{"id":5129,"date":"2018-03-23T10:50:23","date_gmt":"2018-03-23T15:50:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ecooptimism.com\/?p=5129"},"modified":"2018-03-23T10:50:23","modified_gmt":"2018-03-23T15:50:23","slug":"fake-growth","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ecooptimism.com\/?p=5129","title":{"rendered":"Fake Growth"},"content":{"rendered":"

(or, The Gross Domestic Product is Gross)<\/h3>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The last time I wrote about the problem with making economic growth a national goal, it was February 2013<\/a> and Obama was president. It seems sooo long ago.<\/p>\n

EcoOptimism is a bit obsessed with the concept of growth (here<\/a> and here<\/a>, as well as the link above) and its misplaced and misleading focus on Gross Domestic Product. It\u2018s a contender for the most frequent topic here, up there with \u201cwin-win-win,\u201d which is the essence of EcoOptimism.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

In one of the other posts<\/a> on this topic, I wrote that a major problem with economists\u2019 and, especially, politicians\u2019 attachment to the supposed necessity of growth \u2013 and particularly growth as measured by GDP \u2013 is the attractiveness of the word itself. Who can argue with growth? Who can oppose it and survive attack?<\/p>\n

So I looked at ways to get around this by using a different word \u2013 a word or phrase that sounded as positive and appealing as growth. I mentioned \u201cpost-growth\u201d as a phrase that many growth critics favor. I suggested \u201cregrowth.\u201d I brought up a less familiar term, \u201cplenitude,\u201d employed by Juliet Schor in her\u00a0book by the same title<\/a>.<\/p>\n

But I wasn\u2019t overwhelmed by any of them. I\u2019d written in one of those previous posts: \u201chow [can we] make a counterintuitive idea appealing? Facts and figures we have aplenty. It\u2019s the sound bite we\u2019re missing.\u201d<\/p>\n

While reading yet another book<\/a> that criticizes focusing on conventional economic growth, I started getting worked up about a new way of putting it: \u201creal growth.\u201d Aside from its simplicity, its strength is that it makes conventional growth sound the opposite of real.<\/p>\n

But from there, I jumped to thinking about things unreal and, in our current political climate, the word \u201cfake\u201d seemed an obvious synonym. I\u2019ve been, shall we say, annoyed about the co-opting of the phrase \u201cfake news.\u201d It was originally used, back in the beginning of the campaign we wish we could forget, to refer to social media posts that we now know were planted by Russia and had a major influence on the election. But somehow, in an example of brilliant PR, the phrase got adopted by the right wing and by the man I\u2019ve referred to as SCROTUS (so-called ruler of the United States) to malign any news they didn\u2019t like. So, much as I hate that, I have to admire its success.<\/p>\n

Which brings me back to growth and, specifically, the potential of \u201creal growth\u201d as its counterpoint. By implication then, conventional growth is not real. It\u2019s FAKE. (Putting it in ungrammatical caps as SCROTUS does somehow makes it more effective.)<\/p>\n

So I hereby propose, using all the powers vested in me, this combination of terms: real growth vs fake growth. Can \u201cfake growth\u201d make the point? Can it provide the sound bite in a social media world, where other terms haven\u2019t?<\/p>\n

Let the tweets begin.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Share this:<\/h3>