 |
| “The Collapse of Civilization” by Steve Thomas |
Predicting the future is truthfully a
fool's errand. Recent societal changes have taken the most astute
observers of culture by surprise and technological
advancement over the last sixty years would probably seem like magic
to those born at the beginning of the twentieth century. However, I
remember a report published when I was a kid that was scary accurate
in how the future unfolded.
Back during the last year of the Carter
Administration a report came out painting a dim view of the future
stretching from the last two decades of the twentieth century and
well into the twenty-first. I forget the author of the report, some
government agency I believe, but it made the case that the coming
years would see countries across the globe dealing with increasing
pressures from worsen pollution and swelling populations exacerbated
by basic resources becoming scarce. This would lead to an increasing
of international tensions, terrorism, and outright war. This report
went as far as to state that this would ultimately lead to the
introduction of authoritarian governments in normally democratic
countries. That last item was something that both puzzled and worried
me since this report came out before the end of the Cold War. At the
time I just couldn't imagine Western countries willingly surrendering
the principles that made them special enough to stand against the
communist nations.
The main reason I remember this report
was that it ran counter to the general optimism inherent to the late
60's and early 70's, the years that, for a lack of a better term, I
essentially became conscious. To my young mind, after having been
tainted with the philosophy of Star Trek and
being influenced by the Civil Rights struggle, the future was
supposed to be one where things got progressively better. Yes, during
the late 1970's I was a serious science and science fiction nerd who
ate up any literature attempting to describe what the lives of human
beings would be like in the coming decades. Sure, there would be
setbacks, but the view of the futurists I read in magazines like
Analog and the now dead Omni said we were on the road
to far better things for everyone on the planet.
While I have forgotten most of the
details, I do vaguely remember this report spelled out the reasons
why things were going to get bad and they mainly centered around far
too many people basically wanting the American lifestyle. To meet
this desire already threatened resources would be stripped further
increasing their costs, which would push the poorer among us down the
socioeconomic ladder straining civil society. Authoritarian leaders
would then appear to quell the uprising of the poor, denied masses
and protect those of property or conversely, to overthrow the
existing unfair status quo.
It was an exceedingly dark and dystopic
future whose only meager silver lining was the vague suggestion that
technology might remedy the situation by the middle of the
twenty-first century. The last thing I remember about this report was
that it made enough of an impact that the Reagan Administration
instantly countered it as soon as they came into the White House with
their own pollyannaish version. It claimed everything in the future
was going to be hunky-dory and anyone that said different was a lying
commie.
The troubling aspect of that forgotten,
pessimistic report for me was even at that young age it clearly
spelled out the troubles we were to face. As opposed to the Reagan
version that gave vague assurances that everyone should just buy
sunglasses because the future was going to be so bright.
As fate would have it the intervening
years were seemingly not as dire as first predicted. The looming
Soviet Empire collapsed almost overnight freeing dozens of nation
from its oppressive grip. Democracy and free market capitalism were
proclaimed by nearly all as the natural state of human affairs. And
finally, the United States became the sole global superpower whose
destiny was to expand its way of life to every person on the
planet. Then there was the unparalleled expansion of electronic
technology that took the computer from a device the size of a room to
one that could fit in a pant's pocket and act as your telephone, high
quality camera, universal information almanac, personal assistant,
and thousands of other things. Among all this unbridled freedom and
pursuit of new markets and technology things were slowing going to
shit.
The first thing that has to be
mentioned was the growing web of free trade treaties that on the
surface are a great idea. That being rising global trade and open
markets promote higher living standards which in turn increase
stability and prosperity for everyone taking part. The problem with
this good idea was that international corporations decided the
economic bottom line dictated that manufacturing-- i.e. good paying
jobs—had to migrate to countries where the pay was far less than
what the average worker got in the United States or any other First
World country. Now this was fine for the Elite and those running the
corporations, their wealth not only stayed the same but grew almost
exponentially since workers in China only got paid cents on
the dollar compared to their American counterparts.
As for middle class American workers
this has meant a long slide downward as jobs that allowed a newly
married couple to buy a house, raise kids and put them through
college, while saving for retirement began dissolving like smoke
caught in a breeze. With good jobs disappearing credit cards became
the way the middle class kept up the facade of a prosperous
lifestyle. During my grandparents' time debt was a shame and
something that was taken on only with great reluctance. I remember
one occasion when my grandparents television had a permanent and
irreversible meltdown requiring that they go out and buy a
replacement.
Today such a shopping trip can be
executed in one afternoon, but for them that meant waiting for
several weeks as paychecks built up and a few other bills were paid
off. Then there was the shopping around trying to get the best deal
since back then the purchase of a television was much the same as
buying a car. Once the new television was delivered, I remember
my grandfather working overtime at the local paper mill so it could
be paid off as quickly as possible.
Today it is nothing for the average
family to make a similar purchase on a whim all the while having no
tangible monetary savings. Sure they “own” a house that over time
should increase in value and some sort of retirement savings account
that takes the place of the long dead workplace pension. But these
folks are permanent riders on the credit merry-go-round and subject
to the shifting temperament of those that manage the stock markets
and banks.
