The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Month: February 2014

The Disposable Economy

The most important fact about modern economies is rarely remarked on: they are job societies. The vast majority of the population works for someone else. For those without jobs, poverty, homelessness, and in some cases death, is a real prospect. Members of modern societies cannot support themselves if someone doesn’t hire them.

This is, in human history, unusual. For most of American history, most people lived on farms, in the country, and grew much of the food they ate, made their own clothes, raised their own homes. They often lived lives we would consider horribly deprived, but they were able to provide for many of their own needs. The craftsman and professional, while they worked for others, had clients, not bosses, and while they had employees many of those employees were training so they might go out on their own.

We take for granted that industrialization, and moving off the farm has improved human welfare, but that is not true in all places, nor in all times. Industrialization in the Britain is synonymous with land enclosure: pushing feudal tenants off land they had previously had the right to use. Supposedly land enclosure vastly improved agricultural output, but it has been shown that communal fields were almost as productive as enclosed ones. Enclosure was done not to grow more food, but to make more profit, and the people who were displaced flooded into England’s cities, where they were compelled by the real prospect of starvation and death, to work in the new factories, six and a half days a week, 12 hours or more (check the #s).

These factory workers lived worse than they had as tenant farmers and serfs. They worked more hours, had less food, died younger, and during their lives suffered more from disease because of the horrible sanitation of European cities at the time. Their lives were virtually unending misery. This is the reason for the idea of Jeffersonain farmer’s democracy: because Americans were aware of the misery of industrialization.

In Mexico, after NAFTA, small farmers lost their farms because they could not compete with subsidized American agriculture. They flooded into Mexican cities, or they headed north to America to work as illegal immigrants. Again, though in some cases they earned more money, the vast majority of them were worse off than when they lived on the farms, and Mexicans as a whole suffered because after American interests bought Mexico’s food industry, the price of food soared, and the quality of that food dropped.

After World War II Americans flooded from the farms into the new cities. For this generation, the GI generation, it was a straight upgrade: their lives were better. They worked less hours, they had more food, they had access to power and indoor plumbing, and good jobs with good pay.

Those Americans were treated very well, and if you weren’t black, the 1950s and 1960s are looked back on as the heyday of American prosperity. Good jobs were plentiful and easy to find and they came with healthcare and good pensions. Life was good.

Today, millenials and Gen-Xers don’t have such a good deal. Unemployment is high, if you lose your job you will have a hard time finding as good one, or a job at all, and good pensions and healthcare plans are more and more uncommon, and increasingly restricted to the executive class.

Why? Well, one reason is this, the family farms are gone. The first generation had to be treated well because they had options: they could go back to the family farm. So their jobs, and their lives as consumers had to be clearly superior to being on a farm.

I’ve spent a lot of time discussing how to make job economies work in the past, because we live in them, and even if we decide to transition away from jobs as our primary method of distribution, it will take time. But never forget: as long as you need a job to survive, you are at the mercy of those who provide jobs, and for most, the only way you are treated well is if you are not easily replaceable. That lack of replaceability is in most cases a social attribute, not a personal one. You are not replaceable if the job market for your set of skills is very tight. As programmers found out, even if you think ahead and master a skill set that is in short supply, that can and will change, because it is not in the interest of employers for you to be hard to replace.

There are a few people who are their own brands. There is only one Madonna, and you cannot easily replace her. There are a few people who are supremely fitted to the current world, for whom making money is easy. But most of us aren’t in one of those positions, and we need to stop thinking that we are. We aren’t special, we aren’t a unique snowflake, and we are replaceable. We will be prosperous together, or not at all.


If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Our Choices

We are all born into the world destined to die.  Our reality is one in which pain is far greater than pleasure: you can scream for days in pain, but not ecstasy: the heights of pain far surpass those of please, and have far more endurance.

If there is meaning in this world it is not obvious, and the multitude of religions and philosophies, with their myriad different answers to “why are we here?” that we just don’t know.  The message of religion and philosophy is “find meaning”, not “there is meaning” because their very multiplicity states clearly “we don’t actually know.”

All around us there is degradation, cruelty, misery and hopelessness.  People living lives they hate, working all week for a few hours, desperately waitng on the weekend when they can be themselves.  TGIF, and the near-universal hatred of Monday speak to what work is like in our society.  A few, vastly privileged in the way that matters most, love their work, but that’s not the world most of us live in.

Illness and suffering stalk us, everything we care about will eventually pass away, the victim of the world’s cruelest joke of all: time.

In this world, a world which exalts suffering, we seem to go out of our way to make the world worse for each other.  We live in chains we ourselves have forged: societies which are far crueler than they need be.  Societies where most of us spend our days doing work that doesn’t need to be done, that helps no one, and in many cases which harms other people.  We are stuck in a cycle of abuse, where we hurt each other, and then go on to hurt others.  We writhe in fear at the meaninglessness of life, and if we find our bit of meaning in religion, philosophy or our tribe, we are happy to hurt as many other people as necessary to cling to our single spark of light.

One response to this is to say, “and so it is” and to be brutal and heartless and care only for a few around us, if even them.  Live life, take what you can, enjoy it while possible, and when you die, at least you lived.  Life is nothing but endless cycles of eating and being eaten, so make sure you eat, till the inevitable day you die.

Another is to simply accept what is: it is ordained by nature or God, or Karma, and so be it.

Another is to seek transcendence through mysticism, a path those who have not followed should not readily write off.  Perhaps there is something beyond, and perhaps it can be found through esoteric discipline.  Billions and billions have thought so, many have enlightened, and they were no stupider than we are.

Another is to embrace kindness: to scream against Nature and God, to say “just because it is so does not mean I have to accept it.”  If violence and rape and greed are part of human nature, endless selected for by mindless evolution, why then so are kindness and compassion, and we can choose the latter and strive to make our time in the world as good as it can be for as many of us as possible.  We do not need to be complicit in cruelty and suffering, but can make a choice otherwise.

This can be taken further, “nature made us thus but we do not have to accept it.”  There is nothing divine, or sacred about physical processes or evolution, and if there is a God who made this vale of suffering, to hell with it.  As our mastery of science and reality continues, why accept suffering, why accept death, why accept loss?  Oh, eventually the universe will end, but why not seek to change ourselves such that we rarely die, we are not cruel, and we suffer less?  The cry of the naturalist that we should accept our nature is not convincing to me.  Why?  To accept is to be complicit in all the evils of our nature.

However it happened, we have the ability to choose.  What we are, what our world is, does not ultimately define us.  Our choices to be complicit in suffering and cruelty, or to work for kindness and compassion: those define us.


If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Page 3 of 3

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén