A Human Plan

“If we are to act, if human beings are to organize and act, the individual actions must be relatively simple. This is not just true for the masses, but also has been true for the elites who have, in the many simple acts of excessive accumulation, created a complex and well-defended bulwark against changing their grasp on power and entitlement. Any plan to reform and reconstruct the most damaging designs in our blah blah blah blah.”

I have started any number of essays in this and similar ways. I always know that what I am writing is true, not generally understood and reasonably important. But… it is not what I want or need to say, to others or to myself. I put the chances of making the necessary changes, reduction of consumption, reduction in total human ecological footprint, to avoid most measures of catastrophe at about 5 percent; enough to work for, but not enough to realistically make into a life plan.

What is the most likely to happen is what people should plan for even as they work to make other futures possible. We should be planning for a series of economic and ecological shocks that, at first, lower material living standards for the masses in those places where they are now high and eventually make even what we consider essentials more and more difficult to acquire. The long human expansion is at the beginning of its inevitable retraction. ((Our human numbers and consumption will continue to go up for at least another generation, but the signs of decline are clear; the most obvious are that we are using the productive capacity of the earth beyond replenishment levels and that every corrective action we take is exacerbating the failings of some other system that begs correction, all driven by our massive excesses. Those who reject these ideas using the fact that warnings from Malthus to Ehrlich and others have not yet materialized are missing two vital points: one is that catastrophes have occurred, but we, in the first world, using our economic and military power, have been able to deflect them onto the third world and, two, that these warnings by prescient people are more like earthquake predictions: the conditions are clear, but the moment unknown. Los Angeles still requires ‘earthquake proof’ construction standards even without a date certain for ‘the big one.’

If we look at bases of the arguments that reject what the world’s most respected scientists and philosophers see as the most likely future, they are: that humans are exceptional and not, therefore, under the same rules as other life on the earth; all problems in the past have been solved by technology and so will these problems; there is really no problem in the first place other than trouble makers who are jealous of successful people; not every data analysis supports an unambiguous unitary prediction: These are actually a listing of logical error types of the sort that are most commonly used to distort and misrepresent reasonable and responsible decision-making processes.))

There isn’t a ‘plan to reform and reconstruct the most damaging blah blah.’ There can be no such plan. With the greatest of luck and the highly improbable unifying of much of humanity in meaningful common purpose, we might just pass through the coming changes with only a minor extinction event, the complete reordering of human societies after 2 to 4 generations of drama and trauma, but with much of our human knowledge and technological base intact – without passing through a medieval plaque/Mad max period. Or we could truly hit the wall: billions dying off at the hands of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse as we fight it out for the last drink of water and delicious cockroach – fight it out with broken bottles and atomic weapons. This major extinction event would set the stage for a completely unknown “new beginning”; all bets would be off.

You might say that there is no way to plan for either extreme, or any place in the middle, if that is to be the continuum from which the future must be chosen. That would be correct – almost. There is one plan still available; that has always been and will always be available. It is the one that most humans have used except for the last 200 years or so. They had (We have) the option to try and live the life pressed upon us by our approximately 7 x 1027 atoms (we are each made of thousands of times more atoms than the number of stars in the universe) randomly collected from all over this region of space and modeled into our particular human form by the DNA molecules among them. We are, each and everyone, a living thing made up as a species with both physical and behavioral designs; like almost every member of every species in the history of life, we can try to be what we all potentially are: a fully functioning member of our species.

Discovering what this is was once as ordinary as being born; today it is a life’s work. And as a life’s work, it supercedes most of the madness that moves and mystifies most of humanity. Success becomes living in purpose and the practice of specieshood everyday. The greatest enemy of living in specieshood is not global climate change, peak oil, nuclear terrorism or any of these and more real and terrible dangers. It is the loss of connection to the daily events of the natural world, including the ‘world’ within our own bodies, and the loss of human community as the organizing, adapting and sustaining human unit. ((Community is a very difficult project these days. It is possible, with our powers of communication, to live in a community unbounded by time or distance. I can ‘listen’ to Alfred Whitehead read his books in my mind-built study, ask him questions and hunt for the dead answers. Or write a note of question to a living thinker over the Internet with some expectation of a living answer. And I can meet the local ones I love in person. If we truly understand them, communities are within our reach.))

