On Our Current Crisis


Societies ebb and flow. Ancient Egypt, the Minoans, Chinese dynasties, the Persians, classical Greece and Rome, the Moravian empire and many others, have risen and fallen. In more recent times, the British and other European colonial empires have failed, as did the Soviet Union. And their replacements, the American empire and the EU, are teetering on the brink of their own declines. Maybe the Chinese will be next in line?

But I think there’s more going on than just this. We as a species have also been through several mental and attitudinal changes, particularly in the last few centuries. And these have left their marks. I think in particular of the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution, and the modern computer and communications revolution. Each has given us a push forward, and none of them could have happened without the earlier ones. But all of these revolutions are, as yet, incomplete.

Now, the top-down, collectivist political system we suffer under today has its roots way back in ancient Greece. And its modern form, the Westphalian nation state, comes out of a 16th century attempt to shore up the power of the French king. It should hardly come as a surprise, then, that the system is set up to favour the powerful, their minions and their rich cronies at the expense of everyone else. So it’s plain, to me at least, that the current political set-up – of states, nations, arbitrary borders, politicians, sham “democracy,” bad laws, lies and propaganda, bureaucracies, taxes and wars – is way past its last use by date. And that revolutionary change is necessary, and soon.

What sets our current crisis apart from earlier ones is that it is global in scope. That means that the solutions, too, have to be global in scope. But the current political system is by its nature unequipped to do anything on a global scale, except making war. (Indeed, it is by its nature unequipped to do anything nett constructive at all). So the only “solution” that seems to be on offer from the establishment and their cohorts, is a world-wide green socialist totalitarianism. Something like a combination of the worst features of the Soviet Union, the EU and the UN. That isn’t acceptable to any free thinking human being.

There are a number of strands to the problem. The environmental, the political and the financial, at least. Now, I’m highly disinclined to believe any of the green hooey. I’ve looked into the “climate change” scare closely enough to know that it’s a fabrication. I know that overpopulation is a non-problem except, perhaps, in some Muslim countries and in Africa. Globally in 2016, only 105 countries out of 224 had fertility rates above the replacement level. I don’t fear resource depletion, in the short term at least. For I see human ingenuity and the market price mechanism as sufficient to spur better ways of obtaining resources (e.g. fracking), or at need the development of alternatives. As to endangered species, I see an immense lack of hard, trustworthy facts to back up the scare. And none of the species I have contact with seem to be endangered! The one “environmental” issue that is genuinely worrying is the parlous state of the power grids in much of the Western world. Yet this has been directly caused by bad energy policies, that in turn were spawned (intentionally?) by bad green politics.

And there’s a lot of hubris among the ruling classes. After all, they are the beneficiaries of a system that doesn’t hold them responsible for the effects on others of what they do. They also encourage misleading information, misperceptions and ignorance. Indeed, propaganda, lack of clarity and suppression of the facts seem to be characteristic of failed and failing systems.

The instability of the world financial system is another problem. But this, also, is down to failure of the current political system. For it allows its favourites to treat finance as a glorified gambling game, in which they can’t lose in the long run. If anything goes wrong, they will be bailed out with wealth stolen from the masses. The problem is, if continued, eventually there will come a point when no-one has any wealth left to bail them out. In my view, this and power grid failure are the only two of the popular scares that are really worth worrying about.

In the words of Lenin, “What is to be done?” The only answer I can come up with is, “Whatever each of us can.” The visionary part of me foresees that we can get through this Problemenzeit. But huge changes will be necessary. For the future I foresee, not one giant, complex society, but many small, simple ones, networked in a web of trade. I foresee a move, from today’s top-down command-and-control style societies, to bottom-up ones which allow far more freedom for, and take far more account of, the individual.

Perhaps I may be unduly optimistic. But I see a good possibility of change, soon (indeed, it may be already partly here), of a similar kind and scale to the Renaissance and the Enlightenment. Perhaps it can help us get back on track, and complete the earlier revolutions? But the only way such a change can come about is through the changing of minds; which, in its turn, can only come from thought, writing and the dissemination of same.

Revolution begins in your mind.

Advertisements

4 comments

  • You say “I’ve looked into the ‘climate change’ scare closely enough to know that it’s a fabrication….” . I think you mean ANTHROPOGENIC climate change? Climates change – that’s what they do. My own corner of South East England has, at various times, been a tropical jungle and buried under a layer of ice half a mile thick.
    When I heard a news headline on TV a few years ago shouting “The debate is over. Climate change IS happening, and it’s OUR fault!” I knew we were dealing not with science, but with a new religion. As far as I’m concerned, we must do as all creatures have done since the dawn of Creation – adapt or die.
    I believe that the most immediate problem we face is the Islamisation of Western Europe, made all the more intractable by the fact that anybody who mentions it is denounced as a ‘racist’, whatever that may mean. This process is well underway, and if nothing changes, this country will be an Islamic state in a very few decades. A study of birth-rates will demonstrate this; the indigenous White birth rate is sinking – about 1.7-odd last time I looked, whereas the Islamic incomers are producing four or five children per mother. So it is just a question of time before there is an Islamic majority in this country. The name ‘Mohammed’ didn’t figure in the top 35 boys’ names at the turn of the millennium (and I would struggle to list 35 boys’ names). Today it is number one.
    There is presumably a ‘tipping point’ at which this replacement process becomes irreversible, even if we were to halt all Islamic immigration into this country. Unfortunately my knowledge of mathematics isn’t good enough to calculate whether we have already reached that point.

