The last quarter of the 20th century has seen dramatic changes throughout the world. The struggle between capitalism and communism, which dominated most of the century, has almost disappeared. Communism, that from 1917 developed as an actual political-economic system and by 1950 ruled over a third of the worlds people, has suffered a worldwide collapse under the weight of its lack of democracy, of its rigidity, dirigisme and corruption. Capitalism, which halfway through the century, after two world wars, appeared to be in terminal decline, succeeded in reforming itself and has returned in the last 25 years with a remarkable dynamic. The world has been flooded with neoliberalism, the new belief in the blessings of capitalism and the free market. The renewed global hegemony of capitalism as the economic basis of society is invoking new forms of opposition and sharpening those which already existed. At the beginning of the 21st century it is time to consider the consequences of these developments in the Netherlands, Europe and the world.
According to neoliberal ideology, social life and the regulation of society should, as far as possible, be left to free market forces. In order to allow this free market to do its work as well as possible, restrictive laws and rules (protecting people, the environment or society) must be scrapped and the tax burden lightened. State authority should be limited to a number of core tasks, such as the preservation of public order, justice and the running of an army. From the United States and Great Britain, neoliberalism has spread like an oil slick over the world. The Netherlands, where this vision of society has become dominant, is no exception.
In 1994 the Netherlands elected, for the first time since the 1970s, a social democratic (Labour) prime minister. But the ambitions of Wim Kok in no way resemble those of his predecessor of that decade, Joop den Uyl. In the Netherlands, as elsewhere, liberalisation, privatisation and market-working have in the meantime become the new mantra. Changes which under the rule of Christian Democrat Ruud Lubbers (who formed governments first in coalition with the right wing liberals, the VVD, and later with the Labour Party) were tentatively under way, were taken further, and with greater energy, by the so-called Purple Coalition of Labour, VVD and left liberals D66. The social security system is being rapidly broken up and privatised. Industries formerly under state control, such as the railway, local public transport, postal services and the energy sector have been or are being privatised. In every area of society, from home care to theatre and from education to the police, we hear demands for privatisation from a business sector that cares only for profit. Questions such as how many have you sold?" and what do the markets think?" have become more important than how does this contribute to the quality of life and to personal development?" In the supposed interests of the countrys international competitiveness we have had years of wage moderation for lower- and middle-income groups. At the same time, and with the same excuse, there has been an enormous increase in incomes for the richest. In the last ten years of the 20th century the number of millionaires quadrupled, reaching 200,000 in 1999. While business profits grew hugely, taxes on corporations were lowered. Never before has there been more money sloshing around the stock exchange the favourite child of the neoliberal family.
On the global level the changes wrought by neoliberalism have been even more impressive. The World Trade Organisation has brought about an unprecedented liberalisation of international trade. This has gradually made it virtually impossible for countries to protect themselves against unwanted products (those, for example, produced under unacceptable working conditions, or which are environmentally damaging, or which damage the local economy). International investors profit from the deregulation of capital movements. Thanks to computers and telecommunications technology enormous amounts of money flash around the world, continually seeking the highest returns. The upshot has been a number of major regional crises, such as those in Mexico, South East Asia and South America. Even if damage to the world economy as a whole has been contained, consequences locally have been severe: falling wages, mass unemployment and ever fewer funds for public services.
In the Netherlands the welfare state, constructed after the Second World
War, is being demolished piece by piece. Income differentials are growing,
while public provisions such as the social security system, social housing,
education, public transport and health care are cut.
It is true that the polder model (a system which sees employers,
trade unions and government cooperating harmoniously and where conflicts
are avoided) contributed to the wellbeing of many groups. Yet at the
same time it allowed the social dike to be breached and, at the close
of the 20th century, structural poverty to return. The rapid and profound
liberalisation of the economy, the thorough opening up to foreign capital
and the extensive transfer to the market of activities previously under
public control have led to the undermining of democracy and a strengthening
of the power of employers. The welfare state is being converted into
a threadbare, neoliberal rump state. The legitimate democratic authorities
exercise decreasing control over important sectors whilst the unelected
and uncontrollable market becomes increasingly dominant.