But the social world (now the social/economic/political world) has betrayed us. In a procession of tiny uncomprehending steps we have disconnected our adaptive actions from the natural world substituting, in each tiny iteration, culturally derived content for an ecologically based bit of information. Today only volcanoes, hurricanes and the like attract our attention. Most people cannot name and give a human use for a single plant that grows wild in their neighborhood, do not know where the food they eat comes from or where and how they might find a sip of clean water should the faucet go dry. The very lives of our cells are at the mercy of a social system that is only marginally aware of and responsive to the biophysical realities upon which life depends.

Humans try to believe the social world. It has, in almost all of our history, been the grounding design for our wildly active and untethered intelligence and consciousness. For hundreds of thousands of years that social world was the complex extension of the ecology in which we lived. And we are, each and everyone, born into the world with that relationship as a biological expectation. Being guided by the community was being guided and adaptively responding to the full force and power the natural world.

Our present societies leave the greatest part of life out of the equations that describe trajectories and destine outcomes; and so, creates a terrible tension. Each human contains the full potential and history of life on earth in their person. Each and everyone ‘knows’ through the collected force of their fifty thousand billion living cells, each cell adding its tiny contribution to fighting to stay alive, that their life is important. When the social order in which their lives are embedded tells them that they do not matter, humans try to believe society’s design; and thus the tension. Their very bodies name the lie of the surrounding social world.

We are faced, then, with a great and terrible choice: a society disconnected from the fructifying sources of earthly life or the biology of the body and mind formed by 6 million years of hominid evolution. Our present dominating societies have ten thousand years of history marking the progress of the loss of connection with a guiding and informing environment, and the increasingly eccentric expressions of human behaviors: bizarre beliefs and practices, strange body coverings and the actual manifestation of the most remarkable imaginings; and these things occurring simultaneously with, largely indistinguishable from, an increasing comprehension of material science, natural philosophy, mathematics, the physical sciences, biology and even some little touch of comprehension of our own nature and capacities.

Human beings, our societies and institutions have been disconnecting from the grounding source of our species’ nature for about 500 generations; disconnecting from the evolved experience that goes back even beyond our present species through the hominids of our origin and through our primate ancestors that set the primate patterns for sociability, infant raising, and other deeply formed behavioral designs. Just as one doesn’t need to know the names of vitamins to recognize the deficiency of one, that something is missing; absent behavioral opportunities and expressions can lead to sensations of insufficiency. People have, from the very beginning, questioned the loss of a deeply felt experience not yet attained, and questioned how something not yet experienced could be known to be missing. The thought traditions that most directly deal with these sensations are Taoism and Buddhism supported by Vedic materials. I cannot recommend anything presently called religion – this is another way to give up specieshood – but the understandings of those who, long ago, recognized the loss of connection and who struggled to recover what they perceived as missing is an essential study for all who feel that need to reconnect to the evolved nature of the species.

We, personally and individually, are faced with this choice: to unquestioningly accept the standards and directions of society or to recognize society as the present iteration of an increasingly arbitrary existence. We can choose to live within the social framework realizing that we function in it as one might swim in the ocean or climb a mountain, an adaptation to necessary conditions, even as we engage the true existence of rediscovering the specieshood from which we were redirected from the first moments of postpartum life.

Such a goal and way of life doesn’t necessarily become “navel gazing”, though it can especially when the society is strongly rejecting of the effort. More importantly it can be empowering to engage the social ills that are so apparent today, engage them from a place of perspective. But with these personal and community goals, one’s quality of life is not held hostage by the society’s Madness and a life of depth and satisfaction can be lived even if we lose the world that most humans find essential.

But at another level, if more and more people began to understand and explore this way – something that I see in conversation that many people recognize almost immediately as having value – then the more the fight for ecological integrity, changing consumption patterns, maintaining biodiversity and the other planet wide goals are supported by individual actions rather than diminished. But what is essential to understand is that this way of life is not intended to save our world from the increasingly damaging consequences of our excesses, it is intended to give each person the opportunity to be a complete human being with purpose and joy in life regardless of social and institutional madness; though this just might be the only thing that can save us.

