While I am a hardcore Libertarian and might not agree with everything that people reading and commenting here at the American Energy Crisis, I will always happily post a well reasoned and thoughtful insights.
So, without further ado, I give you "oOOo":
Let's start with some definitions. I won't repeat the ones in the dictionary but for the sake of this post, essentially constraints are limits or forces acting on something, but they are variable and it is possible to overcome them. A restraint is a fixed fundamental limit that cannot be altered. If we take the example of the government being faced with constraints and restraints, they have been elected to overcome anything in their path, "Yes we can!" but actually, there are things they cannot do.
You only have to look at nature to understand what is going on. Day follows night, spring follows winter. The tide goes out before coming back in again. Death follows life, before the cycle can go on and things can be reborn anew. The dynamic balance of opposites, change and the cycles of time are inevitable and essential for continuity.
Within this closed system we call Earth, infinite growth is an impossibility, UNLESS you allow things to take their natural course. A cherry tree blooms and then dies and after falling to the ground, the blossoms return to the soil and become nutrients for the surrounding environment. Through it's death, every last particle contributes in some way to the health and continuity of its own thriving ecosystem.
In the world we live in, particularly the world of politics, failure is not allowed, everything is done to prevent it, so things grow to extremes before being put on life support and eventually dying anyway. Politicians focus on watering a dead plant rather than allowing it to die and planting new seeds. They focus on their short-term ability to deal with constraints, rather than the long term geological restraints all of us are essentially restricted by. This focus on specific constraints pushes us into Hegel's dialect, whereby they present a part of the problem, which they can then maneuver into a solution of their own making, usually for their own benefit.
The resources of the world are running out, with top soil depletion, oil, coal, gas, fresh water, fish populations, etc…, etc…, all are being pushed beyond their limits to try to sustain an unsustainable system. We all need the necessaries of life to the same extent, thus things, which are equal to the same thing, are also equal to one another. We are all subjected to the same fundamental laws of mathematics. The ridiculous notion of endless growth for the sake of short-term profit for a few, is sacrificing our chance of long-term continuity. Unless the arrogance and egotism of man, which has helped build up such a fantastic, but complicated and fragile interdependent system, is put aside and instead changed into one of understanding of our true nature and position within the greater picture, the course we are on will lead to disaster.
In order for humans to survive and prosper, the politicians and business leaders of the world must first admit there can be no more business as usual, they must accept the restraints we are all subjected to, of physical limitations to continued growth in a closed system and that the only option is to downsize everything. Instead they focus on constraints, which allow them to prescribe remedies and keep up appearances in order to maintain the illusion that they are in control of things. By admitting to their inability to control forces bigger than themselves, they would help a transition into a more sustainable future and encourage people to take control of their own affairs.
Now, will this happen? In the words of Jeffers, not a f@#cking chance, because it shifts power from the government and companies into peoples own hands.
So where does that leave us?"
Thank you "oOOo"!
Mentatt (at) yahoo (d0t) com
9 comments:
A nicely worded essay, though I'm not all on board with the idea that growth is the problem .. what if we "redefined" growth? Some innovation and new discoveries are guaranteed for the future, if the past is any indicator. We may have indeed hit a wall when it comes to truly life-changing innovations (like radio, telephone, TV, the railroads, the internal combustion engine, the computer). We can debate all day whether or not we are at the end of the "world-changing discoveries" period. But I'm gonna bet that we humans still have a few "innovation" tricks up our sleeve. What I'm more concerned about is the time factor. Replacing/substituting oil (and natural gas) will be a major upheaval, changing lives everywhere .. for the worse initially. The alternative fuels all suck (I work with them) and the politics won't help. We just have to change ... faster. I don't believe we will "run out of everything" or that there are too many people on the Earth. We're just going to have to do things differently, do things in a less lazy fashion .. and start paying more for our energy.
Thanks for the excellent essay!
Civilization is pushing the limits of the resources that the world can provide. There will be competition for those resources. We are seeing an economic crash that is in part due to the present and impending scarcity of oil. It is interesting that the credit bubble that just popped started in 1974, when credit was eased to cushion the effects of the first oil shock. Problems are only going to get worse.
We have exponential economic growth stacked on top of exponential population growth. It is not sustainable, and won't be. There will be calamities and catastrophes, both natural and man made that will bring both population and economic activity in line with the available resources in the world. It won't be pretty, but is the nature of things.
Exponential growth followed by catastrophe is rampant in nature, and we are not separate from nature. Just notice the number of rabbits in your back yard. Year over year there are more and more and then one year the are gone, as the cycle repeats. This is true in many animal populations. The rise and fall of civilizations is evidence of our connection to this cycle.
I wish I weren't cynical about government of the people, but much more often than not the best of intentions have spawned government of the strong man. I shudder to think of the government that could enforce equality of outcome on the human race. It would be an endless reign of terror. Such control is contrary to human nature. We strive to provide better for our families. We are by nature dissatisfied. Stasis is not acceptable at the personal level. Therefor, it can't exist in the aggregate.