From a cultural point of view, also, society is being impoverished. Commercial
considerations oust those of taste and the single-minded pursuit of individual
profit strikes at important values and standards. At a time when the
Dutch population is higher than ever, more and more of our people live
in conditions of exclusion and isolation. People who, for whatever reason,
are insufficiently productive, quickly experience the disadvantages of
the Americanisation of our society.
Just as in the Netherlands, throughout Europe the contradictions resulting
from these processes grow ever sharper. Western Europe forms the largest
united free market in the world. Within its borders enormous wealth is
created, but at the same time social divisions grow ever more bitter.
Eastern and Central Europe fall prey to disintegration, social inequality
and burgeoning poverty for most of the population, while a minority accumulates
exorbitant wealth. In the countries which now make up the European Union,
where since the beginning of the 20th century democracy within the nation
state has developed, this same democracy is now being driven down. Gradually,
major aspects of national sovereignty are being handed over to an undemocratic
executive layer, in which big countries and established economic interests
set the tone. The European Parliament is powerless to fill a democratic
deficit brought about by the exclusion of national parliaments. The Council
of Ministers private agenda offers no space for participation or
democratic control.
Across the world, the gap between poor and rich is growing. Large areas
of the world, including almost the whole of the African continent, appear
to have been simply written off. According to the United Nations, more
than a billion of the worlds six billion inhabitants live in extreme
poverty. Two out of ten children are undernourished. The contradictions
between rich and poor, between plenty and want, between the powerful
and the powerless, are proportionally greater than ever before. These
contradictions are together the principal cause of war, civil war and
the worldwide stream of refugees.
The much-lauded free market often appears successful in the short term, but in every respect fails to deal adequately with the long term. The virtually complete freedom enjoyed by capitalist enterprises is leading to a situation in which millions of people throughout the world must live out their lives in unfree-dom, exploited, oppressed, underfed, underdeveloped. Huge moral questions concerning the quality of life, respect for animals, the malleability of genetic material, to name just a few, are, under the free market, placed in the hands of those who know no morality. The same goes for the increasingly urgent problems of the destruction of nature, of environmental pollution, soil exhaustion and waste of raw materials. All of these demand much more careful consideration than the narrowly economic approach to which the market is limited. The effective tackling of these problems calls for a broader approach, one in which the measuring stick is the wellbeing of the whole of humanity.
The sustained economic growth of the international economy during the
1990s has given the advocates of neoliberalism a triumphal impression.
The belief that a free market will bring the best possible world finds
everywhere adherents and has embedded itself, moreover, in the thought
of formerly social democratic parties, which now accept the existing
capitalist order as the only one possible and try, therefore, to tie
together the social and the liberal. Under the
collective name Third Way they are transforming themselves
into social-liberal parties and claim that the free market,
provided that it is accompanied by their rule, can leave the community
with a responsible social base. But is this claim justified? Is a meaningful,
fundamental critique of capitalism no longer possible? Is the present
world order the only one possible and must we simply accept the bad with
the good?
We think not. And a growing group of people agrees with us, people who
feel themselves less and less at home in this world that supporters of
the free market have conjured up. Anyone who takes a critical look at
the condition of society in the Netherlands, Europe and the rest of the
world can see that capitalism, lacking values and restraints, is ill-equipped
to deliver prosperity and wellbeing to everyone. Anyone who listens closely
will be struck by the fact that the neoliberal answers to the major problems
of our time are inadequate, one-sided and take no account of the relationships
between things. This is precisely why it is useful, necessary and challenging
to consider feasible alternatives to this valueless and unrestrained
capitalist Brutopia. Ever more market, ever less democracy;
ever more commercialisation, ever less culture; ever more glaring contradictions
in society, ever weaker feelings of community and kindred spirit: things
could go on like this, but they need not. Our future is the result of
the political, economic and social choices which we make. If we want
change, we cannot wait patiently for an auspicious moment to arrive.
Humanity is not only the product of history, but also makes it we
make our future!
Our lives are to an important degree determined by the pressure to survive.
We are all individuals who are responsible for our own actions, and we
all want to lead our lives in complete freedom. Yet it is equally true
that none of us can survive alone, still less lead a meaningful life.
We have a constant need for each other, because we are also social beings.
Our development is above all the product of cooperation between people.
On the basis of this conviction the Socialist Party has formulated our
core vision, our tasks and our alternatives for the future.
