2019-11-07

What’s going on here ? (11)

6. societal collapse


Over their thousands of years of observation, of nature and of human activities in nature, the ancient tribal wo(men) of knowledge concluded that humans have a nefarious tendency to damage their habitat. To counter this tendency they devised what is called “the precautionary principle” or in the words of Black Elk “the 7th Generation principle”.1 Both of these principles teach that it is imperative to make certain every, personal or societal, decision will not negatively impact the life of future generations. These principles are part of a worldview that was elaborated over the long time span of tens of thousands of years.


With Modernity ‘the reason that is at work within capital’ concerns itself with one thing only and that is to generate profits. Those who venerate the reason get rich and enjoy an abundance of material possessions. All other citizens envy their richness and the abundance of their possessions. This worldview was elaborated over the relatively short time span of 6-8 centuries.
_____________




In the 19th century Karl Marx became aware that the application of ‘the reason’ to agriculture was exhausting not only the laborer but also the soil.

“Capitalist production, by collecting the population in great centres, and causing ever-increasing preponderance of town population, on the one hand it concentrates the historical motive-power of society; on the other hand, it disturbs the circulation of matter between man and the soil, i.e., prevents the return to the soil of its elements consumed by man in the form of food and clothing; therefore it violates the conditions necessary to lasting fertility of the soil. … All progress in capitalist agriculture is a progress in the art, not only of robbing the worker, but of robbing the soil; all progress in increasing the fertility of the soil for a given time is progress towards ruining the more long-lasting sources of that fertility. … Capitalist production, therefore, develops technology, and the combining together of various processes into a social whole, only by sapping the original source of all wealth – the soil and the laborer.2
Karl Marx. “Capital”.

Marx and his followers were nevertheless so firmly enamored by the revolutionary nature of “the reason that is at work within capital” that they forgot about remedying the exhaustion of the natural processes caused by its application. And his followers, in their haste to catch up with the industrial power houses of Western Europe and its geographic extensions, simply forgot about the idea that natural processes can get exhausted at all. They awakened recently but only after a green wave exhausted their electoral prospects.

Marx was a West European and his thinking was naturally molded after the axioms of the Christian civilization and its Christian worldview :

“ ... God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over … all the earth … and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it. “3

“The Puritans faced opposition from the Native Americans, who already claimed the land as their home. This was among the first and strongest reasons that caused the Puritans to deeply despise the Native Americans. … The labels the Puritans gave the Native Americans came to a long list, from calling them beasts and inhuman to ungodly and demonic. The Puritans felt it was their Christian duty to reach out to the lost. Saving a Native American would mean saving a soul from Satan, and destroying a Native American meant destroying one of Satan’s minions. … The other greatest reason for the Puritan conception that the Native Americans were evil was simply because they were different in many respects. Virtually every piece of the Native American image inflamed Puritan disgust.”.4

In light of a changing Zeitgeist, that promotes environmentalism and all things green, past Christian beliefs and behaviors appear somewhat out of place and have been dramatic re-interpreted. In recent revisions of the meaning expressed in its sacred books Christianity attempted to downplay the past understanding of ‘Genesis 1:26, 28’ and the idea expressed therein of humans having dominion over all the earth including the right to subdue it. New interpretations mention that this was “a simplistic reading of Genesis”5 that has to be understood as being the human “stewardship of nature”.

Whatever the church might want to say today the fact of the matter is that history incontrovertibly demonstrates that Westerners did not give a damn about the damages to the natural processes caused by the application of ‘the reason at work within capital’.

What about the axioms of the Chinese civilization and its ‘Chinese Traditional Culture’ worldview? The Chinese civilization is considered to be a model of pragmatism for its rejection of ideological slogans and its privileging shared pragmatic rules to help alleviate the production by its citizens of their daily lives. But did it succeed to preserve the “precautionary principle” and did it save the natural environment from human depredation? The answer is a resounding NO. Only when China’s Communist Party leaders observed, that their citizens were dissatisfied with high levels of pollution, did they start to legislate environmental rules and to implement them. But we have to recognize that since they decided to act the situation is rapidly improving.

