Page added on November 13, 2012
Excerpted from “Ignorance by Consensus” posted by David Korowicz at FEASTA,
But, very briefly and acknowledging some contention, the conditions for concern might be summarized as follows.We are trying to comprehend our world within the world-views and economic orthodoxies developed over an extra-ordinary, two-hundred year period of compound economic growth. This growth was coincident with increasing wealth, complexity and globalized integration. Part of our dominant consensus is that this trend will continue. Much of what is important to us, how we live, our expectations, what we value and hold dear, was shaped by this process. And we, the global 10%, have done well out of it.
The fringe view is that this growth is over – we are at the limits to growth, now. At issue is the stability of the globalized economy. We are moving into a deepening global deflationary depression, interspersed with dangerous and possibly irreversible shocks to the systems that support our basic welfare. We will lose much of what we take for granted and things we have come to call our own. We are entering an era of real danger and unpredictability.
This is because we are at an historic point of convergence. Firstly, we have reached the limit in the credit backing of our financial, monetary and banking system. We are at the same time hitting profoundly destabilizing ecological limits preeminent at this time is that we are almost certainly at the peak of global oil and food production. Put another way, we are at the limits of the system of trust and solvency that underpins the trade upon which we depend. We are at the limits of the least substitutable energy source that, by the laws of physics, is necessary for economic maintenance and growth. We are at the limits of our most fundamental human sustenance. They are the three most critical structural pillars of the globalized economy. Like a three-legged stool, the whole system can become destabilized by the buckling of just one.
In addition, and almost completely unacknowledged is that the changing nature of the globalized economy – increasing integration, complexity, speed and inter-dependence – has made us very much more vulnerable to this convergence. Further, such complexity makes it very difficult, or even dangerous to try and ‘fix’ its parts.
If we were to acknowledge such a fringe view we would be urgently preparing for profound change – for when real change is forced upon us we may have much less room for manoeuvre. We would be embracing austerity because of its inevitability, and in doing so, transform it. From top to bottom, we would be working on our food security, the resilience of critical services such as sanitation, monetary systems, governance, and re-working work. We would have begun the personal and collective psychological processes that might allow us avoid some of our species most destructive passions that can emerge in a time of crisis, and instead use it as a source of creative and positive change.
Of course, no detailed explanation for such a fringe view has been provided here. For most though, none is needed. They already know this view is nonsense. Why worry, it’s a fringe view… why with shale gas, technology, markets, stopping austerity, green growth, changing the monetary system, getting rid of the ‘wrong’ people….so many options! Anyway haven’t people been saying such stuff since the time of Malthus, and they’re still wrong! Aren’t the experts in control?! But an economist said…! Quite….quite.
7 Comments on "Summing It All Up…"
AWB on Wed, 14th Nov 2012 12:14 am
Good one.
BillT on Wed, 14th Nov 2012 12:35 am
This one will go over the heads of many of the so called ‘educated Americans. Too bad. It sums up the situation very nicely.
IanC on Wed, 14th Nov 2012 1:34 am
It’s almost as if serious long-range planning is not in the human make-up. We respond to immediate crises. If there isn’t an immediate crisis, we (to paraphrase Thomas Hobbes) pursue pleasure and avoid pain. If things are fine right now, we just let it ride.
I don’t expect our leadership to save us. I think we need to lead the leaders by our actions.
BillT on Wed, 14th Nov 2012 3:55 am
Actually IanC, I think your statement is more about the Western countries and not the rest. Russia and China both have 5 year plans and they think even decades in the future.
Without Western meddling, I suspect both countries, and many others, would already be far ahead of the Us in many areas. THAT is why the Us meddles. It knows that it is losing the fight for world leadership now that Texas is no longer the oil giant of the world and we have to beg for money to pay our legions.
poaecdotcom on Wed, 14th Nov 2012 4:16 am
Russia and China are not what I would use as examples of forward thinkers…. they are social time bombs and have oppressive top down models. They are just as hooked on the flawed ‘growth’ paradigm but came to the party late….
China is scrambling for water and arable land and when the world economy really starts to stutter then manufacturing ant colonies like China will be hard hit, cue Tiananmen ‘squared’.
I would use the Native Americans as examples of forward thinkers. 7 generations et all.
Arthur on Wed, 14th Nov 2012 8:05 am
I doubt that there are going to be world leaders in a disintegrating world. It is unlikely that there are going to be leaders of enough stature able to handle the coming desaster, it is simply too big. It will be everybody for himself within small survival groups. We are going to be a combination of farmers and warriers. Forward thinkers? MLK? Chief Blackfoot? Mother Theresa? Mandela? Don’t make me laugh. We have enough people in our own ranks who stated the truth and give the example, like Heinberg.
poaecdotcom on Wed, 14th Nov 2012 3:13 pm
Forward thinkers will be thinking and acting on the LOCAL level. There are many who are acting as local transition leaders TODAY but unlike the MLKs their sphere of influence of tomorrow’s leader will be ALOT smaller….
Chief Blackfoot and the culture he represents does not make me laugh….