As the Socialist Party our ideas and activities are guided by three central concepts: human dignity, equality of worth, and solidarity. It is these values that through centuries of experience have emerged as elements essential to human civilisation and progress. In the future these values will continue to be fundamental to any society which wishes to be seen as (still) civilised and which wants to continue to develop. By means of a rational and concrete analysis of capitalism and its effects on people and society we create the conditions under which we can make our struggle for a better world effective. Our moral indignation over all the missed chances to create such a world gives us the engagement, the energy and the determination which this struggle demands. Our rational analysis gives us the insight, gives direction to our alternatives, and the strategy and tactics we need if we are to succeed. Human dignity, equality of worth, and solidarity together with our rational analysis of the world form the core of socialism, the yardstick by which we judge developments and alternatives. Positive experiences we attempt to build upon, the negative to learn from so that we can prevent or resist a recurrence. Because of this our general starting point is also useful in our daily political practice, and there is a clear and verifiable link between our general vision and our specific opinions and proposals.
By human dignity we mean the respect of one person for another, the right freely to participate in decisions affecting the organisation of society, a secure existence for everyone, and a fair chance for every person to pursue, in full respect for others and for all that lives, his or her personal happiness, with the corollary that everyone is responsible for his or her own thoughts and actions.
A civilised society demands the fundamental recognition that all people are of equal worth, none more than another. To treat everyone equally demands broad tolerance throughout society and the absence of every form of discrimination and neglect.
If we insist that everyone is of equal value, we at the same time recognise that not everyone is equal in every sense of the word, or in terms of opportunity. Because of this we must constantly organise solidarity between people, helping and caring for each other where necessary and giving everyone a real chance to lead a fulfilling life.
Our fundamental belief in human dignity, equality of worth, and solidarity sets us against a society which throughout the world is becoming dominated by a mentality of every man for himself, one in which might makes right wins out over the principal of equal opportunities for all. We are determined to break the tightening grip of capital over society. We refuse to hand societys management over to the free play of market forces. We do not accept that capitalist economic laws determine the margins within which politics can operate. For these reasons we are striving to break the current neoliberal trend. This means working inside and outside parliament to improve the representation of the people and our contacts with the population as a whole.
These are the principal tasks of the Socialist Party:
Despite the explosive increase in knowledge and resources the twentieth century has not lead us to a Utopia. Society has instead developed increasingly in the direction of a Brutopia, a brutal jungle where the right of the strongest prevails. This development, of such a capitalist ideal state ideal, that is, for the rich and powerful we are determined to resist with all means at our disposal, to struggle, in the interests of all, for a better society in the twenty-first century. Below we set out, under ten headings, our ideas for this better world.
To guarantee human dignity, equality and solidarity will demand a profound
democratisation of society. Because of the determining influence of the
economy over the quality of life, democratic control over the economy
is of the greatest importance. Democratic control must take precedence
over any control linked to economic power or private wealth. This in
turn demands systematic extension of the control exercised by democratically
elected bodies over the economy, as well as a structural increase in
the control exercised by workers over the firms in which they are employed.
The democratic principle one person one vote is fairer and
more reasonable than the capitalist principle one share one vote.
A democratised society is the best guarantee of such essentials as the
defence of social progress and justice, health, nature and the environment.
Essential services, public transport and infrastructure belong in the
hands of the public authorities. Basic provisions such as education and
health care should come under the direct supervision of the government.
Only the government can guarantee equal access of everyone to these services
and only the government can take decisions which take into account the
broader picture and the longer term.
Democracy consists not only of rights, but of duties. The most important
of these is the duty to be involved. Citizens should be expected to participate
in elections and to follow the activities of their elected representatives,
and when necessary recall them. For democracy to function correctly,
decision-making must be transparent and the distance between decision-maker
and citizen made as small as possible. Citizens must have more influence
over their living and working conditions. This would increase opportunities
for active participation in decision-making procedures and reduce the
risk of disaffection and political apathy.
Parliamentary democracy, based on equitable representation, is the most
important means through which the popular will is expressed and put into
practice. Defence and strengthening of parliamentary democracy is thus
of paramount importance. The handing over of sovereign powers to undemocratic
supernational institutions, such as the European Union, leads to serious
and unacceptable erosion of democracy. An elected head of state, elected
Queens Commissioners and elected mayors would be elements of the
broadening and deepening of democracy, as would consultative and corrective
referenda and popular initiatives on important issues. Society has a
duty to guarantee and further the human rights of each individual, as
stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Treaty on the
Rights of the Child and other international treaties. Every form of discrimination
must be combated with vigour.
