Social Economy Alliance wants Inclusive Capitalism, excluding..

With a speech In 2009, the President of the UN General Assembly said this about the economy:

“The anti-values of greed, individualism and exclusion should be replaced by solidarity, common good and inclusion. The objective of our economic and social activity should not be the limitless, endless, mindless accumulation of wealth in a profit-centred economy but rather a people-centred economy that guarantees human needs, human rights, and human security, as well as conserves life on earth. These should be universal values that underpin our ethical and moral responsibility.”

In joining the Social Economy Alliance I may well have disregarded the good advice of Groucho Mark on not joining any club that would have someone like me as a member. I learned only yesterday that we that is the alliance, are calling for smart infrastructure to becone the 'seed corn' for 'Inclusive Capitalism'. where society profits from citizens investments.

So what do thise terms mean in the context of social enterprise?

Smart development

I offer an example from our work in Crimea, 11 years ago where we made a call for investment in a peaceful Muslim communitty who were largely homeless, the repatriated Tatars.

"In efforts to deal with communities in or near poverty, it will be useful to target progressive, peace-oriented communities just as aggressively as has been done in targeting terrorist cells. Both types of communities are quite similar, but, one has attempted a peaceful path whereas the other has not. Toward this end, the most promising and deserving communities must be “hit” with equal force as is brought to terrorist cells – the difference being delivery of resources rather than ordinance. The point is to grow the best, most promising communities with the same focus and passion brought to destroying terrorists.

Rewards must come for being decent, peaceful people to the same extent that punishment is brought for those who are not. There is no more obvious a case to be made for such reward than that of Crimean Tatars. This is a community which deserves to be rewarded first, quickly, and strongly as the opposite example of terrorist threat. Attending to those communities which represent the strongest threat very simply invites others to follow suit and become threatening. Rewarding those who represent strong and clear commitment to democratic principles and peaceful resolution of conflict will have the same effect: inviting others to follow suit and become peaceful and democratic. This is the best possible outcome, and an excellent start toward building a better world based on democracy, peace, broad prosperity, and the fulfillment of basic human rights.

Just as the US now heavily uses smart bombs in warfare, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the equivalent is needed in aid efforts. It is not enough to spend, say, US$ 7 million dollars for five Tomahawk cruise missiles and then spend a fraction of that amount in building a peaceful community which does not merit targeting by missiles. Yet, that is what we have in this case."

It was a warning which went unheeded.

Inclusve Capitalism

Another warning was made the following year, with a proposal for  "enterprise for the primary objective of poverty relief, localized community economic development, and social support "

The warning was made to UK government and the social enterprise community:

"While the vast majority of people in poverty suffer quietly and with little protest, it is not safe to assume that everyone will react the same way. When in defence of family and friends, it is completely predictable that it should be only a matter of time until uprisings become sufficient to imperil an entire nation or region of the world. People with nothing have nothing to lose. Poverty was therefore deemed not only a moral catastrophe but also a time bomb waiting to explode."

Inclusive Capitalism was launched on us just a week ago, with a major conference event in London. It was hosted by the Lord Mayor of the Cirty of London who went as far as paraphrasing the warning made to London ten years earlier when it was shared with the social enterprise community.

My Open Letter, draws her attention to the harm that is done by marginalising those who have put Inclusive capitalism Into practice.

Capitalism thrives by looking past the bottom line says Lynne Forester de Rothschild, who surely must have read 'Re-imagining Capitalism - The New Bottom Line'

As we've said since inception "P-CED places people at the center of economic development. P-CED takes the bottom line one step further: to people, past numbers. Enterprise profitability and economic success cannot be fairly measured in terms of gains of money capital alone. Profit is redefined in human terms rather than pure quantitative analyses that remove human and social concerns in the name of profit."

Alliance spokesman Ed Mayo must surely agree with that because recently he's made the same point with 'People over Capital'

On the matter of inclusion, notably, this book excludes what we've shared online since 1997. More to the point, it excludes what we shared with ICOF in 2004, in our business plan. 

We said it plainly from the position of having walked the talk in the 'Marshall Plan' for Ukraine and the 'New Bottom Line:

'This is a long-term permanently sustainable program, the basis for "people-centered" economic development. Core focus is always on people and their needs, with neediest people having first priority – as contrasted with the eternal chase for financial profit and numbers where people, social benefit, and human well-being are often and routinely overlooked or ignored altogether. This is in keeping with the fundamental objectives of Marshall Plan: policy aimed at hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos. This is a bottom-up approach, starting with Ukraine's poorest and most desperate citizens, rather than a "top-down" approach that might not ever benefit them. They cannot wait, particularly children. Impedance by anyone or any group of people constitutes precisely what the original Marshall Plan was dedicated to opposing. Those who suffer most, and those in greatest need, must be helped first -- not secondarily, along the way or by the way. '

It would be encouraging to see some support from the Social Economy Alliance who include many of those who protested at the use of the terms Social Enterprise by SalesForce.  Is not the hijack of inclusive capitalism  likely to be just as harmful?

Why can't the Alliance, which we're members of, recliam the term Inclusive Capitalism for social enterprise? If it's inclusive, surely that means everyone?

See Wikipedia:

"In 1996 with a white paper for the Committee to Re-elect the President, honorary researcher Terry Hallman proposed the concept of people-centered economic development as an inclusive model of capitalism for the information age. It was published in synopsis online in 1997. [1] Proof of concept was demonstrated in sourcing the Tomsk Regional Initiative in 1999 in the wake of Russia's economic collapse, as an alternate bottom up approach to economic development. The Tomsk initiative [2] was managed by USAID with FINCA Tomsk [3] as the microfinance partner. Moving on to Crimea in 2002 to offer a similar strategy for the repatriated Tatar community [4], he is later interviewed by a diaspora leader representing the International Committee for Crimea and relates the history of his people-centered model for more inclusive capitalism. [5] I offer the information above with the declaration that in 2004, I incorporated this model as a UK based social enterprise named People-Centered Economic Development UK, which continues to fund advocacy for inclusive capitalism and activism in Eastern Europe. -- (talk) 10:18, 7 November 2009 (UTC)"