James Keye is the nom de plume of a retired academic and small businessman living with an Ecological Footprint of 1.6 earths. He can be reached at jkeye1632@gmail.com. Read other articles by James, or visit James's website.

25 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. bozh said on June 5th, 2010 at 9:55am #

    James Keye,
    When u build a house, u first lay a foundation. Talking ab our society shld also start from the fundament: division of people into less- and more valuable categories of people.
    Science and i recognize only one category; priests, jornalists, army-cia-congress do not!
    Elites or ‘elites’, as i say, are obviously one category of people and the masses or ‘masses’ is another, tho, an alien class.
    If that is not bad enough news, the ‘elite’ [i don’t think it had been peasants] divided also peoples into A {isr, US} and B, C, D , or fg peoples like some muslim lands.
    And now our ‘elite’ want peace on earth! But of course, it does! tnx

  2. Don Hawkins said on June 5th, 2010 at 10:16am #

    What is the most likely to happen is what people should plan for even as they work to make other futures possible. We should be planning for a series of economic and ecological shocks that, at first, lower material living standards for the masses in those places where they are now high and eventually make even what we consider essentials more and more difficult to acquire. The long human expansion is at the beginning of its inevitable retraction.1

    Or we could truly hit the wall: billions dying off at the hands of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse as we fight it out for the last drink of water and delicious cockroach – fight it out with broken bottles and atomic weapons. This major extinction event would set the stage for a completely unknown “new beginning”; all bets would be off. James Keye’s

    Well you went and did it this time James the truth. Of course you will be called a nut maybe even a Communist but your in good company. Not a person on the corner with a sign that reads the end is near this time but the best minds we have and to just look with our own eye’s and after this summer and then winter it will be as plane as the noise on our face. We all do have a little problem the powers that be have decided to do nothing go through the motions all just for show and the reason well a few million words have already been written on that. We act now or like you said all bets are off. It will take most of us the last time I checked the many.

  3. Don Hawkins said on June 6th, 2010 at 4:47am #

    http://www.webcommentary.com/php/ShowArticle.php?id=moncktonc&date=100606

    James read this and these are the people who just don’t give a dam. They are relentless as well it appears this is what they live for on the other side of course so far half measures and that will not do the trick if we wish to make a real try. I need a cup of coffee

  4. Don Hawkins said on June 6th, 2010 at 5:45am #

    And why the half measures in many way’s again the system is in control not humans. In the States the fossil fuel companies corporations in general run the show, policy and with that thinking the end is near. We don’t have long to see how this will play out as not just the illusion from these so called leaders with there head up there ass but the problem itself is going to make an entrance onto the stage in even a bigger way. I known let’s think of it as two football teams the one team all the latest play’s and the coach’s have a copy of the darkside win at all cost. First chapter of the copy from the darkside is it’s not if you win or lose but how you play the game no no no in there copy it’s not how you play the game at all cost but to win. The other team so far want’s to also win with hope on there side and the coach’s on this team have a couple of hail marry play’s in mind. Who will win who know’s but who ever does will get a parade a big ring and commercial endorsements as the rest of us go down the drain in not such slow motion. Strange game no one really wins nice game of checkers cup of coffee. Remember so far nobody wins it’s not how you play the game at all cost but to win and nobody really win’s and that is nut’s. Yes we are the many and they the few and again we are lead to believe that this game has real meaning it’s important when in reality nobody win’s we all lose.

    What happens to the wide-eyed observer when the window between reality and unreality breaks and the glass begins to fly? –Stephen King

    Well noise generator’s comes to mind as a start and that’s best case scenario. Oh I almost forgot the mayor’s of the cities on the Gulf coast said everything is fine come on down go shopping we are open for business what’s a few tar blob’s and heck you can watch birds and other life forms try and survive it will be great fun.