Work is part of life, and everyone has a right to work. At the same time we do not live to work we work to live. For this reason we are against the 24-hour economy and ever- increasing flexibilisation of work in the interests of profit maximalisation, just as we are for the sharing out of available work. Disabled people have as much right as others to work, a goal which could be realised by the opening of suitable workplaces by the public and private sector. Instead of continually adapting people to work, work should be made more suitable for people. The state should force enterprises to contribute to the realisation of full employment. In this way waste of labour power and the throwing of people on to the scrapheap would be prevented. As a corollary, every citizen should be expected to contribute, to the best of his or her ability, to the optimal functioning of the society. This could be through paid work, but also through provision of care to children or adults in need of care, or through voluntary work. Pensioners should be given the opportunity, should they wish it, to put their knowledge and skills at societys disposal, either as a paid worker or respected volunteer; the right to a care-free old age must, however, also be guaranteed.
Only when everyone has the chance of wellbeing can a sustainable improvement
in the quality of life be achieved. Net incomes should for this reason
be subject not only to a legal minimum, but to a legal maximum. Unlimited
incomes serve no reasonable interest and make unjustifiable demands on
money that would be better used for social purposes. The government must
have sufficient funds to maintain such basic services as education, public
transport and health care at a high level of quality.
Anyone unable to do paid work, or who is exempt from such work, should
have a right to a guaranteed secure existence, sufficient to make possible
full participation in society. The tax system must contribute to a redistribution
of wealth, with those who can afford it carrying the heaviest burden.
This demands a progressive system of tax on incomes, property, profit
and inheritance. Through international treaties the worldwide race to
find the cheapest labour and the most favourable tax rates
must be brought to an end.
Everyone should have an equal right to protection of their health and
to high quality health care. This is both a matter of civilised values
and, moreover, an investment in the future. Everyone should therefore
have free access to necessary health care, with the state taking responsibility
for its financing. Because health depends so heavily on living and working
conditions, on upbringing, education and nutrition, care must be taken
to ensure that everyone, notwithstanding his or her social circumstances,
has the chance to develop healthily. The causes of socio-economic health
differentials must be vigorously addressed. Giving precedence to some
citizens at the expense of others on non-medical grounds is unacceptable.
Prevention is better than cure. For these reasons prevention and early
identification of situations which pose a threat to health should play
a major role in health care. Information and surveillance in relation
to food and the environment and the promotion of a healthy lifestyle
are of great importance. It should be possible for everyone to take part
in sports. Instead of a one-sided emphasis on top performers, more attention
should be given to the more important matter of broad availability of
sport and the contribution this can make to individuals and society.
Human dignity can be affected by unbearable and hopeless suffering, putting
both patient and doctor in an extremely difficult situation. Euthanasia
is, in the last stages of terminal illness, permissible under very strict
conditions. As a society we must do everything in our power to improve,
to the highest level possible, the quality of life of people who become
dependent on our care. In this way euthanasia can be prevented from becoming
an escape route, rather than a reaction to an extreme situation.
People do not live only with other people, but with nature. Respect
for all that lives is a hallmark of civilisation and a healthy intellect.
Society must find a sustainable balance between the social importance
of an activity and its consequences for nature and the environment, a
balance which should be determined and maintained by democratic vigilance.
Activities which threaten human life or wellbeing either now or in the
future must be prevented. Unbridled growth of production and the consumer
society lead to unacceptable damage to nature and environment. The government
must take care that production of goods and services is not carried out
at the expense of the environment. The general interest must here take
precedence over that of the individual. The state should, where necessary,
take action against enterprises and individuals.
Farmers must have the chance to farm in a responsible manner, one which
respects humanity and the environment. Organic agriculture should be
encouraged. The interests of animals should be given more attention.
The damage done to animal welfare in the biotechnology industry must
be ended. Patents on life forms must be abolished. The same goes for
genetic manipulation, except in cases where it can be guaranteed that
no lasting damage may be done. The exploitation of raw materials and
nature, as much in our own country as elsewhere, must be seen in relation
to its effect on people, nature and environment. Instead of a single-minded
emphasis on short-term gains priority should be given to sustainability.
