Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970105100937.00952c70@ilhawaii.net> Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 10:10:21 -1000 From: Jay Hanson <mailto:jhanson@ILHAWAII.NET> Subject: Re: pushing development--or pushing the status quo? To: Multiple recipients of list DEVEL-L <mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
At 10:44 AM 1/4/97 -0500, Steve Eskow wrote:>They are one view, at most a partial view, of "reality".
Speaking of views of "reality", perhaps this will help to explain where some of the resistance is coming from.
I will begin with some BACKGROUND and conclude with a little synopsis of my view of THE ROAD AHEAD.
BACKGROUND
Most people in the First World have a neoclassical economics (NC) world view. This self-evidently inverted world view is wrong in the same way that men used to believe that the earth was flat, or that the sun revolved around the earth. Indeed, neoclassical economics is sometimes called "flat earth economics".
The NC view holds that economic growth can continue forever because it sees our ecosystem -- and people themselves -- as a subsystem of our social/economic system. In other words, our ecosystem and people are a pile of "natural resources" to be put to our best use -- all things to all people. . . . The opposite view is called the "biophysical" (BP) world view. Ecologists (and other natural scientists) are trained to see the BP view.
The BP view sees that human social systems -- and humans themselves -- are subsystems of our ecosystem. Moreover, the BP view sees our ecosystem as our LIVING LIFE-SUPPORT SYSTEM. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The hierarchy here is obvious, no life-support = no life.
Our life-support system has its own requirements that are not well-known and have no relationship to markets.
Obviously, neoclassical economists are not trained in living systems. When living systems are cut-in-half, they may die. . . and those parasites that depend upon now-dead systems for life, die too.
Indeed, there is now scientific evidence the we may have less than 35 years before the "functional integrity" of our ecosystem is destroyed. [ See references at end ].
The admission of limits to growth brings all kinds of nasty redistribution questions, so naturally the present power holders and their high priests -- the economists -- will try to maintain the status quo as long as possible.
place in our society. In the final analysis, the call for endless economic growth is rooted in a hidden, insatiable drive for power; rational debate rarely manages to bring this fact out into the open, let alone confront it. Modern society remains a crumbling monument to self- deception and exploitation. See my newest essay at: [ http://csf.Colorado.EDU/authors/hanson/page79.htm ]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
THE ROAD AHEAD
I will begin by pointing out that there is no reason to assume that humanity will change its ways in order to survive. Studies show that humans are not rational (e.g., Ornstein) and that the human response to environmental scarcity is violent conflict (Homer-Dixon).
Within the context of irrationality and violence, humanity is about to leave the "exuberant expansion" phase of its existence and enter the "crash" phase. I expect this to occur sometime around 2005 when global oil production peaks and begins its permanent downward trend. [ http://csf.Colorado.EDU/authors/hanson/page65.htm ]
We in the US, do not have a proactive government -- one that asks how people want to live in the future, and then plans for that future. We have a social trap -- a "laissez-faire" government -- that can not react to a catastrophe until it actually occurs (e.g., ozone, global warming, S&Ls, lead, cigarettes, etc.). Thus, our social systems can not change until we actually have a permanent crisis that seems unsolvable given existing social arrangements. [ http://csf.Colorado.EDU/authors/hanson/page4.htm ]
Once the crash begins (say, about 2005), it will be so disruptive that democratic governments MUST become authoritian in order to keep the peace. Remember Rodney King? Multiply that violence by a million.
And it is not just my opinion. In AN INQUIRY INTO THE HUMAN PROSPECT, Robert Heilbroner considered the damage that our economy is inflicting on our life-support system and projected continuing (but gradually slowing) economic growth until approximately the year 2005. At that time, he sees the need for highly authoritarian governments to control the transition to worldwide economic decline. (quoted in Daly and Cobb)
No proactive government = NO way to avoid the crash. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A study of the Easter Island experience will give futurists a sense of what will occur around the world during the coming century. [ http://csf.Colorado.EDU/authors/hanson/page14.htm ]
Also see Robert Kaplan's THE COMING ANARCHY at [ http://www.TheAtlantic.com/atlantic/election/connection/foreign/anarcf.htm or http://csf.Colorado.EDU/authors/hanson/page67.htm ]
Really nothing to do except to start digging foxholes.
Jay ====================================================== A few selected references from REALITY:
The two most prestigious scientific institutions in the world, The National Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society, issued a joint public statement in 1992 that ended with:
"The future of our planet is in the balance. Sustainable development can be achieved, but only if irreversible degradation of the environment can be halted in time. The next 30 years may be crucial." Archived at: http://csf.Colorado.EDU/authors/hanson/page7.htm
Furthermore, in 1992 a WARNING TO HUMANITY was issued by the Union of Concerned Scientists that began:
"Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. Human activities inflict harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment and on critical resources. If not checked, many of our current practices put at serious risk the future that we wish for human society and the plant and animal kingdoms, and may so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know. Fundamental changes are urgent if we are to avoid the collision our present course will bring about."
This warning was signed by over 1,500 members of national, regional, and international science academies. Sixty-nine nations from all parts of Earth are represented, including each of the twelve most populous nations and the nineteen largest economic powers.
It was also signed by 99 Nobel Prize winners. Archived at: http://csf.Colorado.EDU/authors/hanson/page8.htm
And finally, in 1993 a joint statement by 58 of the world's scientific academies said:
"In our judgement, humanity's ability to deal successfully with its social, economic, and environmental problems will require the achievement of zero population growth within the lifetime of our children." Archived at: http://csf.Colorado.EDU/authors/hanson/page75.htm
===================================================
A selected reference from UNREALITY:
ECONOMISTS GIDDY OVER FUTURE OF GOOD OLD U.S. ECONOMY By Martin Crutsinger, AP (12/29/96)
WASHINGTON -- Economists, normally staid practitioners of what is called "the dismal science" are downright giddy these days. The object of thief delight -- the good old U.S. economy.
No less an authority than Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, described the economy as fundamentally the best he has seen in three decades.
Searching for their own superlatives, some private economists have taken to calling this the "nirvana economy," a state of perfect economic bliss.
And as they prepare their outlooks for a new year, they're predicting the good times will continue to roll in 1997 . . .
[ Elsewhere my newspaper mentions that suicide is the third largest cause of death among youths aged 15-24. ]