Search the Community

PROMPT: To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. {Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.} A society is a major driver of a nation and it is also the society that determines its development. Cities are important to consider when studying a society but the major facets of a nation are more pronounced in the villages and towns as well as small cities of that culture. Thence, it is imperative to consider their culture and practices while formulating one’s viewpoints about a society to get a holistic understanding of how the society works. Studying major cities may facilitate a learning that is one-sided and skewed towards a certain section of society that resides in these important cities. Moreover, a significant part of the population is concentrated in the many villages and towns which form the main structure of the society. These entities are mainly agrarian in nature and are labeled as the backbone of a society. To ignore them and not consider their importance would be a shame. The approach of basing the exploration of a society’s elements merely on the processes and life in major cities is inherently classist. By doing so, one would be avoiding and disrespecting the development that the society’s peasantry and the townships have experienced. Metropolitan cities do not have an exclusive culture of their own when viewed from a reductionist lens of understanding. They are the hotspots for nearby villages, towns and cities to migrate to and seek better opportunities. A thorough understanding of a society is incomplete without giving enough credit to the pure cultural practices and rituals observed in these entities of a culture. It can be inferred that cities do not hold a pure culture and are continually experiencing major changes in terms of their population types and their practices. Therefore, it would result in an unstable understanding of the society. The signs of development in major cities are quite remarkable with some of them forming important epicenter or hubs to delineate a society’s understanding. However, the different colors and flavors of that development are a direct contribution of migrants and working class who in desolate search of opportunities have made the cities into what they are today. The cities can be considered as the creamy layer of a society with its advanced and much forward livelihoods and lifestyles but the rest of the cake is made up by the townships and village culture. It will be a problematic paradigm and would lack the inclusivity which is an important characteristic of a society. Nevertheless, the major cities can be broken down into small shards which are a subculture of their own, each derived from other villages, towns and cities. Hence, the elements which form the constituent parts of a society cannot be ignored while giving its large cities a major outlook.

Jacque Fresco has famously said: "Earth is abundant with plentiful resources. Our practice of rationing resources through monetary control is no longer relevant and is counter-productive to our survival... ...Today we have access to highly advanced technologies. But our social and economic system has not kept up with our technological capabilities that could easily create a world of abundance, free of servitude and debt... ...Whatever happens in the world is real, what one thinks should have happened is projection. We suffer more from our fictitious illusion and expectations of reality." I'm not sure of to what extent any of you have heard of Jacque Fresco, but I believe him to be man of incredible genius when it comes to social and cultural design. Do you believe the world is at the beginning of a new paradigm shift, evolving out of a monetary system (similar to how we evolved out of the bartering system)? Of course, I am not suggesting that people do not still barter today. However, I am asking economists to evaluate Jacque Fresco's claims, because I do believe there is a common sentiment shared accross the world concerning our current macroeconomic/international system. Isn't the study of economics concerned with maximizing social happiness in the most productive way possible? Cheers!