So Modernity is not the only culprit in unleashing damaging side-effects. Since their inception power societies, like the Chinese empire, have been damaging the habitat of their citizens. The deforestation of what today is the barren landscape of the Loess Plateau comes to mind.


Source: Geological Society of America

The Great-Wall zigzags many thousands of Kilometers though the plateau and most of the later sections were built with fired bricks :

“Cooked in kilns at 2102 ̊F (1150 ̊C) for seven days, many of the Great Wall's bricks were as strong as reinforced concrete.” 6 How many cubic meters of wood to fire such a quantity of bricks ? No academic has thought about that apparently.

At 1 million bricks on average per Km this gives 1 billion bricks per 1000 Km and the wall is guesstimated to be 21,000 Km long…  and there is more: “the Imperial government decreed that all grass and trees within 100 kilometers of the wall be cleared to deprive attacking enemies of opportunities for surprise attacks. Near the wall the land was used to raise crops to feed soldiers that were stationed at the walls”.7

Building the great-wall has played a determinant role in the deforestation of the Loess-Plateau mainly during the Ming and Qing dynasties (1368–1911). That plateau was the cradle of ancient Chinese civilization. Deforestation supplied the energy to fire the bricks of the great-wall :

“ the region experienced the most intense soil erosion in the world and a significant decrease in water tables of rivers, lakes, and groundwater; it was turned from flat land into hills with deep gullies, and from a culturally and economically advanced area into a backward one. ”
(7)

The damages to China’s habitat before it started its industrialization indicate that power societies were engaged in unintended damages since long before Modernity and its industrial revolution. But China’s industrialization confirms that the rhythm of devastation accelerated dramatically with various forms of pollution that caused widespread environmental problems : Soil8, water resources9, air pollution10, and so on.


6.1. the paradox of Modernity

Modernity, and more particularly, its industrial revolution are considered presently, by the whole world, as having been one of the greatest achievements of humanity. There is no better testimony of this than a graph of population growth that visualizes how industrialization fostered popular enthusiasm which resulted in population growth from roughly 1800 until today.


Viewed from the perspective of the side-effects of Modernity, and more particularly from the perspective of their present convergence, the collapse of Modernity seems to be approaching fast. See 4. determinant side-effects of Modernity.


As I mentioned earlier scientists are busy studying the impacts of each side-effect taken separately. But they do not know with certainty what is the outcome of each of them and so they bicker among themselves leaving the public aghast and no longer knowing what to think.

One example that jumps to mind is the impact of plastic nano-particles that are being absorbed by the body of the individuals of all living species. Nobody has a clear answer about the consequence of plastic accumulating in bodies. It is well known already that Bisphenol B, one of the most produced chemicals on earth and a plastic compound, is responsible for endocrine disruption. But what happens when all life forms are absorbing plastic nano-particles through the water we drink or the rain that falls? It has indeed been observed that all water sources on earth contain such nano-particles.

But there is worse. What about the multitude of side-effects of Modernity that are unleashing a process of wild interactions among themselves? To my knowledge science has no grasp on the possible interactions between the multitude of side-effects of Modernity. We have thus no clue of the damages awaiting the natural systems. And so the outcome of the great convergence is unknown. But what is known is that life is suffering already and dozens of species are going extinct every day.

Of all species that have existed on Earth, 99.9 percent are now extinct. Many of them perished in five cataclysmic events. According to a recent poll, seven out of ten biologists think we are currently in the throes of a sixth mass extinction. Some say it could wipe out as many as 90 percent of all species living today. 11

My intention with the last graph here above is not to propose a timing of future events. There are simply too many unknown unknowns to come up with a valid forecast. But we know unmistakably the direction in which the side-effects of Modernity are taking us :

  • by the end of 2019 the world population reaches 7.7 billion. And it is expected to continue to grow to some 11 billion sometime around 2070. 

