Seeing clearly changes what can be ignored.

In the previous part, the mechanism was named and the possibility it reveals became clearer. Once such a possibility is recognized, attention naturally shifts from diagnosis to responsibility — not as an abstract demand, but as a practical question of orientation.

Diagnosis changes what can be ignored. When a pattern becomes visible, the situation is no longer experienced in the same way. The question moves from What is happening? to How do we understand our position in relation to it? Knowledge does not force immediate action, but it does bring developments into clearer view.

Historical change rarely begins with a single decisive moment. More often, it unfolds as recognition spreads and becomes harder to set aside. At that point, the issue is less about proving a process exists and more about how people, institutions, and economic arrangements relate to what is now seen.

Responsibility, in this sense, begins with understanding. It starts not with grand gestures, but with acknowledging that changing conditions may call for more deliberate responses. From there, discussion can turn to how structures might evolve — cautiously, step by step, and without slipping into denial or overreaction.

Seen this way, the Ethical Market Economy (EmE) can be viewed as one possible response to the diagnosis described earlier: an approach that seeks to align economic signals more closely with ecological consequences, so that everyday participation gradually reflects real conditions. It is introduced here not as a conclusion to accept, but as a framework for exploring how recognition can translate into direction.

Diagnosis clarifies what we face. Responsibility concerns how we position ourselves in relation to it. Between the two lies the space where direction begins to form.

In the next part, we will look more closely at what EmE could mean in practice and how its logic follows from the patterns we have been tracing.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)