak and helpless. The more powerful should not take advantage of people’s weaknesses and deprive them of their responsible freedom and equal rights.

The prime minister or president of the greatest country is equivalent to a rubbish collector when it comes to human rights, liberty and justice.

The religions say we are all equal before God and democracy claims that we are all equal facing justice. However, is this claim true for everyone? The rich and influential always manipulate the justice system and get away with their sins. The solicitors defend clients for their money, not because they are right or wrong. The judges’ justification for a judgment depends on their moods, politics and the technicalities, but not the purpose of the laws in most circumstances.

Ecolism has no racism or favoritism and places the right people in the right jobs based on their merits, not on their color, status, gender or race.

Ecolism is the new Eco-society for the future of humanity, with the right to live free but responsibly and the right to live secure, self-sufficient and cared for from birth till death. Ecolism does not believe in prison sentences or punishment but believes in removing the root causes of failure, reforming or re-educating those who fail and reintroducing them as reformed members of the Eco-society.

Ecolism Comparison

The purpose of Ecolism is to create a new Eco-socio-economic system purposed to end poverty and provide a self-sufficient, sustainable Eco-lifestyle for Eco-communities or Eco-cities. It is mainly to protect the poorest, the elderly and the most vulnerable on the planet by providing them with a decent living standard as a minimum requirement for their human right to live in an Eco-home in a self-sufficient ecosystem.

Ecolism principles apply to its followers, but it is best if implemented in a sizable Utopian Eco-city designed for an Eco-society that accepts living an Eco-lifestyle. The ultimate objective of Ecolism is to reform democracy and other socio-economic systems or at least to give the poorest a better chance to live in peace, happiness, harmony, security, economic stability and with a better social-welfare system.

To better understand the Ecolism philosophy, it is best to compare it with other socio-economic systems. All the socio-economic systems are not perfect and may not become perfect. The proof is in the poverty, wars, limitation of freedoms and injustices that existed for thousands of years and still exist in the 21st century. Whenever there is conflict, there is an injustice for one or the other. Therefore, a balanced system resolves such strife. Thus, our humanity needs a new Eco-socio-economic system that balances the extremes and removes the root causes of conflicts.

So, let us compare Ecolism with other socio-economic systems.

Capitalism versus Ecolism

Capitalism in the 21st century and earlier is controlled by the rich or the so-called capitalists. It has become an authoritarian socio-economic system that controls national policies and principles, disregarding the ethics of democracy and comprehensive social welfare. The practices of capitalism are profits at any cost, regardless of consequences or fairness to others.

The philosophy of capitalism is the private ownership of commodities and assets, treating human resources as robotic working machines that produce profits. The dominance of capitalism and global organizations in the West became hugely influential, able to manipulate or control political systems and capable of trembling the economies of the most powerful nations.

Capitalism allows the rich to manipulate politicians with financial contributions to their parties or by lobbying them to legislate for national projects that suit their vested interests at the expense of taxpayers’ money. Sometimes, it is secret bribery for decreeing what suits the interests of the rich, even if it causes more misery to the poor.

The politicians manipulate the electorates with false promises, like false prophets and misleading information to justify the feasibility of such national projects that are supposed to be better for the public, more cost-effective and better value for the taxpayers’ money.

Most people either do not care, can’t be bothered, do not know the truth or are just believers of the false prophets taking the form of a prime minister, president, party leader or member of parliament (MP). There are those who know, care and petition, but they are a drop in the ocean of the political and financial power and have no impact.

Capitalists mainly support two political parties and it does not matter which party people elect because they can influence both. It is common in the USA, UK, Germany, France and many other countries where capitalists are the real power behind the scenes.

However, there are many similarities between the monopoly of governance and the manipulation of the nation that yield the same results. The Chinese ruling system is one communist party, the Russian system is totalitarianism, others are dictatorial and some are monarchical. While democracies’ two parties are controlled by capitalists and the results are the same in all of them.

When we go to a supermarket to shop freely for the available products, we are still under the influence of that supermarket’s products. And if all supermarkets buy from the same source and fix the prices between them, then it becomes an illusion that we are free to choose what we want and get good-value-for-money products. The analogy means that if the source or the controlling power is capitalism, then it does not matter which leader the people choose.

Capitalism forcibly snatches more from the poor to satisfy the narcissistic greed of the rich, manipulating and abusing the principles of democracy, which have become the rules of autocracy. It forever widens the gap between rich and poor and takes true freedom and justice away from the poor.

