I can’t argue with stevenstillwell’s comment about money: it dovestails with my thoughts as I read your very well reasoned article.
For years, I’ve carried on an internal debate about the globalization of capitalism. The upside to me is that blanketing the globe with a relatively free market manifesto tends to pour resources into developing marketplaces -which strikes me as the partnership that capitalism creates with technology. The downside is that unrestrained capitalism is a victim of it’s own success, creating it’s own form of enslavement to an improving quality of life. I think you only have to look at the mature marketplaces of western democracies to realize the methods of developing a consumer society undermines the spark that promotes the innovation you speak of….we tend -in the cynically general sense- to become complacent: curiosity is sparked by the desire to solve a problem, not the satisfaction enjoyed as a result of a solution.
This is to me the dilemma posed by capitalism as a global economic force. I believe that both the hopeful view of the opportunities provided by emerging markets as a sort of breeding ground of untapped innovation, and the skeptics view about costs vs benefits stripping the diversity from that breeding ground, are accurate. This points out to me that -without a third vector in this game- eventually innovation must end up a product, controlled by a system that see things in terms of economic accountability.
Again, as as cynic, I think this is not the innovation that you speak of. In the short term perhaps the curiosity potential provided by education and technology is very close to your vision. And perhaps it will spark the development of that third vector. I don’t have a name for it, but it will come from that mysterious 21st century violinist living in our still existent cave dweller mindset.