Is green capitalism resistance to change Use a case study to explain Essay

Is green capitalism resistance to change Use a case study to explain your answer - Essay Example The advocates propose moderation of damages while the critics propose an overhaul of the principle of free market economies. From the thread of logic, it is conclusive that green capitalism is a resistance to curtailing the presupposed form of ‘liberty’ there is in an unregulated market. Natural capitalism is an action initiated by capitalists and capitalistic environmentalists alike as a grandiose experiment to stash the truest form of capitalism (as it has evolved now) in a sanctuary where it can enjoy from the naivete of many; and to avoid dialogue with or outwit discreet environmentalists and Marxist’s ideologists who reside on the principle that there can never be ecological preservation with capitalism in existence. Yet so far, there is a relative success to it. II. The Triple Crunch Communities around the world admit to experiencing three types of crises with which third world economies run up against the most: energy, financial, and environmental crises. A ll are similar in effects in terms of equality, resource distribution, and human development. Although the three crises are interrelated, of the three confronting the world in the 21st century, climate change is perhaps the most severe and uncontrollable but it remains the second agendum next to the financial crisis. It is said that one of the major causes to this phenomenon is people’s over dependency on oil and other non-renewable gases for everyday domestic and commercial consumption. As predicted, this will lead to an energy crisis. Energy resources are unquestionably indispensable in the course of modern-day living especially to a country undergoing industrialization. There would not be any wonder if oil extracts will be lesser and lesser everyday therefore (Winter, 2006, p. 14). This is based on simple logic that natural resources are ‘naturally’ scarce but oil consumers and miners choose to think that oil is unlimited because energy experts and political a uthorities implant such idea to prosumers and consumers. In 1993, a news organization reported that the 700 million barrels of oil Shell Oil Company mined was only good for 42 days (16.6 million bbl/day) for the U.S. economy at that time (Bartlett, 1998, p. 3). The US economy has always been one of the world’s largest oil consumers as it is the world’s second biggest economy (only behind the European Union). Although it is a mixed market, one may not argue that it is highly capitalistic more than it is socialised. More than that, the country is probably over developed as it is now. The clincher however is that major pollutants don’t directly suffer the effects of climate change. Third world nations do which is why these the same catalysts to ecological degradation are the same agents (e.g. G7 countries) that spearhead initiatives which appear ‘globally than locally beneficial’ (e.g. Endorsement of the Tobin Tax). The worst case scenario is that they are likely solving the wrong problem. For instance in the UK, oil dependency is misrepresented (however intentional or not) by energy experts and political authorities wherein the topic for domestic consumption eats more than half the time during public discussions when in fact, domestic consumption only accounts for 30% of the aggregate consumption (Mobbs, 2005, p. 1). As made implicit, the global financial crisis of late is another serious trouble that has garnered more than enough attention (e.g. initiatives for