Will increasing conflict lead to expanding violence?

Not if neuropsychologist Stephen Pinker is right. In his expansive and widely praised book The Better Angels of Our Nature: the Decline of Violence in History and Its Causes, Pinker claims that, in general, violence has waned during the past few decades. He argues that this tendency has ancient roots in our shift from peripatetic hunting and gathering to settled farming; moreover, during the past couple of centuries the trend has greatly intensified. With the emergence of Enlightenment philosophy and its respect for the individual came what Pinker calls the Humanitarian Revolution. Much more recently, after World War II, violence was suppressed first by the “mutually assured destruction” policies of the two opposed nuclear-armed sides in the Cold War, and then by American global hegemony. Pinker calls this the Long Peace. Wars have become less frequent and less violent, and most societies have seen what might be called a decline of tolerance for intolerance—whether manifested in schoolyard fights, bullying, or picking on gays and minorities.

But there is a problem with Pinker’s implied conclusion that global violence will continue to decline. The Long Peace we have known since World War II may well turn out to be shorter than hoped as world economic growth stalls and as American hegemony falters—in John Michael Greer’s words, as “the costs of maintaining a global imperial presence soar and the profits of the imperial wealth pump slump.” Books and articles predicting the end of the American empire are legion; while some merely point to the rise of China as a global rival, others describe the looming failure of the essential basis of the U.S. imperial system—the global system of oil production and trade (with its petro-dollar recycling program) centered in the Middle East. There are any number of scenarios describing how the end of empire might come, but few credible narratives explaining why it won’t.

When empires crumble, as they always do, the result is often a free-for-all among previous subject nations and potential rivals as they sort out power relations. The British Empire was a seeming exception to this rule: in that instance, the locus of military, political, and economic power simply migrated to an ally across the Atlantic. A similar graceful transfer seems unlikely in the case of the U.S., as economic decline during the 21^st century will be global in scope. A better analogy to the current case might be the fall of Rome, which led to centuries of incursions by barbarians as well as uprisings in client states.

Disaster per se need not lead to violence, as Rebecca Solnit argues in her book A Paradise Built in Hell: The Extraordinary Communities that Arise in Disaster. She documents five disasters—the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina; earthquakes in San Francisco and Mexico City; a giant ship explosion in Halifax, Canada; and 9/11—and shows that rioting, looting, rape, and murder were not automatic results. Instead, for the most part, people pulled together, shared what resources they had, cared for the victims, and in many instances found new sources of joy in everyday life.

However, the kinds of social stresses we are discussing now may differ from the disasters Solnit surveys, in that they comprise a “long emergency,” to borrow James Kunstler’s durable phrase. For every heartwarming anecdote about the convergence of rescuers and caregivers on a disaster site, there is a grim historic tale of resource competition turning normal people into monsters.

In the current context, a continuing source of concern must be the large number of nuclear weapons now scattered among nine nations. While these weapons primarily exist as a deterrent to military aggression, and while the end of the Cold War has arguably reduced the likelihood of a massive release of these weapons in an apocalyptic fury, it is still possible to imagine several scenarios in which a nuclear detonation could occur as a result of accident, aggression, pre-emption, or retaliation.

We are in a race—but it’s not just an arms race; indeed, it may end up being an arms race in reverse. In many nations around the globe the means to pay for armaments and war are starting to disappear; meanwhile, however, there is increasing incentive to engage in international conflict as a way of re-channeling the energies of jobless young males and of distracting the general populace, which might otherwise be in a revolutionary mood. We can only hope that historical momentum can maintain The Great Peace until industrial nations are sufficiently bankrupt that they cannot afford to mount foreign wars on any substantial scale.

11 Comments on "Heinberg: Conflict and Change in the Era of Economic Decline: Part 2: War and peace in a shrinking economy"

BillT on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 1:10 am 



9/11 and the like happened to people who had food in their stomachs and money in their pockets and could afford to rally around the flag, misguided tho it was.

When the SHTF, the opposite will be true and it will release just the opposite in mans nature. When the purchase of guns and ammo has a huge, sustained increase over many months, in a nation where civilians have many times the weapons as the military, anything can happen, and likely will.

Yes, we may just end with a hundred big bangs as the nukes come out or . . . the Empire may just withdraw inside its 48 states and exist as a fortress country. (Not likely!)

But, with 90% of the Us citizens over 6 years old on some kind of drug, I can only imagine the Us when they are not available any more. The withdrawal will be horrendous! The time of the zombies may just become fact.