  5. James Keye said on June 6th, 2010 at 1:54pm #

    Don, This is very hard stuff to take, that the world as we know it must make dramatic changes — will make dramatic changes no matter what we do. When faced with this reality a significant number of American Indian groups attempted to overcome the inevitable with the institutional denial of the Ghost Dance; the hysterical rejection of settled science is the last refuge of our frightened people. We should not despise them, no matter how misguided they are and act, but must stay steady on to inform ourselves and others. The moments will come — there will be no choice — when evidence overwhelms before the sophistries can form; for those moments we should be ready.

  6. David Silver said on June 6th, 2010 at 2:53pm #

    James
    You left out the need to get rid of the system that kills for profit.
    It’s called capitalism/imperialism. And the need for a socialist society
    which is a pr-requisit for improving the human condition in a significant
    way as well as producing people tat will be more caring, and intelligent
    and whose behavior can eliminate was, and injustice; it’s called socia;lism.
    Dave

  7. Don Hawkins said on June 6th, 2010 at 5:08pm #

    Well said James well said.

  8. Don Hawkins said on June 7th, 2010 at 4:36am #

    Sent this to CNBC this moring.

    Morning,

    James Keye said on June 6th, 2010 at 1:54pm #
    Don, This is very hard stuff to take, that the world as we know it must make dramatic changes — will make dramatic changes no matter what we do. When faced with this reality a significant number of American Indian groups attempted to overcome the inevitable with the institutional denial of the Ghost Dance; the hysterical rejection of settled science is the last refuge of our frightened people. We should not despise them, no matter how misguided they are and act, but must stay steady on to inform ourselves and others. The moments will come — there will be no choice — when evidence overwhelms before the sophistries can form; for those moments we should be ready.

    The new monthly ice report should be out today so look it up and inform yourselves and then others. Not a good idea and why is that? When evidence overwhelms before the sophistries can form oh yes that is why there is Fox New’s so as to not form or is it form in that fair and balanced way we hear so much about. I wonder who will win in the art of a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone yes who will win.

    Don

  9. Don Hawkins said on June 7th, 2010 at 5:44am #

    Then this one

    Too see,

    Reality. Governments worldwide are ignoring these conclusions from the science. In
    their policy discussions they seemingly do not appreciate a fossil fuel/economics “law” that is as
    sure as the law of gravity: as long as fossil fuels are the cheapest energy, the world will keep
    burning them.
    I did not write my talk, except the final few paragraphs, which were:
    It is not my job to suggest policy, and I certainly will not interfere in French politics. However, I
    would like to note that we, the world, desperately need some nation to stand up and tell the other
    nations the truth: we cannot solve the climate/energy problem without a rising price on carbon, a
    tax. Cap-and-trade with offsets will not work. And China and India will never accept a cap –
    why should they, as long as their per capita emissions are much smaller than the West?* There
    needs to be a steadily rising price on carbon, with the money collected distributed to the public.
    I think that it is my job as a scientist to connect the dots all the way with scientific
    objectivity using all empirical evidence. And it is my job, as a father and grandfather concerned
    about young people, future generations, and the other species that share our planet, to point out
    that the path the world is on, if we stay on it, guarantees that we will push the climate system
    beyond tipping points.
    This is a moral issue, a matter of intergenerational injustice. Because of the inertia and
    slow response of the climate system, our generation burns most of the fossil fuels and reaps the
    benefits while future generations bear the costs. We, the older generations and our governments,
    cannot pretend that we do not understand this situation – we must accept responsibility.
    Note: charts provided here (as PDF and Powerpoint) without discussion, because several people
    requested them. I will provide discussion of them in upcoming talks/papers, including how a
    fair, transparent and popular “carbon.fee and dividend (green check)” would work.
    *China, the United States and Europe need to agree to a carbon fee on their internal
    consumption of fossil fuels. Why would China agree: to avoid fossil fuel addiction, clean up its
    polluted air and water, avoid climate catastrophe, and economics (a leg up on clean technology). James Hansen

    Deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone cap and trade will not work. So now what or then what?

    Don

  10. James Keye said on June 7th, 2010 at 11:45am #

    Through all of living history life has been dangerous and uncertain, yet humans have often found ways to make it joyful or at least some degree of interesting. We must continue to do that even as we begin the distresses of decline. Not only will the decline be less distressing, but might be mitigated for the rest of the living world that we threaten to take down with us.

    though less damaging than capitalism, socialism is still a growth based system; it is economic growth that is the ultimate enemy of an integrated relationship with the biosphere.

