We can’t go on as we are now. That’s the most important point. If we are to create more equal and just societies that are environmentally sustainable, it’s clear not only that we can’t afford the rich, but that we can’t afford to perpetuate an economic system predicated on inequality and endless compound growth. The dream of ‘green growth’, with capitalism delivering sustainability, is like selling guns to promote peace. We need an economy that can function on the basis of enough, instead of insatiable acquisitiveness. Much more equal societies are desirable in themselves for allowing all to develop their capacities and to develop a sense of the public good, and of mutual respect, solidarity and care; but that’s impossible if we are constantly pressured to compete in the rat race for positions that are themselves very unequal. Nor can we expect some to accept more modest levels of consumption if others are free to consume more than their share of what the planet can cope with. George W. Bush’s response to global warming was to say: ‘The American way of life is not up for negotiations. Period.’ But an American way of life for everyone in the world would require an estimated five planets to support it. We can’t afford that.

So there’s also an environmental argument for equality: no one has the right to more of the earth’s resources, including its capacity to reabsorb CO2, than the total of those resources divided by the world’s population (the principle underlying contraction and convergence). It’s imperative for preventing runaway global warming and an ever more hostile environment for human and other life, but it also means much greater equality within and between nations.

Back to basics

Crises are opportunities. The neoliberals are seizing the opportunity to push down wages, dismantle the welfare state, allow corporations to dictate policy and push up profits still more. To offer a genuine alternative we need to go back to basics. It is no good just trying to oppose the status quo on its own limited ground, answering only the questions that it poses. If we did that, then at best we might slowly emerge from the economic crisis in a decade or two to find that our quality of life was no better and the planet was even more damaged.