If this trend continues, there will be only a handful of people with enormous wealth and the rest are below the poverty lines. The longer this trend continues, the more pressure will be on people to explode and destroy it all because they will have nothing more to give and nothing else to lose.

Ecolism, in comparison, democratize and socialize capitalism by equalizing powers among people, governors and capitalists. Distributing the powers is logical, in the long-term, to keep the status quo of the Eco-socio-economic system and sustain the coexistence of mutual benefits for all.

Each authority requires the other two to maintain its existence. In other words, the workforce needs investors to establish a business or industry and the governors’ role is to regulate them both. But the public elects the governors and votes them out upon failure or misconduct and the governors can do the same to failing businesses or their executives, while the investors can decide whether to remain or leave without causing harm to the workforce and the continuity of the human ecosystem.

In the Ecolism political system, the electorate can deselect or remove politicians from power and the workforce can remove their chief executive officers (CEOs) from their position upon failure or misconduct, with no compensation or bonuses. The politicians or government controls and enforces disciplinary actions on businesses and people for any offense or misconduct. The workforce cannot strike and cause a loss of profits for businesses or earn money without working and being productive.

Businesses and investors have the government’s protection for their investment and an agreed minimum margin of tax-free profits but pay taxes on earnings above the allowed tax-free threshold, in addition to paying an agreed minimum hourly rate for the required skills or training local employees in the needed jobs.

If the trends of inequality, injustice and increased poverty continue, they will reach the point of no return. The time may come for the volcano to erupt and burn its green surroundings, unless we create newer and fairer social ecosystems that are just for everyone on the planet.

It is already happening in countries where there is extreme totalitarianism and there is even a split in Western societies into two opposing parties: one supporting the rich to get richer and supporting their vested interests and the other opposing party that gives more to the poor but is not doing enough. People have started to elect whoever is against the status quo of the establishment or the envisaged new world order.

It is as we saw in the Brexit vote in the UK, in electing President Trump in the USA and whatever will happen next in the rise of populism and the future of the European Union (EU).

Democracy versus Ecolism

What is the definition of democracy? The dictionary defines it as a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

We always hear politicians talking about democracy, freedom, equality, etc. However, although it means people are free to elect any candidate they choose, they do not have the liberty to deselect that candidate when he or she betrays their trust. Politicians talk about legislating for voting out or removing an MP from power if the electorate chooses to do so, but they never actually do it, unless there is a media scandal of some sort.

There is no principle to remove a prime minister or president from power, even if he or she destroys the country’s economy or signs a treaty surrendering the sovereignty and principles of the country to another. In my view, that is not a democracy and it does not exist in practice, only on paper.

The free electoral system allows the electorate to choose any candidate they like. Fair enough. However, there are only two main parties and most people take sides with one or the other, even if both are corrupted or influenced by global organizations, secretive clubs, more powerful countries or party donors.

The media always split people’s opinion between the two parties without an alternative third or fourth party. It gets worse when both parties and the media work against any upcoming third-party that causes a threat to either of the dominant two.

The problem with parties is the limited choice and, whichever MP the people choose, he or she must follow the party line or the leader. Of course, there are the occasional rebels in each party who do not follow orders from the party whip, but they cannot influence the leader in one direction or another because they are a minority, unless they hold the balance of power.

Democracy is no longer a social system of equality allowing people to have a say in political decisions and what affects their lives. Although people can vote and select their leaders, whoever assumes the dominant power automatically becomes influenced by business conglomerates and implements policies to suit their vested interests, disregarding the consumer or the public will.

Some politicians become influenced by more powerful countries, executing their treaties, interests and global agendas without consulting people on critical issues and most people do not know any better anyway. Even if a leader grants people the right to vote in a referendum, the leader tries to influence the results.

However, in some democratic countries, such as the UK, the USA and other EU countries, to protect the nation against tyranny or the dominance of one political power, the legislation creates the separation of powers into three divisions a ‘trias politica’ or ‘tripartite governance’.

Typically, the three governance divisions are the legislature, executive and judiciary. No one division can have total control. The government in the UK consists of the executive branch (the prime minister and ministers), the legislative branch (the House of Commons and the House of Lords) and the judiciary (the courts).

However, a prime minister sometimes has the authority to exercise prerogative powers without consulting Parliament. It is the party leader with the majority who can practically do anything unless substantial numbers of MPs drop their support.

The USA has a similar system and the constitution splits the powers among the legislative, executive and judicial branches. But the president also appoints judges and officials to support him/her, in addition to having the backing of the majority of his/ her party in Congress and has some executive powers to veto a bill or law enhancement.