  • resources taken from the earth are finite and many of the resources, that are indispensable to ensure the good functioning of our societies, are already peaking or approaching their peak. One of those resources, that has peaked already, is fossil fuels. They are powering all our activities, and as of today, no alternative nor any combination of alternatives, are viewed as capable of replacing fossil fuels which means that, within the following decades, we will be constrained by diminishing production outputs and by a forced reduction in consumption. 

  • The climate is warming at an accelerating pace. The glaciers, the poles are melting, and the level of the oceans is rising. Over the next decades tens of millions will have to flee their see level residences and migrate to higher ground. But this is where we have built our biggest cities : Shanghai, Guangzhou, Tianjin, Hong-Kong, Tokyo, Amsterdam, Antwerp, London, New-York, Los Angeles, and so on. This means that within a few decades the world is going to lose quite a large chunk of its industrial and service infrastructures…

  • all these side-effects indicate big trouble is coming destroying our Modern ways of life.

The outcome of the great convergence of the multitude of side-effects of Modernity is certain. They are a death sentence for the way of life that Modernity has fostered over the last 2 centuries.

Humanity’s present predicament is a paradox. Modernity, and more particularly, its industrial revolution were seen as being the greatest achievements of humanity. But, after a short time-span of 2 centuries, our dependence on the systems of Modernity appears to be our undoing. The individuals in the most advanced societies have lost the knowledge about how to live outside of the ways of life of Modernity… Imagine what happens after one month without electricity supplies.

But I don’t follow those who say that life simply stops. The distribution of Modernity among the international community of nations is widespread for sure but it is unequally distributed. The most advanced nations are the most dependent on the ways of Modernity. The majority of citizens in the other nations are at worst one generation away from farming and in case of necessity they will have no difficulty to re-insert themselves in rural life. This is definitely not the case with the citizens of the most advanced countries.

When trouble arises many processes will be interrupted. Non essential state institutions and corporations, that are active in sectors that are not directly linked to physical survival, will be eliminated and many people will starve to death (note that this is already happening today in Britain and the US where people who don’t have the cash to pay for heating simply freeze to death in the winter).

That’s how the collapse of Modernity gradually sets in and this will force the survivors to band together locally to endure which will set in motion a transition from Late-Modernity to Early After-Modernity. Necessity will force people to cooperate in order to survive. Individualism, the Late-Modern dreams of consumerism, and the hubris of scientism will all be tested no doubt about it. But the struggle for survival will eventually foster bonds between people that will encourage them to test new societal structures and new ways of living. Over time life will eventually stabilize giving way to a new historical era. That’s how the societal paradigm eventually shifts…



6.2. the ancients were right after all

Our ancestors, who were categorized as primitives under Modernity, survived over tens of thousands of years in the midst of long periods of glaciation and otherwise very unstable climate conditions. They survived because they had developed a process of knowledge formation that was meant to help them make the best of their daily lives. They thought that knowledge had to have pragmatic uses and knowledge that did not have such pragmatic uses was considered superfluous and discarded. Pragmatism to them meant a capacity to minimize suffering and to increase happiness.

Tribal societies devised such pragmatic knowledge through observation of the elements over the long haul. That’s how they discovered that the surface of reality is patterned. They made it their task to decode these patterns and to connect these codes with the reality they observed in their near environment which is their habitat. Practiced over tens of thousands of years this method of knowledge formation procured robust conclusions to the tribal men of knowledge that helped them in :
  • guiding their tribes on a path of ‘giving’ to their neighbors (gifts) that resulted in peaceful relations among neighbors
  • guiding their fellow tribesmen to cultivate a profound trust among themselves that resulted in high levels of societal cohesion
  • guiding their fellow tribesmen to collect the resources necessary to ensure the health of their bodies and minds
  • guiding their fellow tribesmen to manage the level of their population (Dunbar number) by splitting their tribe when their population grew over a certain threshold
  • guiding their fellow citizens in managing conflicts between themselves and in treating their health conditions.

