When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

You've reach your limit of free articles.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime.

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Ad-free experience NEW

Exclusive international news coverage

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Monthly Access

30-day free trial, then $2.90 per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch
Society

It's Neoliberalism, Stupid: A Millennial's Plea To Break The Status Quo

I am part of a generation whose quality of life will be worse than those who came before us. This should encourage society to realize that the idea of infinite growth is a myth, and that time is of the essence when it comes to saving the environment.

It's Neoliberalism, Stupid: A Millennial's Plea To Break The Status Quo

At a protest to demand governments urgent measures against climate change in Buenos Aires

Azahara Palomeque

-Essay-

Millennials (those aged roughly between 25 and 38) and others born after us will never be able to live better than our parents (or grandparents). There are those who will blame Netflix subscriptions or avocado toast as a pattern of expenses that, if avoided, would allow us in theory to buy a house. But the economic data is there and it doesn’t lie.

Economic growth has slowed down in a good part of the globe and, along with this, there has been a weakening of the welfare states in most Western countries. This has been coupled with a reduction in taxes for those who are the wealthiest, resulting in unprecedented wealth inequality.

Demonizing the leisure activities of the most precarious sectors not only demonstrates a conservative and prejudiced position but also a shameless ignorance in the face of a problem that has been studied by many experts.


When sociologist and Pulitzer Prize winner Matthew Desmond recounts in his book Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American Cityhow a man who receives government food stamps to alleviate hunger decides to spend them all on a lobster feast one day, he does not take a judgmental approach. On the contrary, he uses the example as a way to demonstrate that, without those small pleasurable gestures, life would have no meaning at all.

The growth dilemma

In other words, what may seem wrong from a nutritional or economic point of view can be logical emotionally. That man who bought lobster needed to feel like a full citizen. He wanted to feel like a member of a society, which is one that values the rich, their whims and luxurious wastefulness while criminalizing those born in poverty for practically everything they do.

So the anger of those 30-somethings and younger is legitimate. They are facing injustice with seemingly no end in sight. However, sometimes that visceral drive is channeled into the form of inter-generational resentment (against our elders), instead of directing it to a better target: the neoliberal puppet masters.

And this is where the issue becomes thorny, because some call for more neoliberal capitalism in order to maintain a certain lifestyle. But this would involve more plundering of the Global South. If there is one dilemma we are facing most strongly it is the complex balance between the longing for the exponential growth of the past and the realization growth cannot be infinite.

Left-wing demonstration against the German government's energy and social policies in Leipzig

Jan Woitas/dpa/ZUMA

The Global South

We are in an era that calls for frugality, energy savings and an urgent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, but austerity has strongly negative connotations (bailouts of banks with public money, dismantling of basic services, unemployment). Against this backdrop are climate and social justice goals. Climate and social justice goals call for “more wealth for all”.

Those on the bottom do not want to hear about cuts. They are already paid a fraction of their wealthy boomer boss.

Then there are conflicts of interest. If some environmentalists propose reduction, they are criticized. If the government rightly intervenes in a war situation, the argument is someone else should make sacrifices, I have made enough already. The nations of the Global South use similar arguments: The environment should be protected by the rich. We want to "develop."

Our survival depends on how we handle this situation.

Perhaps what all these complaints and demands have in common is that they are born from the same capitalist status quo, which determines what is imaginable. At this point there are no miracle solutions: There are those who denounce the proliferation of fast fashion manufactured by child labor with huge amounts of fossil fuels. However, those few polyester rags in the closet of the most disadvantaged Western citizens bring satisfaction and a false perception of great purchasing power.

The climate question

Going back to the man who bought a tasty lobster, who would dare tell him that bottom trawling is killing marine life, disrupting entire ecosystems, and that he should go vegan?

I don't have definitive answers for the massive crossroads this century puts before us. Sometimes, it is even difficult for me to understand the details of the contemporary maelstrom. But, as a millennial, I am clear on two things: that financial crises have rained down upon me, leaving significant damage, and that we have little time left to try to make amends for the climate catastrophe.

Our survival depends on how we handle this situation. For me, it would definitely begin with a massive redistribution of wealth and, once the pyramid top has been cut off, perhaps the way would be paved for the huge cultural changes that urgently need to be adopted.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Economy

Lex Tusk? How Poland’s Controversial "Russian Influence" Law Will Subvert Democracy

The new “lex Tusk” includes language about companies and their management. But is this likely to be a fair investigation into breaking sanctions on Russia, or a political witch-hunt in the business sphere?

Photo of President of the Republic of Poland Andrzej Duda

Polish President Andrzej Duda

Piotr Miaczynski, Leszek Kostrzewski

-Analysis-

WARSAW — Poland’s new Commission for investigating Russian influence, which President Andrzej Duda signed into law on Monday, will be able to summon representatives of any company for inquiry. It has sparked a major controversy in Polish politics, as political opponents of the government warn that the Commission has been given near absolute power to investigate and punish any citizen, business or organization.

And opposition politicians are expected to be high on the list of would-be suspects, starting with Donald Tusk, who is challenging the ruling PiS government to return to the presidency next fall. For that reason, it has been sardonically dubbed: Lex Tusk.

University of Warsaw law professor Michal Romanowski notes that the interests of any firm can be considered favorable to Russia. “These are instruments which the likes of Putin and Orban would not be ashamed of," Romanowski said.

The law on the Commission for examining Russian influences has "atomic" prerogatives sewn into it. Nine members of the Commission with the rank of secretary of state will be able to summon virtually anyone, with the powers of severe punishment.

Under the new law, these Commissioners will become arbiters of nearly absolute power, and will be able to use the resources of nearly any organ of the state, including the secret services, in order to demand access to every available document. They will be able to prosecute people for acts which were not prohibited at the time they were committed.

Their prerogatives are broader than that of the President or the Prime Minister, wider than those of any court. And there is virtually no oversight over their actions.

Nobody can feel safe. This includes companies, their management, lawyers, journalists, and trade unionists.

Keep reading...Show less

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

You've reach your limit of free articles.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime.

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Ad-free experience NEW

Exclusive international news coverage

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Monthly Access

30-day free trial, then $2.90 per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch

The latest