DC on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 1:56 am 



The UK is a poor example of anyone attempting to make the case the empires can fade into the night gracefully. Britain is a unique exception in that, they found a ‘partner’ if you will, that was willing to take them on a a (very) junior partner in a global hegemony. Mostly in exchange for allowing the US to garrison the UK and use it a base for keeping tabs on supposed ‘enemies’, and even friends for that matter. Its doubtful China will ever become the super-power the US thinks they are now, and even if they did, it would be because the US had sunk down so low even China looks good by comparison. Right now China is in unhealthy co-dependent relationship with the US, and tug one way or the other and both will probably sink. China wont have the resources to prop up the amerikan husk when the time comes. So why worry about it?

ken nohe on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 2:46 am 



I agree mostly with the article. Pinker is probably right in the long term and his analysis is superbly original and interesting. But it does not tell us what will happen in the coming years.

Still, a catastrophic event does not lead to anarchy in developed countries anymore, even if people don’t have enough food. This is a fact. We saw it last year after the great Tohoku quake. Within 2 days stores were empty but there was no looting or violence. Help came from outside the areas affected, people shared and organized themselves. It was pretty tough but not a case for despair, quite the opposite.

The violence we risk nowadays is not really individual violence anymore, except maybe in some slumps but social, organized violence. When a society is under stress, the extremes rise and offer radical solutions which look more appealing as tensions increase. This is the risk. Greece may become a good “laboratories” to see how these trends evolve in the next 2 to 3 years

BillT on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 3:54 am 



Ken, Tohoku is a poor example. The culture of Japan is totally different than Western Culture, and they are not armed. If you have been paying attention to the middle east and Europe lately you would see it in the streets and it will only get worse. Declining economies and increasing prices for necessities will bring out the animal in all of us. Wait and see. There are no exceptions.

ken nohe on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 7:09 am 



Bill, you are far too pessimistic as usual. It is not that you are wrong; your arguments are sensible but you systematically discount the “other” side of things, the positive one.

The Middle East is specific and may well explode for local reasons but Europe is far from it simply because people, on average are far too rich. In a few years, if the economy deteriorate significantly maybe, but we are not there yet and a lot will happen in-between.

By the way, if you haven’t read the books of Stephen Pinker yet, you should. They are absolutely fascinating and give one of the deepest insight into the human mind I have ever seen.

Arthur on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 7:47 am 



DC, the USSR is the perfect example of an empire that went quietly in the night, but it took a character like Gorbatsjow to make that happen. The European empires were dismantled, on US insistance, relatively peacefully, with a few exceptions like French Algeria and Dutch Indonesia.

I hope that the US will go like the USSR and transform in a sort of CIS or EU of relatively independent states. This could be achieved via secession and reconfederation, putting Washington, Wallstreet, the military-industrial complex and a certain minority out of business.

About Tokohu… Japan is a blessed homogenic mono-ethnic society and they have a high inner mutual trust level. There you can expect this kind of disciplined behaviour. But that is not going to happen in multiculti USA. Look at New Orleans as an example of what to expect if the shtf like with Kathrina. The US will be one big flash mob – gang territory if it starts to fall apart. But I am not very hopefull about a peaceful transition and that a transformation into a new USSR is just as likely. Time will tell.

BillT on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 9:31 am 



Ken, there is no ‘exceptionalism’ for Europe. You are already ahead of the US in disintegration because you are trying to keep 27 children agreeing to be skinned alive by an organization beyond their control.

This attempt is only a few decades old, not centuries like the US. It was destined to fail before it was even started. It is/was a globalist’s wet dream, leading to a one world government eventually. But, they forgot that it was a bunch of either irresponsible spenders or school yard bullies. Not an association of rational adults.

It WILL fail, and probably before 2020. There are not a lot of “wealthy” Europeans left in Europe. The really wealthy ones are gone or at least have moved their wealth outside into other venues when they could. What are left are those who think they are immune to reality, or have the “it couldn’t happen here” mindset, like the foolish Americans.

And, I do not have to read books by so-called ‘experts’ who are only trying to make their thinking into yours. I observe people, I don’t read about other people, I read about events and try to put them into context with each other and how they connect. YOU have no idea how Europeans are going to react to the slavery they are being subjected to by the IMF, ECB, etc. Nor do you know how you are going to handle the millions of immigrants that have flooded into Europe in the last decade or so. I am sure that blood is going to flow freely in the streets of Europe, just as it will in the streets of the Us eventually.

Cloud9 on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 11:43 am 



Multiculturalism is a fantasy of the well fed. Racism is rampant in the United States. Absent Uncle Sugar Daddy’s subsidy it will be as successful here as it has been in the Balkans. Almost a million Floridians have their concealed weapons permits. Ruger and Smith and Wesson have been on a tear since the housing bubble, and Wal-Mart is selling assault rifles on Black Friday sales. Ethnic Cleansing is on its way.