    • Hugo, well spotted. I should have said “catastrophic anthropogenic climate change.” I was striving for (too much) brevity.

      As to Muslim immigration, I think that problem too is caused by the current political system. With an aging population, the “welfare” state needs a tax base to stop its slide down into economic ruin. But I don’t think you need to worry too much about an Islamic majority – last time I heard, they were only about 4.5% of the population. Even if their birth rates are (let’s say) twice those of indigenes, it would take several generations for the effect to work through. By which time, the state and its sham “democracy” will be gone, and “majority” won’t matter any more.

  • The fact that Empires decline and fall, is not a ‘crisis’.Sometimes it’s a Godsend and sometimes it isn’t.

    The so called American ‘Empire’ has been a short lived affair and the very idea of it, is an anathema to the founding principles of America.

    The British Empire was acquired by accident, and became an expensive waste of money. And the less said about the Soviet, Nazi and Japanese Empires the better.

    I doubt of the decline of the Mongol Empire caused much shedding of tears amongst its victims.

    Most of the European Empires have in the end been damaging to the well being of those who were occupied by them, in that they have stilted the resolution of, usually inflamed the ethnic tensions within them and retarded the creation of secure, stable, independent Nation States.

    Even the EU, which is nowhere near as oppressive as some of the Empires which went before it, is doing the same thing.

    They now all have to go through a process which should have been resolved centuries ago. Hopefully most of it will be more peaceful.

    Overpopulation is not a problem anywhere. A smaller percentage of the world’s population are living at starvation levels that at any time in human history, and the world now produces more food that it needs to eat, and the surplus will widen.

    There is nowhere in the world where it can be reliably argued that people would be better off if they weren’t alive at all. Their birth rates will fall as a result of them becoming more prosperous, not the other way round.

    By the end of this century global population will be declining. Falling population will be a serious issue in the West, and the problem will gradually spread elsewhere. It’s already so in Japan.

    There is no ‘global’ solution to anything. Any ‘global’ solution is, by its’ nature, ‘top down’.

    It would require the construction of layer upon layer of extraordinarily complicated and organised tiers of state authority, to create anything remotely capable of creating and implementing ‘global solutions’.

    The few things which do appear to require ‘global solutions’ can readily be addressed in exactly the same way that any other community initiative and community advancement succeeds.

    Solutions to common problems are found by Independent States and individuals realising that it’s in their own best interests to co-operate, to lead one another by example, and to ostracise those who do not.

    It’s not international agreements which have enabled advanced countries to put all out war behind us. It’s experience, self interest, and International Capitalism. Just as it’s not ‘global action’ that’s hugely reduced global absolute poverty, it’s Capitalism (in the case of China,
    ‘State Capitalism’).

    As far as ‘endangered species’ are concerned, nearly all the species that have ever existed on Earth are extinct, and some still go extinct every day now. Species come and go. The fact that one or other, is, or is not, photogenic or of curiosity interest to humans doesn’t merit turning the world into an open air museum to accommodate the observers and the observed.

    It’s the individuals within any species who have rights (assuming they have rights at all), not those yet to be conceived. The ‘yet to be conceived’ are mere figments of our imaginations.

    The problem with ruling elites, and particular ‘socialist’ ones is that they want to control and determine how society progresses. That mental affliction however, is a by product of the sort of mindset that motivates them to go into politics and government in the first place.

    Everything about them is about control freakery, whether it be social control, and nowadays even climate control and determination of the fate of whole species. They always demand that we submit to them providing for us, and telling us what we can and can’t do.

    They even tell us whether or not we are ‘poor’. People who were oblivious to the fact that they are living in ‘relative’ (or in some cases ‘absolute’) ‘poverty’, and are quite content as they are, are routinely alerted to the fact of their supposed misery by people who demand that we beg them to give us more.

    It’s all for our own good you see!!

    The control freaks however are oblivious to the fact that what they want is both impossible and undesirable. The can come nowhere near to knowing everything about the present, let alone the future and, much as they demand that we succumb to them doing so, they can’t live our lives for us.

    • I agree, Ronald. But I think the major problem we have with the control freaks is that, as I said in the essay, “they are the beneficiaries of a system that doesn’t hold them responsible for the effects on others of what they do.” More than anything else, that is what has to change.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s