  11. bozh said on June 7th, 2010 at 12:54pm #

    Socialism= caring-sharing, using only what is necessary or living like indigenes of america; with timocratic governance and an much egalitarian structure of society; preferably sans religion, but with god wld solve many problems; including damaging nature-biota.
    It cld even cut dwn on world pop if deemed a must! In such a society, professors, scientists, musicians, doctors wld still be valued as now [or may be not?] but the earnings wld be more level than now.
    A doctor and a ditch digger with kids shld have equal money to spend on their children! Fascists [antisocialists say no way jose]

    Asocialistic structure of society and with corrupt governance is root of all evil. Capitalism, whatever it may stand for, causes nothing; it is asocialists [people] who cause all the ills that befall us on interpersonal and interethnic level.

    Imo, one shld not substitute the word “capitalism” for either of the two social structures, broadly, equal and inequal in share in governing and earning.

    However all fascists do just that, while probably knowing the difference btwn a structure of society and the economy; ie, what and how people produce or make things.

    In short capitalism and socialism existed for eons, but prepriestly rule. Then destroyed ca 8k yrs ago! By whom and why?
    James keye doesn’t know this?? I think he does, but being made in america, what to expect than his hatred for equality and love for americanism; a special from of fascism and cruelty. tnx

  12. Don Hawkins said on June 8th, 2010 at 5:10am #

    http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/greenpage/environment/floating-dogsled-sculptures-now-on-sea-floor-after-iceberg-melts-too-quickly-95788939.html

    If you read this the headline reads Breaking Environmental New’s. It’s a little more than that it could read warning warning warning.

    Through all of living history life has been dangerous and uncertain, yet humans have often found ways to make it joyful or at least some degree of interesting. We must continue to do that even as we begin the distresses of decline. Keye

    I agree James and so far do we see any plans for adapting to any of this so far no.

  13. Don Hawkins said on June 8th, 2010 at 5:46am #

    In Canada does the United States force Canada to dig for tar sands and destroy the Earth in that way? Or in Canada is it like here in the States one big happy family sort of a few and the many what are they doing in a dark corner no fight left. Of course that prison for the mind just might be a big player. A fair and balanced prison for the mind.

  14. Don Hawkins said on June 8th, 2010 at 6:39am #

    A dark corner many examples of that in the greatest nation on Earth like now along the Gulf people it is said depressed, divorce, violence among each other starting. Is BP winning the PR battle or what about the elections coming in November who’s winning that little battle maybe the other side will win, oh crap there’s where war is peace just might come in and ignorance is strength will be front and center well maybe not exactly center. I guess we should all get ready for some very strange commercials I mean messages.

  15. bozh said on June 8th, 2010 at 7:07am #

    I evaluate as factual that today clerico-plutocratic evil soyuz is working hard to possesss the entire planet.
    I also evaluate as factual that that evil soyuz had transformed our dear planet into THEIR planet ca 8k yrs ago.

    Ca 8 k yrs, the greatest evil doers were known as the rulers of the four corners of known earth.
    Rise of socialism or making of a caring-sharing-peaceful societies in the twentieth century, had scared them to death.
    Thus, the evil class’ intensification of threats, amassment of weapons, much more and much more severe warfare; ever greater dependency of serf class on master class.

    However, if we wld form an antipodal party that wld work for utter destruction of pluto-priestly ‘teachings’; paired with education-enlightenment, we cld save biota and liberate selves to finally after millennia become fully human!

    I am not caling for killings or imprisoning people; i am calling for utter destruction of cancer some people are spreading.
    Let’s make THEIR planet, our planet. That’s all folks and we can do it so easily. Just don’t listen to people who complexify this simplicity in order to remain exalted over us!

    Note, that i do not call for banishment of anyone’s god. Believing in god 1, 2, 3, 4, x is actually desirable to me!