There is a comparable situation in the EU, where the EU Council, the EU Commission and the EU Parliament are linked in a similar form of governance. However, the president of the EU is not publicly elected and the rest of the commissioners have to take an oath to serve the EU and not the interests of their countries! So, there is no democracy in the EU. Hopefully, one day it will change and there will be more democracy in the EU.

Similarly, in most countries, there are three governance branches and some are better than others. However, there are always lobbyists behind the scenes influencing the ones in power. The point is, the manipulation and abuse of powers still exist, regardless of the checks and balances of the various governance powers. The proofs of this are the injustices, inequalities, freedom limitations and the existence of poverty in a high percentage of the public.

While Ecolism, in comparison, allows people to elect leaders who pass the criteria for selection, which defines an ethical track record, qualifications, expertise and abilities. But it also allows them to remove the elected leaders from power upon any misconduct, failure to serve the national and public interests or utterly failing to deliver the promised manifesto.

The citizens have the right to be consulted on any policy or changes to the socio-economic system that affects their lives. It is like a codified constitution that cannot be changed without a referendum and cannot be overridden by presidential executive orders.

However, the traditional voting system on paper is expensive and not suitable for use in voting on regular changes in policies. Therefore, using an electronic voting system is more cost-effective and can be designed as a tamper-proof system. The public survey polls guide politicians to go in the right direction. In Ecolism, petitioning to remove politicians, company CEOs or anyone in authority is non-debatable. Once it reaches the majority percentage threshold, it takes immediate effect. Upon any proof of misconduct, no one is immune from prosecution and trial.

In the current socio-economic system, there are many people in power who have extra privileges, are unaccountable and can afford lengthy trials to avoid prosecution.

In Ecolism, every activity is recorded and open to the public. It is real transparency and everyone, without exception, is accountable and subject to prosecution.

Socialism versus Ecolism

Socialism means distributing power and wealth among the proletariat (workforce, rulers and capitalists), but it fails to determine where to draw the line between them or create a balanced formula that is accepted and implemented by them all.

However, a version of it is still in use by Scandinavian countries and in most of Europe under different names, such as social welfare or benefits systems applied in one form or another, but we are not sure for how long.

Many front-line services were nationalized and have gradually become privatized. In time, capitalism might privatize national health, education and whatever will be left from social benefits and front-line services for the poor.

Some of Karl Marx’s theories were feasible and great, but were abused by the Russian leaders Lenin and Stalin by converting socialism to communism and the totalitarianism of the ruling communist party. However, the social benefits of the welfare system, which is still adopted today in some European countries, are the results of Karl Marx’s work.

Ecolism goes a step further and asserts that a decent living standard is a compulsory human right for the incapable, unemployed and retired.

Ecolism must give the investor an incentive to invest to guarantee jobs for the workforce (the proletariat) and give the worker the incentive to work harder and smarter to earn more and live better. It disciplines the investor and employee to follow beneficial mutual rules to maintain the status quo, where the rich or investor gets a reasonable return on investment, while the worker gets a fair return on productivity. As a result, the investor’s profits and the workforce’s productivity generate taxes to be spent on the welfare of society to guarantee the sustainability of the human ecosystem.

Communism versus Ecolism

Communism, with all its variations in Russia, China, Cuba and the totalitarianism of North Korea, has created classless societies living on the basic necessities for survival. The socio-economic system provides free, rationed food, basic accommodation, simple clothes and a good education, but forces the individual to work in factories or do specific administrative jobs.

Such a socio-economic system has made people the property of the government and is controlled by a single ruling communist party. The public act as robots programmed by the government to perform specific tasks dictated by the republic. A robot is an executor and has no incentive or motivation to do anything beyond its program.

Nevertheless, the system has created powerful countries with industrial and nuclear power that costs much less than what it costs the USA to produce. The communist regime had ensured that the basic necessities to survive are provided to everyone and there was no homelessness, starvation or poverty, as there is in Africa. On the other hand, there has been no further progressive improvement of productivity to compete with the freer Western capitalistic systems.

As always in history, the ideology was abused by the rulers and created an enormous gap in wealth and power between the working class and the ruling communist party. Eventually, the communist systems were isolated economically and socially from the free world of capitalism. The isolation led to the political and economic collapse of the Soviet Union and forced the rulers to adopt a more flexible and open socio-economic system.

A similar economic failure happened in China until the ruling communist party decided to be more open to the world, reduce bureaucracy and tight controls and then compete with the West to improve its economy. This is in contrast with North Korea, where the strict public control still exists and so there are lower standards of living, global isolation, limited resources and poverty.