As fearsome as the future looks, I would much prefer to take my chances in catastrophes than to doom my children to endless oppression. Unfortunately, it looks like we'll all have to endure catastrophes in the not to distant future, or not.
Good Luck,
Coal Guy
"We're just going to have to do things differently, do things in a less lazy fashion .. and start paying more for our energy."
Who in this global economy is sitting around being lazy? Our Chinese workers? They are a billion or so eager beavers. The Americans who hold 2-3 jobs? Yup lazy.
And money is not a substitute for energy. You can pay all you want but when global geological depletion and export-land dynamics shut down the oil tankers to the USA, we will not be able to replace them with greenbacks.
Try reading Olduvai Gorge...
If anyone can't understand the problem of infinite growth in a finite world, ........
But it also points out the problem of the electorate expecting that politicians are responsible for fixing everything (and for politicians reinforcing that by promising they can).
We've seen the reality of this when governments have tried to protect their currency from devaluation by supporting it, but then getting blown out of the way by the pressures exerted by the markets.
We'll see more of the same pressures when the current 'stimulus plans' bankrupt those governments foolish enough to think they can buck the power of markets. The German Chancellor and now the European Union are right to point out the dangers and refuse any further involvement with these stimulus policies. They'll only borrow to invest in the real economy.
You can delay reality, but truth will out.
PS You may be interested in this;
http://www.chrismartenson.com/forum/currency-armageddon/15310
Thanks for the compliments. It is the first time I have ever written something like this so I appreciate you all taking your time out to write comments.
Part of the point I was trying to make is that ultimately, as bad as things are now and are going to get, unless you are disabled or locked up, it is really up to individuals to take power into their own hands.
When we will hit our limit to growth is anyones guess, but when you look at things from afar it is inevitable to happen one day.
Thanks for posting this Greg. I like the mysteriousness of your reference to me, but I don't mind you linking to my site.
I read your piece when you first sent it and thought it very good. I just re-read it and feel even stronger about how well written it is. You connected the dots very well. I have only one major observation: I think you put too much criticism at the doorstep of “politicians”. My own feeling is that the problem is 99% a private problem and politicians are only the mirror for the private sector.
The private sector—business and self interest—drives everything else.
Private self interest is what elects the politicians. In a representative democracy of any real kind, the elected representatives by and large can only represent the people who sent him/her. There is little life and only a short life for any politician that dares to step very far from what the private self interest wants to hear, wants to act upon, and cares enough about. Politics is the art of the possible. No politician that I am aware of has ever succeeded, or survived, by giving people—the private sector—very much information that the private self-interest does not want to hear. There are leaders—I’d like to believe Obama is one of them—who can tread the line of moving the public forward at a pace slightly faster than they are actually ready to move or believe. We’ll see. As a result, most politicians simply must mirror (and some are incapable of doing anything more) what the public is willing to believe.
The private sector—business and self interest, not government, is what created the situation—all situations. Government and politicians are, by and large, only able to react and help. As we say here: people want to privatize the benefits and socialize the costs. Government and politicians are left to figure out how to do that while also pulling/pushing the public ahead as much as they are willing to tolerate.
The last 20+ years have devastated the government’s ability to manage, to lead, to do anything other than react. The reactionaries that have dominated government and policy making across the planet for the last 20+ years claimed that government didn’t work and got themselves elected and made that true. Pick your crisis: all of them have been seen, written about, worried and cried about, and many speeches have been made about them for years. Government is not the source of the problem, it is the result of the problem. People, self interest and business, has not wanted to hear about, much less do anything about, any of these problems—put these problems on future generations.
Coal guy, I love this comment "We are by nature dissatisfied", because I think it really puts the finger on an important issue. That being that as a whole we have become so far removed from nature that we have forgotten where we came from. As so many distance themselves from nature through TV and computers, modern medication, consumer culture and synthetic this and that, many people get further away from what we really are, and in the process become more unhappy.
One other point I wanted to make is that I am an optimist, because I believe in the power we pretty much all have to take control of our lives and the more people start realizing this, the better things will become. If only on a personal level to start with. But all things start small.
I guess rephrasing what you wrote would better illustrate the point, "the further removed from nature we are, the more dissatisfied we become".
There was a special on National Public Radio last year about labor conditions in developing countries (Africa, Asia, etc.) with a particular focus on child laborers and the awful conditions they live under. One of the segments was about a boy of about 12 (I think) in Pakistan (a place where I worked for 5 years) who had to leave home and live in a cardboard box a long walk each way to the leather factory where he worked 12-16 hours a day dying leather. He never had any of his income because it went back to his employers to pay for the “food” he “received”.
The occupation has a short tenure because the toxics in the dye kill the workers fairly quickly. Nevertheless, that is where he worked. After a long session about his terrible living conditions and lethal work situation, the commentator asked the boy why he was always smiling. He said something to the effect: “I have nothing, I never will have nothing. What they pay me, they take back. Something they can never take from me is my smile…..”
Amazing, moving, wisdom and resilience from a small boy…. Something for all of us.
Post a Comment