  16. James Keye said on June 10th, 2010 at 2:58pm #

    Socialism does not mean caring and sharing. Intimate community experience means caring and sharing. Socialism as it is used most commonly today is seen by the dichotomy-making human mind as some “opposite” of capitalism; it is not. I have respect for Bozh’s passion, but what is left for the species to do had best be right, or very close to right; there are not to be many more chances. Our thinking must break beyond our present categories, and beyond our present passions.

  17. t42 said on June 10th, 2010 at 3:42pm #

    the term socialism means nothing but public ownership of the means of supplying people’s needs.

    The term has a long history of misuse by “power configurations” which were antidemocratic, even applied to various kinds of capitalist & state capitalist regimes. Ben Gurion managed to convince Joe Stalin that Israel would be “socialist”, even had Marxist-Leninist emblazoned on the banners of the Palmach, so it was no trick at all to get US “labor leaders” to join in “fraternal relations” with the “socialist” Histadrut.

    But I don’t think one can claim that the institutions in place and evolving in Cuba and in Venezuela now do not in the main reflect the popular will?

    Or, for instance, that Cuban provision of medical services and free medical education to nations and peoples suffering the effects of colonization should be seen as entirely cynical Real Politik?

    Which is not to say that any attempt to build a society based on Public Ownership must necessarily follow Cuban or Venezuelan models. The point is that a society based on public ownership can take many forms, most of which we haven’t even imagined yet. So let’s not conflate the idea of Socialism with any particular type of political structure, not one from the past or one presently existing or claimed to exist.

    The one item essential to the concept Socialism is the abolition of private property in the means of supplying human needs. All else is a tabula rasa.

  18. bozh said on June 10th, 2010 at 5:51pm #

    James Keye,
    I don’t want u to respect my passion. I did not say i was passioned. What i did say is that capitalism, to me, is not structure of society; of wich there can be only two at the end of their full development: Much egalitarian in spending-governmental power or much inegalitarian in spending, etc.

    But u have the right to use the word capitalism as u see fit. Please tell us if it stands largely or solely for economy-money usage or other phenomena.
    Thanks for ur comment!

  19. James Keye said on June 11th, 2010 at 11:44am #

    T42, thank you for expanding the discussion of socialism.

    Bozh, Capitalism certainly incentivises much of the worst of human behavior – the capacity for the behavior is there in any case. While different political and economic systems can make dramatic differences for lives, it finally must be the total environmental consequences that matter; otherwise the environment will smite thee, perhaps smite thee hard. Our only option to avoid a major conflagration in the next few generations is to discover how to adapt our human economies to the natural economy of energy and biophysical chemical cycles. The thought (which I do not in any way attribute to you) that we can defeat the physical and chemical design of the universe is batshit crazy, but it is the common thought of corporate shortsightedness.

  20. bozh said on June 11th, 2010 at 1:51pm #

    James,
    I note that socialism as an ideology is not socialism on living-applying level.
    Furthermore, appying socialist ideas and praxis of it in cuba may not be exact copy of the praxis of it in china or vietnam.

    Putting socialist ideas to work in yugoslavia was probably more difficult than in vietam. One the the causes for break up of socialism in yugoslavia was the fact that there were few socialists there.
    Its governance had been quite corrupted; everybody who cld steal s’mthing did just that.
    Vietnamese may be much more honest or more supervised to ensure that people don’t steal tools and products.

    In add’n to having few socialists [ wanting a timocratic society and rule], over half of yugoslav pop was strongly fascist and serbs and croats, i think more so than slovenes or macedonians.

    one cannot build a tiomcratic rule or, rather guidance-teaching, with so many people rendered unsane.
    One needs sane people to do that. But how to restore sanity that the clerico-patrician class of life has destroyed over millennia? I’d love to visit vietnam and learn what they are doing now!

    It does seem they are on right track; hopefullly, china, too! tnx

  21. Deadbeat said on June 15th, 2010 at 1:46am #

    James Keye writes …

    though less damaging than capitalism, socialism is still a growth based system; it is economic growth that is the ultimate enemy of an integrated relationship with the biosphere.

    No Mr. Keye definition of Socialism as a growth based system is incorrect. Unfortunateely becuase Mr. Keye has an incorrect definition and view of Socialism he carries it forward in his arguments. First and foremost Socialism is economic democracy — the dictatorship of the proletariate.