Arthur on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 1:51 pm 



“You are already ahead of the US in disintegration because you are trying to keep 27 children agreeing to be skinned alive by an organization beyond their control.”

Who is skinned alive. The Greeks are badly battered, because of their own irresponsible behaviour. Guess what… they are **desperate** to stay in the euro. The EU has only one serious enemy and that is Britain. Americans often overestimate the EU, that is merely a thin peel covering tens of still relatively independent nations. The EU only has 32000 or so civil servants (that’s the municipality of a city like Amsterdam of 700k inhabitants) and a budget of merely 1% EU GDP. The EU cannot impose taxes, does not have an army, or a CIA or order troops. The EU is nothing but a set of arrangements between states, a space agency, Europol, an energy club and a few more and that’s it. And there are some transfer payments from the richer states to the poorer in exchange for free access to their markets. There is no country that seriously contemplates leaving the EU, except UKIP-Britain.

“This attempt is only a few decades old, not centuries like the US.”

You are ignoring that nationalism is relatively new (since Napoleon) and that Europe for centuries had an emperor and as such was united under Christianity. You could say that the EU is a sort of return to 2 millenia old normality, going back to the Roman Empire. Cesar=Czar=Kaiser=Keiser=Emperor. There is no European nation in the EU that denies it’s European identity and heritage, except Britain, that sees itself part of Anglosphere. That’s a common denominator. But Britain’s role is over for ever, now that Europe is united and 500 years of ‘balance of power’ policies is out of business because of it and initiating a third world war against continental Europe, aided by the US and Russia/USSR, are no long possible. Expect Scotland to escape from the grip of London and change horses and expect that London’s only trumpt card, it’s financial ‘industry’, will be outmanouvered by Paris and Frankfurt, if Britain will be so stupid to go it alone. Expect Britain to become an agrarian state of Morgenthau proportions.

“There are not a lot of “wealthy” Europeans left in Europe.”

Is that important? The income difference here are vastly smaller than in the US, but for me that is a sign of stability. The system is probably smeared as ‘socialist’, but it still pays to work. No people sleeping in the woods or under the bridge here. Europe still has a large middle class, most people in (western) Europe have jobs, a car, a mortgage and one or two holidays per year.

“Nor do you know how you are going to handle the millions of immigrants that have flooded into Europe in the last decade or so. I am sure that blood is going to flow freely in the streets of Europe, just as it will in the streets of the Us eventually.”

That’s true. I expect a civil war to erupt between the autochtones and the muslims within ten years. Beginning in either Holland, Belgium, France or Britain. On forums, even MSM forums, there is already a war going on and everybody is cursing muslims and the other way around. The jewish/American idea of multiculturalism has failed. Continental politicians like Merkel and even Sarkozy has said as much… well multiculti, not ‘jewish/American’.lol Islam has been thrown out of Europe twice before, in 1492 (Spain) and in 1683 (Vienna). The third time is immanent and it will start on the very moment that Pax America will fail for everybody to see. Look at Greece/Golden Dawn to see what will happen to a society if the goodies run out. Left wing policies thrive in the good times of economic expansion, right wing policies in the bad times. And we all seem to agree that we are facing bad times, big time. I would say, enjoy your last years as a passive couch potato, flipping the channels, sipping beer, because history will be back sooner than you think.

Arthur on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 2:12 pm 



“Pinker claims that, in general, violence has waned during the past few decades. He argues that this tendency has ancient roots in our shift from peripatetic hunting and gathering to settled farming; moreover, during the past couple of centuries the trend has greatly intensified. With the emergence of Enlightenment philosophy and its respect for the individual came what Pinker calls the Humanitarian Revolution. ”

Wrong. It is wealth first, and Enlightenment and humanitarianism as a consequence. And wealth is in a barrel of oil. If you have 150 virtual energy slaves working for you, like Americans have (Europeans 100), the necessity to fight evaporates. There has yet to be a historian who ties historical developments, like the abolishment of slavery in the US, to the number of energy slaves per capita. From a certain level of wealth everybody is nice.

Hugh Culliton on Thu, 13th Dec 2012 3:45 pm 



Pinker is obviously not an historian. To look at Pax Americana and deduce general truths about the evolution of human conduct is absurd. As many of us know, the last 60 years have been anything but normal in the course of human affairs. Indeed, speaking as one who spent several months in Rwanda back in ’94, the milk of human kindness has been somewhat curdled even during Pinker’s glorious period of peace acendant. If we are to survive the coming tests throwen at us as plenty turns to scarcity, we will have to learn how to work together as communities much better than we are doing right now.