[A-List] The Collapsing Western Way of Life

[Nadja Tesich]

----------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 09:15:37 +0900
> From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp
> To: a-list at lists.econ.utah.edu
> Subject: [A-List] The Collapsing Western Way of Life
>
> The greatest threat to the Western Way of Life is the Western Way of
> Life itself
>
> by John Kozy
>
> Global Research (June 18 2010)
>
>
> The Age of Enlightenment was born sometime around the beginning of the
> eighteenth century. A mere three-quarters of a century later,
> industrialization ushered in the Age of Endarkenment, and human life has
> grown more and more perilous ever since. The Golden Age of capitalism
> cannot be recreated merely by applying the right mixture of spending,
> subsidies, re-regulation, and international agreements. Because the
> economic advantages of industrialization rely on overproduction and
> profit, balanced trade is impossible if the advantage is to be
> preserved; it entails no economic profit. Industrialism is a Hegelian
> synthesis which embodies the forces for its own destruction. The
> greatest threat to the Western Way of Life is the Western Way of Life
> itself.
>
> That human beings seem unable to solve their most pressing problems is
> too obvious and well known to deserve much mention; that most of the
> problems that human beings seem unable to solve are caused by human
> beings themselves deserves mention but rarely is.
>
> Human beings act as though having to deal with problems whose causes are
> beyond human control is not enough. Cyclones, earthquakes, volcanic
> eruptions, droughts, floods are apparently not serious enough to command
> human attention. These problems, apparently, have to be supplemented by
> self-made catastrophes to keep our minds engaged. But most manmade
> problems could be avoided by careful and complete analysis of the ideas
> that, when implemented, have dire results.
>
> Time-tested and effective ways of analyzing problems have been known for
> centuries. Rene Descartes published his Rules for the Direction of the
> Mind around 1627 and the Discourse on Method in 1637. John Stuart Mill
> published his Methods in his System of Logic in 1843. The mathematical
> method known as reductio ad absurdum has been employed throughout the
> history of mathematics and philosophy from classical antiquity onwards,
> as has the method known as counterexample. And root cause analysis is a
> highly developed method often used in information science and other
> places. Oddly enough, however, even most well educated Americans seem to
> be unaware of any of these analytical techniques, and when attempts are
> made to analyze ideas, these attempts are rarely carried out logically
> or all the way to their ultimate ends. Americans rarely "follow the
> argument wherever it leads"; even those good at analysis often stop
> when they come across something that looks appealing.
>
> John B Judis recently published a piece in the New Republic in which he
> summarized some claims made by Robert Brenner, a UCLA economic
> historian. Judis writes:
>
> Brenner's analysis of the current downturn can be boiled down
> to a fairly simple point: that the underlying cause of the current
> downturn lies in the "real" economy of private goods and service
> production rather than in the financial sector, and that the current
> remedies - from government spending and tax cuts to financial
> regulation - will not lead to the kind of robust growth and employment
> that the United States enjoyed after World War Two and fleetingly in
> the late 1990s. These remedies won't succeed because they won't get at
> what has caused the slowdown in the real economy: global overcapacity
> in tradeable (sic) goods production. Global overcapacity means that the
> world's industries are capable of producing far more steel, shoes, cell
> phones, computer chips, and automobiles (among other things) than the
> world's consumers are able and willing to consume.
>
> Why this is worth mentioning is difficult to fathom. Overproduction has
> always been associated with economic busts, and such busts have happened
> with such regularity that economists have even incorporated them into
> theory by euphemistically calling booms and busts the "business cycle".
> The question that must be asked is, "What causes overproduction?" And
> the answer is industrialization.
>
> The Industrial Revolution began in England around 1780. It transformed
> England from a manual labour and draft-animal economy into a
> machine-based one. But this change in the primary mode of economic
> activity was not merely economic; it changed the entire culture, not
> clearly for the better. Almost every aspect of life was changed in some
> way.
>
> Many cite increased per capita GDP as evidence of the revolution's
> benefits, but GDP is a poor measure of benefits. It merely measures the
> sum total of economic transactions in terms of the culture's money,
> neglecting the effects of economic activity on the quality of human
> life.
>
> The Industrial Revolution is largely responsible for the rise of modern
> cities, as large numbers of people migrated to them in search of jobs.