    This means that the people are in control of the economy and runs the soceity for the benefit of the people. Socialism is not about capital accumulation, private property and profit growth. Socialism is about reallocating societial resources for the betterment of the people and communities by way of their own participation in economic decisions.

  22. Max Shields said on June 15th, 2010 at 5:59am #

    Deadbeat anyone touting “dictatorship of the proletariate” has no credibility in critizing someone for “incorrectly” defining socialism.

    Keyes is right that the fundamental problem is an economics of growth. A focus on production leads to a linear increase in growth. Our enemy is the Gross National Product that provides absolutely no correlation with human welfare. GNP is not a “capitalist” index per se. A socialism which simply switches who’s in charge of the production machine does noting to correct what is coming as an almost inevitable collapse of “civilization”. A collapse which will be extremely painful.

    Socialism has implied by Deadbeat is a materialistic based inversion of capitalism. Who controls production is not the question to be asking. It is why this massive waste of resources and creation of anti-ecological sinks created by production is made better by who is driving it? Another way of putting it: Who drops the bomb makes no difference.

    The USA is a faux power which has become on all human welfare indices a 2nd and quickly falling to 3rd rate nation-state. Shamefully, the American proletariate (to use this anachrontistic term) is hardly prepared to do much of anything until the end of what is gives all of us no choice but to find a radically different living arrangement.

  23. bozh said on June 15th, 2010 at 6:43am #

    We don’t have yet a much egalitarian-pantisocratic-timocratic society and a rule; thus, we can only guess if such a society wld spurn sybaritic life, cars, airplanes, or even reduce number of births to a level to maintain the health of nature and its biota.

    But whatever such a society wld decide to do ab oil, forest use, it cldn’t do worse than a society which vigorosuly propagates a sybaritic way of living!
    If one is gonna fear-abhor socialism, one better not do that a priori; let it come first.
    James Keye is making a major error when he posits as fact that an egalitarian [?socialist] society wld also have a growing [ab]use of nature.

    For one thing, we have always [ab]used nature; we’l always use it, but must stop abusing it!
    My conclusion is that an ‘equally poor’ [borrowing this from fascists] wld abuse nature much less if at all!

    Is james confusing the growth [whatever that is to him] with use of resources and which we must do? tnx

  24. James Keye said on June 15th, 2010 at 8:21am #

    Mr. Shields makes the point that I was going to make, with this caveat: Mr. Deadbeat is right that, unlike capitalism, socialism doesn’t require economic growth, but in every iteration in modern times it has, as Max states, been only a variation of economic expansion.

    Bozh, I don’t believe that I am confusing growth with resource use. The differences are important. I have considered this matter closely here; “Taking Without Compensation” [http://www.amovingtrain.com/rejection08/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=270&Itemid=1]

  25. bozh said on June 15th, 2010 at 8:59am #

    James, thanks for ur clarification of the differences in use of resources and growth of possession of things.
    Obvioulsy, and in whatever kind of societies, people wld use more if their respective pops grow.
    An egalitarian society managed [not ruled by private people] by timocrats [people magaging a country for honor of it and not money-prestige] wld still use more if it wld allow growth in pop.
    But, this a big IF!

    My proposition is that we are OK; particularly, in managing all of our affairs; thus, i conclude, we wld see to it that there wld not be abuses of people, biota, and nature.

    In a private governance and with people managing a country’s affairs for money-power-influence and even mastery over a majority of people, i conclude, that we can expect more abuses of people-nature.
    We have only two choices: keep on trucking millennial private governance or a public one.

    I won’t go in ab what privatization of governance had cuased thus far; i’ve written ab that many times; listing over the time many ills it had caused.
    My conclusion is that such a governnance wld lead us even to N-wars, let alone to further killngs and exploitation of people.

    So, warning people ab these expectations is what we must do. It wld be helpful not even talk ab any ism. Posit the facts! All isms are to big for our littel brains to ever understand them.
    Propagandists know this; thus, always runs for cover under an ism or under a conclusion preseneted as fact. tnx