Raw materials and products must be where possible recycled. Economic
transactions should be conducted in such a way as to be economically
responsible.
A society which functions well must give attention to integration and
harmony. Integration of immigrant and indigenous inhabitants should be
encouraged on every level. Living, working, recreation and nature should
not be in conflict but, on the contrary, attuned to each other. This
demands a well thought-out use of available space and adequate possibilities
to determine the use of space in a democratic fashion. Land must be possessed
by the community where necessary and land speculation forbidden.
Integration must also be a starting point and priority of housing policy.
The contrast between groups of residents who are confronted with an accumulation
of problems such as unattended repairs and neglected public space on
the one hand, and those who have everything they could wish for close
by on the other, must disappear. The formation of ghettos including
those of the rich and segregation, are unacceptable, partly because
they place people, in particular children, in a disadvantaged situation.
Everyone must have the right to affordable and good quality housing in
pleasant surroundings. That would require, amongst other things, a legally
binding reasonable relationship between income and housing costs, the
encouragement of the building of social housing and a fairer sharing
out of scarce space for residential use, work and leisure. The starting
point must be that space is something more than a commodity, and that
community needs come before financial interests. Speculation in housing
should not be permitted. Thoroughgoing strengthening of the influence
of democratically elected bodies over what happens in relation to land
and housing is necessary in order to guarantee the right of everyone
to housing.
Society should be able to offer everyone the chance to travel around
by means of different forms of public transport which are cheap, fast
and comfortable. In every decision concerning the use of available space
in our country the need structurally to limit the use of private transport
must be taken into account. The favouring of environmentally unfriendly
air transport must be ended. The most environmentally friendly forms
of transport of people and goods should be encouraged.
Everyone is in equal degree entitled to protection of his or her person, rights and property. In order to guarantee such protection, the one-sided emphasis on more repressive measures, stronger punishments and enlargement of the police force must give way to a broader approach, with especial attention to the victims of criminality and social insecurity. Police and courts have, amongst others, the important task of tackling criminals and preserving public order and safety. Society should give them the means to do so. However, society must also above all set itself the goal, as far as is possible, of preventing criminality. Abuse of power and opportunities by people in leading positions in society must be vigorously tackled. It must also be recognised that people in large measure derive their identity from their social status. When they have no status and no prospect of improving this, it sometimes takes very little to set them on a criminal course. Society must therefore pay more attention to the socio-economic background of much criminality as well as to the greater insecurity of economically backward neighbourhoods. Legislation and the administration of justice should extend equal rights to, and impose equal duties upon, everyone; and everyone must be guaranteed equal access to justice and legal aid. Every kind of class justice is unacceptable.
The provision of good and available education for all is one of the
most important investments we can make in our society. It is for this
reason that it should be carried out by the state. In this way we can
prevent an intolerable division in education between a luxurious private
sector for the well-to-do and an impoverished public sector catering
for people with less money. Financial barriers which limit the availability
of education must go. Education must in principle be free, paid for out
of the general resources of the state. Good and universally available
education is essential to the development of each individual and of society
as a whole. Education policy should be based on the vision of humanity
as a social being and not one which must be moulded as quickly as possible
according to the demands of the means of production. Instead of the narrowing
of outlook now so often evident, education should seek to bring about
a widening of vision. Philosophy should be included in the curriculum
of every school. Children have the right to be children and the right
to play. Children should be brought up to be able, critical individuals
capable of discovering how things fit together. They should be able to
approach art, culture and science with confidence, and learn to value
and respect their fellow human beings and all that lives. As well as
education and training aimed at preparing them for work, all should have
the opportunity to pursue continuing education in order to broaden and
deepen their knowledge and understanding.
The independence of science is vital to the development of society. Privatisation
and commercialisation of education and research should therefore be resisted.
Society as a whole should be the guardian of our cultural heritage in
the broadest sense of the phrase, encouraging both active and passive
participation in art and culture and giving people the chance to discover
new, unexpected things. Art and culture offer not only opportunities
for relaxation, they also give people the possibility of developing their
own creativity and that of others. Such a creative process is vital to
a society which wishes constantly to renew itself. For these reasons,
commercialisation of art and culture must be resisted. The pure commodification
of art and culture erects undesirable financial barriers which exclude
sections of the population. It leads, furthermore, to an impoverishment
and a flattening-out of what is available.