The conclusion from the above is that when rulers impose more controls, increase bureaucracy and limit the freedom of the population, then the economy and progress became limited. The economy collapses and the entire system fails. It is like an overdraft facility from a bank in that if it is limited, then the borrower will have a smaller trading capability, but if the credit facility is more significant, then the trading capability increases.

While communism is too limiting but is fairer in providing the minimum standard of living, capitalism is not limiting but does not guarantee a minimum standard of living or end poverty and homelessness. Therefore, Ecolism balances the two extremes, ensures a better standard of living as a minimum, encourages ambitions to the maximum and restricts inequalities.

Religions versus Ecolism

Some religious systems have failed to adapt to the current 21st century’s socio-economic systems and integrate with the liberties of modern social convictions. And, as there is a big gap between the super-rich and the super-poor in capitalism, there is a significant difference between the thousands-of-years-old religious beliefs, compared with the 21st century doctrines of the advanced Western countries.

Some religions do not differ from capitalism in their socio-economic systems, in the sense that some are super-rich, while most religious followers are super-poor and there is no endeavor from the rich religious countries to narrow the wealth gap between them and the most impoverished worshipers in developing countries. As a simple example, compare the wealth in the Arabian Gulf with the poverty in Africa and Asia.

Some religions have become like commercial organizations, investing money in commodities. In the UK, St Paul’s Cathedral charges money for even entering the church in contrast to what Jesus Christ did when he entered the temple and drove out all who were buying and selling. The temple is for prayer, not a theater or gallery where one must pay an entrance fee.

Most religions have political extremists inciting hatred towards others and brainwashing followers to kill, terrorize and destroy others. The Muslim extremists, for example, are not even following what their Prophet Mohammed said during the Hadith ‘talks’ for peace builders, when he said: “If someone shows no compassion to people, God will show no compassion to him”.

It is even funnier and so double standards, when Moses, over 3,200 years ago, killed the guard of Ramses II, escaped with his followers to the desert and brought the ten commandments: one of them is “Thou shalt not kill.” Maybe he learned from his mistake, as we all are still learning. Ironically, it is alleged that Prophet Mohammed forbade alcohol after he got drunk one night and got up killed his friend in anger.

However, let’s forget the past. Humanity evolves all the time and humans learn from their mistakes, then find restrictive measures to prevent unethical behavior. It is disappointing that some people are afraid of change, remain living in the past and never progress to an advanced civilization.

Perhaps, the time has come to extract the moral values and the right teachings from the old religious systems to adapt them to our modern life, merge them with our socio-economic systems and dissolve them all in one furnace to extract the new Eco-socio-economic system and become more forgiving and fairer to all humans.

Most religions say, there is only one God and yet there are many religions on the planet have different convictions of what God says or wants or is. However, let us assume that God means morality, ethics, discipline, humanity and all the right names you can give to God’s decrees.

But, also, the democratic government’s principles say and want the same thing and all humans on this planet need the same moral principles. In this case, we all worship the same God whether we belong to a religion or not. We must all worship the ‘god of ethics’ and agree on what those ethics are.

Ecolism wishes to unite the Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews and those following other religions under the banner of an Eco-religion such as Ecolism. Or at least to agree on universal moral values compatible with their religious moral ones, but which have been adapted to our modern times and principles without conflicting with international human rights and ethics.

Religions do not have to abandon the ethical teachings of their prophets if they are happy with them and should translate the old teachings to our modern life without imposing their rules on others. No matter what differences there are among various religions and traditions, there are always some common moral grounds to bring them together, living under the same banner.

Ecolism does not interfere in the doctrines of religions or any other socio-economic system but avoids their negative influences and learns from their failures to create a better Eco-socio-economic system.

Ecolism hopes that a new ethical Eco-socio-economic system will supersede the old ones and will lead by example for future generations to come together and integrate into one social system that ensures human rights, liberties, equality, justice, peace and harmony for all humankind.

Each person’s Eco-freedom ends when the Eco-freedom of others begins. Freedom is a universal consensus that comes with the responsibility for not harming yourself or others, physically, financially, morally, emotionally, religiously or influentially.

Written by 

Authot of Ecolism

Leave a Comment

Animated Social Media Icons by Acurax Responsive Web Designing Company

Privacy Preference Center

    Necessary

    Advertising

    Analytics

    Other

    Visit Us On TwitterVisit Us On FacebookVisit Us On YoutubeVisit Us On Linkedin