> These people were mainly housed in slums where diseases, especially
> cholera, typhoid, tuberculosis, and smallpox, were spread by
> contaminated water and other means. Respiratory diseases contracted by
> miners became common. Accidents in factories were regular. In 1788,
> two-thirds of the workers in cotton mills were children; they were also
> employed in coal mines. Henry Phelps Brown and Sheila V Hopkins argue
> that the bulk of the population suffered severe reductions in their
> living standards. Although life in pre-industrial England was not easy,
> for many it was better than laboring in factories and coal mines.
>
> Other consequences of the revolution are worse - craft workers lost
> their jobs. The Industrial Revolution concentrated labour into mills,
> factories, and mines, but industrial workers could never experience the
> sense of satisfaction and pride that craftsmen derived from their
> creations. Working a craft is a mentally stimulating and creative
> activity; operating a machine is not. The best craftsmen were renowned
> as artists. Some are still renowned today: Thomas Chippendale and
> George Hepplewhite, for example. The integral strength of Windsor
> chairs has never been duplicated in a factory. Handmade textiles,
> Persian rugs, even handcrafted toys are renowned for their artistry.
> Today that pride and satisfaction accrues only to hobbyists, such as
> quilters, but never to industrial workers. The Industrial Revolution
> degraded human life to the status of coal. People became fuel for
> machines. Bought cheap, people are used until unneeded and then
> discarded like slag. Individuality, talent, imagination, originality
> - the best attributes of human beings - are suppressed to the point of
> extinction. The Industrial Revolution sucked the humanity out of the
> human race; people became things.
>
> But the revolution gave England a temporary economic advantage as that
> is measured by economists. Excess production, that is, production not
> consumed domestically, could be exported, and England's wealth could be
> increased by buying (importing) cheap and selling (exporting) dear. This
> worked - for a while, but never smoothly.
>
> The Industrial Revolution quickly spread to Belgium, France, the United
> States, Japan, the Alpine countries, Italy, and other places. As it
> spread, the amount of excess products that needed to be exported grew
> and grew, and the number prospective foreign consumers shrank and
> shrank. Because there is little economic advantage (as economists
> measure it) in trading exports for imports of equal value, the
> international economy necessarily divides into net exporting nations
> who are enriched and net importing countries who are impoverished and
> less and less able to afford imports. The system has to be patched or
> the machines would grind to a halt. Most of the work of economists
> since the middle of the nineteenth century consists of developing
> patches for this collapsing system. Comparative advantage, creative
> destruction, free trade, Keynesian stimuli, and even social programs
> (which would be unnecessary if the economy provided for the needs of
> people) are merely attempts to patch the system, to keep the machines
> running.
>
> Industrialists soon realized that if they reduced the quality of their
> products, their life cycles would be shortened which would require
> people to replace them more often thereby increasing consumption.
> Manufacturers have been steadily reducing the quality of products ever
> since. An essential part in a device is made of an inferior material so
> the device fails far before its time and becomes junk, batteries in
> devices are soldered to their circuit boards so that when the batteries
> die, the products becomes junk, one fewer olive in every jar means more
> jars are sold, and the jars become junk. Economists like to claim that
> the system produces the best products at the lowest cost, but in
> reality it produces the exact opposite. As more and more products must
> be discarded and replaced, the discarded junk is hauled to landfills or
> dumped in oceans. But as landfills grow larger and larger, another
> patch is required - recycling. But it too is ineffective. Batteries
> soldered to circuit boards cannot be recycled, every half-filled can of
> paint cannot be taken to a recycling center, separating useful elements
> from the useless ones is often a hazardous task. The system produces
> junk! Humans originated about 200,000 years ago. The Soviet Union
> launched the first Sputnik into space in 1957. In less than sixty
> years, less than a mere three tenths of one percent of the time people
> have inhabited the Earth, the industrial nations have put so much junk
> into near outer space that the junk now endangers the functionality of
> operational satellites. Abandoned industrial sites are often highly
> toxic which often require cleanup - another patch. Often complete
> cleanup is impossible. Toxic residues are a species of junk. Keeping
> the machines running necessitates the production of it.
>
> Global industrial capitalism will continue on the gradual downward
> descent to collapse. The Golden Age of industrial capitalism that
> lasted from 1945 to 1970 cannot be recreated merely by applying the
> right mixture of spending, subsidies, re-regulation, and international
> agreements. Because the economic advantages of industrialization rely
> on the two ingredients mentioned above, overproduction and profit,
> balanced trade is impossible if the advantage is to be preserved; it
> entails no economic profit. Ultimately too many nations will be too
> poor to be importers, and the machines in the exporting countries will
> cease to function. Industrialism is a Hegelian synthesis which embodies
> the forces for its own destruction. The greatest threat to the Western
> Way of Life is the Western Way of Life itself. Patches may prolong it,
> but they cannot remove its contradictions.