The right to free expression of opinion and free access to the media,
culture and information (including the Internet) should be guaranteed.
Access to libraries, museums and galleries should be free. The government
should ensure the continuation of a strong public broadcasting service,
within which diversity is guaranteed. Undesirable concentrations of power
and the abuse of power in the provision of information must be resisted.
New media regulations are needed, especially in order to protect children
from commercial exploitation and undesirable exposure to violent or harmful
images.
On the international level the Netherlands should encourage recognition
of the fundamental principles of human dignity, equality and solidarity,
engaging in the struggle against worldwide social inequality, poverty,
underdevelopment, war and other forms of violence. Only then will all
the worlds citizens be given the prospect of a life worthy of human
beings. Combating poverty and a better sharing out of prosperity are
also needed if we are to tackle the threat of overpopulation. Radical
reorganisation of the enormous Third World debt is also necessary. The
world economy should be fundamentally reformed so that products from
developing countries are paid for at a fair price. International organisations
(such as the powerful World Trade Organisation) must no longer see free
trade as the highest good; in its place should be the goal of development
for all countries and their inhabitants. The power of corporations operating
on the international level and international financial institutions must,
through agreements within international organisations and treaties between
national authorities, be reduced in favour of that of bodies under democratic
control. A stringent regulation of international capital movements is
needed, as is a tax on all profits derived from such movements. A better
worldwide sharing out of prosperity would further the opportunity for
everyone to lead a fulfilling life and put an end to many regional conflicts,
thereby ending also the disruptive flow of refugees and giving their
countries the chance to carry out desirable structural reforms. Refugee
relief is the responsibility of all civilised people acting in international
solidarity. Our country should play a full and enthusiastic role in this.
International agreements should be drawn up with the aim of greatly reducing
armaments.
In international actions and cooperation with other countries states
should respect each others sovereignty. They should also respect the
human rights of their own populations. Dutch foreign policy must be directed
towards mutually advantageous cooperation and the protection and furthering
of human rights, and against political, economic and military domination
and exploitation by one country or alliance over another. Our armys
duties should be limited to the defence of the national territory, and
peacekeeping. Membership of NATO is therefore unnecessary. NATO should
be abolished as soon as feasible, and it would be a good thing were the
Netherlands to set a good example by leaving. International security
must be based on international treaties under the jurisdiction of the
United Nations. The UN should itself be democratised. Domination of poor
countries by rich must end. In a world where there is ever-increasing
international interaction and interdependence, cooperation in more and
more areas is needed, including cooperation within international institutions.
In making decisions regarding the establishment, enlargement, restructuring
or abolition of these institutions the following criteria should be applied:
the citizens should find the cooperation transparent; the consequences
for popular involvement of increased scale should be taken into account;
cooperation should not lead to erosion of national democracy; and cooperation
must contribute to a better sharing out of prosperity and wellbeing and
to protection of human rights.
Socialism is not a blueprint for a future society. Neither is it a utopian
prophecy, satisfying itself with the promise that everything will be
better just over the horizon. Socialism is in the first place the expression
of a certain vision of humanity and society. It offers a perspective
for the future but has also, and above all, meaning in the here and now.
Socialisms starting point is that humanity is the measure of all
things, and that this measure must be the criterion upon which society
is established. Human dignity, equality of worth and solidarity together
form our yardstick, both here and now, and on the way to a better world.
Ever more people are convinced that the credo more market, less government offers no structural or sustainable solutions to the great problems of our time, asking themselves, Then what?" In a global society, in which national affairs are increasingly dominated by international developments, there are no simple answers to this question. We are not an isolated island but a part of a worldwide whole. Yet however complicated is modern society, the need for an alternative remains for us a fact.
We call therefore on everyone who endorses the fundamental values of human dignity, equality of worth and solidarity to join us in thinking about the further development and elaboration of workable alternatives to this capitalist Brutopia. We do this in the conviction that the future belongs not to homo economicus, the selfish, calculating person who thinks that the measure of all happiness is directly proportional to the size of his or her income or how much they consume. We are rather convinced that the future will be one of homo universalis, whose creativity and dedication is used for the benefit of the whole of humanity, the whole of nature and the entire earth.