Modernity forced ‘the reason that is at work within capital’ in the minds of its nations’ citizens. After venerating the reason, for some 5 to 6 centuries during Early-Modernity, the successes of big capital holders’, resulting from their short haul observations, procured them the assurance that they had what it takes to port the reason to the altar of academic correctness for further spreading to all fields of human life in the form of rationalism, science, and technology. Capital holders mastered science by acting as its financiers. Science was thus captive from the get go. It needs cash to finance its activities and this procures the supplier of the funding the authority to decide what kind of research should be undertaken with their cash. Science is thus fundamentally stuck in procuring services to capital. And what capital wants is generating ever more profits. Science is thus instrumental to big capital in its quest for profit generation. This instrumentation necessarily leads to relative conclusions that compare poorly with the robust conclusions reached by animist wo(men) of knowledge from their long haul observation.

Here we discover what fundamentally differentiates animism and science :
  1. Animism shaped a pragmatic knowledge by observing the unfolding of the elements over the long haul and this long haul observation necessary fostered the same answers all around the whole world. That’s why animism was a global belief system whose forms varied eventually due to local variations in the local contextual settings

  2. Modernity forms scientific knowledge by momentarily observing the particular unfolding of elements that leads to a desired outcome. Because this particular unfolding of elements is not validated over the long haul science recourses to a stratagem that superficially at least puts to rest the need of a validation over the long haul. The scientific stratagem is the scientific method (repeatability).

  3. Both start with observation but the scientific stratagem gives only a certainty of repeatability in the short haul. In other words the scientific validation does not give access to the observation of the repeatability over the long haul :

    • the long haul observation by animism detects: the severity of the side-effects of a particular unfolding of elements and, also detects special settings that eventually invalidate the repeatability of that particular unfolding. Herein resides the motive for the precautionary principle.
    • science is blind to these 2 forms of validation. But science does not take any responsibility for the consequences. As such the animist knowledge formation appears to be of a more fundamental nature than the scientific knowledge formation.
    • the more fundamental nature of the animist knowledge formation relates to its moral nature which is founded in the trust between the wo(man) of knowledge and her/his fellow tribesmen. The trust bond between them excludes anything else than a pragmatic service to the community as described here above. In contrast the mission of the scientists is solely to supply ‘tricks’ that momentarily allow the investor to generate more profits. 
    • Animism and science are thus two radically different approaches. From the perspective of societal evolution one inspires trust while the other inspires suspicion. Societal evolution is about how to harness the creativity of independent thinkers in order to inject more complexity in the societal systems, while simultaneously ensuring the reproduction of society. In other words societal evolution is about keeping these two polarities in a state of balance. This requires a strong bond between the individuals and their society. 3.2 and 3.3 clearly indicate that science is nor worthy the trust nor of the individuals nor of society and as such its implementation in Modern societies was deemed to foment distrust between the individuals and their society. The societal atomization of Late-Modernity confirms this. And the convergence of the multitude of side-effects of Modernity also confirms that science was never worthy the trust nor of the individuals nor of society.

The differentiation between Animism and science leaves no place for doubt. It indicates that our ancestors were definitely on the right track while science was at best a fad that lasted no longer than the blink of an eye on the scale of societal evolution.
____________


Notes


1   The “7th generation principle” is an old tribal rule that Indian tribes were sharing within the present day US territory. Black Elk was a man of knowledge of the Oglala Sioux who lived in the Pine Ridge Reservation. His life was narrated by John G. Neihardt In “Black Elk Speaks”. This book soon became a bible for all North-American tribes. The “precautionary principle” is the generic term for that same rule as it was shared by all tribal societies on earth.

2   Karl Marx. “Capital”. Volume 1. First American Edition. 1906. Translation from the 3rd German Edition by Samuel More and Edward Aveling. Editor Ernest Untermann. Pages 554, 555, 556.

3.    In Genesis 1:26, 28. The King James version of the Bible.

11   See  “A Modern mass extinction?” by Daniel Simberloff in PBS.org


No comments:

Post a Comment