>
> Chandran Nair writes,
>
> The 20th century's triumph of consumption-based capitalism has
> created the crisis of the 21st century: looming catastrophic climate
> change, massive environmental damage and significant depletion of
> natural resources ... The western economic model, which defines success
> as consumption-driven growth, must be challenged ... Advocates of the
> western model tend to play down its dramatic effects on natural
> resources and the environment. They refuse to acknowledge that their
> advice runs counter to scientific consensus about limits and the need
> for stringent rules on resource management. Instead, they argue that
> human ingenuity aided by innovations in the markets will find
> solutions. This is rooted in an irrational belief that we can have
> everything: ever-growing material wealth and a healthy natural
> environment. The stark evidence ... should be proof enough that this is
> not possible.
>
> No, it's not possible, but the impossibility lies in the system's logic,
> not in its effects. To use the preferred diction of economists, the
> system is unsustainable. Since the collapse of the industrial system is
> inevitable, a fundamental rethinking of the way the economy works is the
> only alternative. It has always been the only alternative. But even that
> leaves humanity soaking in the pickle. When the economic advantages of
> industrialization have dissipated, humanity will still be stuck in a
> world filled with bioundegradable junk, hazardous sites, raped
> environments, the unending consequences of the often accidental
> importation of alien species, polluted air and water, and numerous
> other consequences, the costs of which economists have never taken into
> consideration. And the progeny of both the rich and the poor alike will
> have to live with them. The pockets full of money that the rich have
> won't prevent their children and grandchildren from breathing bad air
> or drinking bad water or dealing with environmental degradation. These
> children and grandchildren may someday curse the days their fathers and
> grandfathers were born. Capitalism, as we know it, is reaching its
> endgame. The meek who inherit the earth will find it to be worthless.
>
> The human brain has enabled mankind to discover and create wondrous
> things; it has also been used to inflict horrendous suffering and
> destruction. In fact, it would be difficult to design an economic system
> more destructive, wasteful, and dehumanizing than the industrial, and
> much of the destruction it has wrought may be irreparable.
> Industrialization does not efficiently allocate resources; it squanders
> them.
>
> So, is mankind smart? Of course, but that is not the question. The
> ultimate question is, Is mankind smart enough to keep from outsmarting
> itself? The answer appears to be no!
>
> The Age of Enlightenment was born sometime around the beginning of the
> eighteenth century. A mere three-quarters of a century later,
> industrialization ushered in the Age of Endarkenment, and human life has
> grown more and more perilous ever since. Natural disasters can be
> catastrophic, but their destructiveness is usually limited, and the
> really horrendous ones are rare. Manmade disasters are ubiquitous, very
> extensive, and difficult, perhaps impossible, to repair. Had mankind
> been wise rather than merely smart, most manmade calamities could have
> been avoided. Que Sera Sera! Whatever will be will be will be. The
> future is plain to see, and it's not pretty.
>
> _____
>
> John Kozy is a retired professor of philosophy and logic who blogs on
> social, political, and economic issues. After serving in the US Army
> during the Korean War, he spent twenty years as a university professor
> and another twenty years working as a writer. He has published a
> textbook in formal logic commercially, in academic journals and a small
> number of commercial magazines, and has written a number of guest
> editorials for newspapers. His on-line pieces can be found on
> http://www.jkozy.com/ and he can be emailed from that site's homepage.
>
> Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole
> responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the
> Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are
> of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on
> Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or
> incorrect statements contained in this article.
>
> To become a Member of Global Research
> http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=section§ionName=membership
>
> The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
> articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are
> not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed.
> For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms
> including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor at yahoo.com
>
> www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has
> not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are
> making such material available to our readers under the provisions of
> "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political,
> economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed
> without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
> it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted
> material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission
> from the copyright owner.
>
> For media inquiries: crgeditor at yahoo.com
>
> (c) Copyright John Kozy, Global Research, 2010
>
> (c) Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
>
> http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20100618&articleId=19782
>
>
> http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com
> http://www.ashisuto.co.jp
> 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1