by mos6507 » Wed 16 Mar 2011, 11:00:15
I wish I could be more eloquent in expressing this idea, but I realized some time ago that where you fall ideologically has a lot to do, if not EVERYTHING to do with trust. How much trust do you have, and in which institutions?
Doomers tend to skew tinfoil because they're trust in established institutions is shot. Whether they're overcompensating by becoming paranoid is an endless debate, but I understand the intersection-point, and why you might have doomers who on the one hand believe in AGW and peak oil, and on the other, suck down Alex Jones kool-aid or coast-to-coast nonsense. It's because when you lose your trust in the ministries of information, then you are stuck fumbling around, constructing your reality based on your own feeble perspective of the world around you.
The same would be true of the back to the land and anti-civ types. If you feel that BAU is built on a house of cards, that large institutions are corrupt and incompetent, then you will start retreating from any sort of dependence on 'the system' in anticipation of short or permanent disasters.
But where trust has failed almost universally now, is our trust in our financial institions, and to a slightly lesser extent, government which we hold accountable for the fate of the economy and the job market.
That the voting public would, perhaps, vote against its own interests by attacking government through sending tea-partiers to washington who will only further deregulate big businesses is besides the point. The intention of the people in the mid-terms, or in the revolutions in the middle-east, is to express a vote of no-confidence in the status quo.
Then you have the issue of trust in our support system. The BP spill, the string of natural disasters from maybe Katrina onward, the shakiness of the global grain market, the nuclear meltdown, all these events erode confidence in the system's resilience.
It just seems that whether you are a raging denier who keeps talking about climategate, or a greenie talking about the Koch brothers, you're speaking the same language, which is that of distrust.
Trust is hard to build and easy to lose, but it is vitally important for a functional society. Trust was the central theme in the Godfather movies, for instance. If you bet wrong in trusting the people around you, you'd wind up suddenly dead. Trust is the reason terrorism is so effective. If you don't trust that public places are safe, that a bomb could go off any minute, you'll walk around in constant fear.
What we've enjoyed in the west all this time is an unprecedented period of comfort in which we simply didn't have to worry about our basic needs. That this came at a high externalized cost wasn't clear to us, just that we were comfortable and safe and care-free.
We're now in a period in which a great many aspects of our lives is vulnerable. Tainted foods, cadmium in toys, economic collapse, the vagaries of eaarth, pesticides & GMOs, energy, geopolitical instability, infrastructure rot...
Even those of us who pray to the altar of BAU feel this increasing vulnerability, but we go off in a million different directions to try to address of it, most of them counter-productive.
If the world as we know it is built on trust, once that trust goes away, I really wonder what's left in this crowded world besides people just fighting each other over every last trivial difference, perceived threat, conspiracy, and misunderstanding.
You see it in this forum, which I think is merely a microcosm of the mood of the country, if not the planet. Everybody knows that the world is screwed up, and everybody's got their own flawed explanation for why that is, who is at fault, and what should be done about it.
I think the world functioned effectively in its current state when there was greater common purpose. Once things fractionalize the way I see this happening, I wonder whether anything good will come out of it. It's one thing to keep bringing up Rome and how in some ways its dissolution was a good thing. It's another to have to live through a dark ages.
At some point the breakdown of trust has to be followed by the restoration of trust in some new institution or new paradigm, something a little more than the simplistic anarchism-peddling I see here.