Needless to say, since the 1970's
economic equality in the United States and around the world has
suffered terribly with a tiny percentage of the super-rich
controlling the vast majority of global wealth. To the modern wealthy
Elites, their status is as natural as eighteenth-century aristocrats
thought their own position was during that that era of hereditary
kings and dukes. However, like the peasants that eventually wised up
and killed off many of those aristocrats, there are those of us that
have become aware very little of the post-Cold War expansion of
wealth is trickling down to those of us on the bottom half of the
economic ladder. But instead of forming coherent groups to address
this equality, populist leaders have stepped forward who appeal to
the worst in our nature. They promise utopia but upon closer
examination are only spewing hate-filled rhetoric while scapegoating
people and institutions and that while flawed, are not the true
source of their problems.
There is absolutely no doubt that
capitalism, when compared to the command and control economies of the
post-WW 2 communist nations is both more efficient and takes into
consideration the basic human right that someone should be able to
reap the benefits of their idea or invention. That being said,
capitalism has similar tendencies like communism in that it eats the
unfortunate and poor. The simple fact that corporations almost daily
abandon longtime and loyal employees and relocate to countries that
pay significantly less and do not have troublesome institutions like
labor unions shows a contempt for the individual that I frankly find
psychotic.
One of the central parts of the
pessimistic Carter report was how pollution in the coming years was
going to become worse. This was another aspect that puzzled me since
the 1970's was the decade that the Clean Air and Water Acts passed by
the United States Congress had gone along way to reducing and
reversing industries affects on the environment. Of course, Ronny
Reagan wasn't long in the White House when his administration began
reversing as much of those vital reforms as it could get away with.
Later administrations would go even further all in the name of
slicing through “Red Tape” that hampered economic development.
Since the end of the Cold War massive
industrialization along capitalistic principles by former-communist
and third world countries have assaulted the global environment all
in the supposed name of raising living standards for the less
fortunate. That does occur in a limited fashion, some places more
than others, but in actuality the level of environmental destruction,
climate destabilization, and worker abuse at the hands of monolithic
corporations is so bad you could debate whether or not any positive
short term gains are equal to the long term negatives. In short,
while working in some third world sweatshop does provide a narrow
avenue for some to escape grinding poverty, if that person and his or
her family have to drink polluted water, eat tainted food and then
suffer through a drought one year and unprecedented and destructive
floods the next are they truly any better off? This ignores the
possibility that these sweatshop workers are near slaves being forced
to endure soul crushing hours while working in dangerous conditions.
This being the late 1970's, I don't
remember anything about climate change being mentioned in that
pessimistic report. However, I learned recently of a 1950ish video
that shows two science types talking about how industrialization was
spewing untold amounts of pollution into the atmosphere and how that
it could, and would eventually alter the global climate for the
worse. The fact that huge numbers of people absolutely refuse to
accept the overwhelming scientific evidence that human actions have
severely damaged the planetary climate does not say anything good
about the chances of our species long term survival.
In all the years that have passed since
I became aware of this report, the one aspect that I took some relief
in was that the Western nations hadn't succumbed to the siren call of
authoritarian demagogues, now even that has come true. At first it
was newly freed Eastern European countries like Hungary and Poland
electing individuals who have no dedication to the principles of
freedom their nations dreamed about while under Soviet domination.
Then this contagion spread to Western countries rightly worried about
the power of uncontrollable multinational corporations, fears over
economic globalization, and outright racism spawned by uncomfortable
changes in internal demographics. Sorry Brits, while you guys and
gals have every right to worry about how globalization is effecting
your country, your recent vote to leave the European Union was
packaged in ways less than honorable given your country's traditions.
Now even the United States has
succumbed to the trends that long forgotten report predicted. The
American public has just elected a man who has never held public
office and whose temperament and behavior suggests the absolute last
job he should hold is one where the lives of literally billions of
people are in his hands. Furthermore, his admitted admiration of
authoritarian tyrants in other countries as well as his reluctance to
steadfastly condemn racist supporters frankly scares the hell out of
many Americans. Trump's criticism of the American free press and
threats to curtail its ability to do its Constitutionally mandated
job by all rights would have immediately eliminated from presidential
consideration if a majority of the American public were true to the
principles the United States was founded upon.
Personally I believe these trends go
beyond the report saying all this would be brought on by dwindling
resources. While capitalism is a better economic system than the one
used by the now dead Soviet Union, it nonetheless has its own
inherent flaws. Namely that expansion must be constant and that
efficiency and profit must come before people and the environment.
These flaws, for the most part, could be overlooked in a world with
far less people but that is simply the not the case anymore. Ignoring
economic globalization alone for the moment, just having over seven
billion people on a small planet all demanding access to food, water,
and something more that makes life worth living would strain
resources beyond the breaking point.
I absolutely hate sounding like a New
Age guru, but I can't escape the conclusion that our current global
structure of competing nation-states and massive corporations that
answer to no regulating body is unsustainable. As for the report's
suggestion that technology might ultimatly save us from the mess we
have created, that is the one aspect I believe it will get wrong. The
only thing that will save not only our global civilization, and maybe
our species itself, is the realization that no nation, religion,
corporation, or ethnic group can continue to look to the past as some
sort of lost golden age of greatness. Simply put, our numbers and
demands on the planet and each other will not allow it. It's a tired
cliche but there is in reality no great savior that will solve all
our problems, only fools believe such a thing. What will save us is
the awareness that the ideas, superstitions, and institutions that
divide into conflicted and selfish groups are foolish and worn out
relics from previous ages that we best discard, not just for the
betterment of ourselves but for the very lives of our children.
Author's note: If anyone can direct me to a link or even an article to that report published during the Carter Administration I would greatly appreciate it. I'm probably not phrasing my internet searches correctly so I'm not finding any mention of it even through I know it was real.
