|
ISSUE #65 NOVEMBER 2015
|
|
|
IN THIS ISSUE:
What Technology Hath Wrought..........................2 What Keeps the Old Model Going....................5 The Corporate Strategy..............................7 Outside Complications...........9 The Next Steps..........9 Which One Wins?.....11 |
HOW THE INDUSTRIAL MODEL
WILL BE REPLACED
“That which is becoming obsolete and old,” says the book of
Hebrews, “is ready to pass away.” And so it is for the industrial model
of civilization that has dominated the world for the past century or
two. It is obsolete, it is old, and it is passing away. In fact, it is being
replaced.
Please bear in mind that this is not necessarily bad news. Its passing may feel unsettling to many of us, but the industrial model was in many ways contrary to human nature. Its passing is not, by itself, a problem. The real concerns are when and how it passes away and whether people react reasonably to the changes. And of course what comes next. When I refer to the “industrial model,” however, I am not just referring to factory work; I’m referring to the entire model that says, “You need
http://www.freemansperspective.com
1
|
a job,” that holds people in ‘high places’ as important, and requires children to be regimented. I’m
referring to the mindset that sees size as impressive and authority as reliable, that thinks only ‘smart
people’ end up in high office or on TV.
What I’m saying is that this entire model is passing away. Entire classes of accepted beliefs will simply vanish, including things like, “You need to go to college,” and, “People keep their retirement money in the stock market.”
And when these things change, many people will feel unmoored. That of course can be a problem... if, for example, enough people look for a great leader to save them, rather than adapting for themselves.
As for the timing of these changes, they are happening now and have been for some time. It will certainly be a long process, but it is already underway and has gathered a lot of momentum. The process will continue until the industrial model fades into the past... just like a dozen other ways of life that people thought were eternal.
Alvin Toffler predicted this back in 1980, by the way. (The first ten chapters of his book, The Third Wave, are essential reading.) We are now, however, far enough along to see the details of the process.
So, I think this is the right time to take a good look at the changes that are underway.
What Technology Hath Wrought
The industrial model of human organization arose for economic reasons; it was a set of arrangements that led to the greatly increased production of goods.
Since the 17th century (see FMP #8), one technological breakthrough after another has supported human life better and better. By the end of the 18th century, enough improvements were in place to support mechanized production. Once people saw that they could have better clothing, better food, and more comfort, they understandably jumped at the opportunity and Western culture re-formed itself on an industrial model.
Technological breakthroughs, however, have not ceased, and the industrial model has been surpassed. Human arrangements that seemed
sensible and desirable in 1920 are
no longer sensible and desirable.
They are continuing, of course, but largely because the managers of the industrial model ended up with immense power and are actively ghting to retain it.
The past is ghting to prevent the future from forming.
To establish the point quickly, here is a graph (I used it also in FMP #60) showing the percentage of people working at food production over the past four centuries:
What I’m saying is that this entire model is passing away. Entire classes of accepted beliefs will simply vanish, including things like, “You need to go to college,” and, “People keep their retirement money in the stock market.”
And when these things change, many people will feel unmoored. That of course can be a problem... if, for example, enough people look for a great leader to save them, rather than adapting for themselves.
As for the timing of these changes, they are happening now and have been for some time. It will certainly be a long process, but it is already underway and has gathered a lot of momentum. The process will continue until the industrial model fades into the past... just like a dozen other ways of life that people thought were eternal.
Alvin Toffler predicted this back in 1980, by the way. (The first ten chapters of his book, The Third Wave, are essential reading.) We are now, however, far enough along to see the details of the process.
So, I think this is the right time to take a good look at the changes that are underway.
What Technology Hath Wrought
The industrial model of human organization arose for economic reasons; it was a set of arrangements that led to the greatly increased production of goods.
Since the 17th century (see FMP #8), one technological breakthrough after another has supported human life better and better. By the end of the 18th century, enough improvements were in place to support mechanized production. Once people saw that they could have better clothing, better food, and more comfort, they understandably jumped at the opportunity and Western culture re-formed itself on an industrial model.
Technological breakthroughs, however, have not ceased, and the industrial model has been surpassed. Human arrangements that seemed
sensible and desirable in 1920 are
no longer sensible and desirable.
They are continuing, of course, but largely because the managers of the industrial model ended up with immense power and are actively ghting to retain it.
The past is ghting to prevent the future from forming.
To establish the point quickly, here is a graph (I used it also in FMP #60) showing the percentage of people working at food production over the past four centuries:
2
http://www.freemansperspective.com
Producing enough food is simply not a problem anymore. Distribution is sometimes an issue, but not
production. And the same goes for more or less all key commodities. And it has been true even in
regard to energy, as you can see on this chart, from Julian Simon and Stephen Moore’s It’s Getting Better
All the Time:
At our present moment this process continues with whole classes of jobs being made obsolete by robots. Here for example is one of the many types of robotic security guards:
At our present moment this process continues with whole classes of jobs being made obsolete by robots. Here for example is one of the many types of robotic security guards:
http://www.freemansperspective.com
3
Mercedes-Benz is introducing self-driving trucks in Germany, Tesla just added auto-drive to their cars,
driverless cabs will soon be moving passengers in Japan, a Swiss group announced a robotic brick-
laying machine that can adapt to real jobsite conditions like uneven ground and obstacles, and the
machine below can produce 360 hamburgers per hour – quality burgers.
These machines and many more like them will obsolete human jobs... and they should obsolete human jobs. They accomplish their tasks faster, cheaper, and often better than humans can. They reduce scarcity, freeing us up for better things.
Overall, these machines provide serious bene ts, even though millions of drivers and construction workers may be forced into painful adaptations. That’s what technology does; witness the millions of farm workers who were forced to nd new jobs as the e ects of our top graph caught up with them. Painful as those changes were, none of us want to go back to the days when we all had to work the elds.
At the same time, industrial-age institutions (government schools, courts, etc.) are also past their time. They are currently being evaded by the bravest and most forward-thinking people. Even our currency systems have been surpassed. Digital currencies, cryptocurrencies, and even local currencies are superior to the currency monopolies that have reigned through the industrial era. Dollars, euros, pounds, and yen are essentially obsolete, no matter how eternal they seem. They will sooner or later fade into the past.
It is telling to see good people pulling away from old-style schools, courts, and currencies, even though their use is coercively enforced. Laws are in place to punish people who don’t take their children to government schools, who refuse its courts, or who don’t want to take its currency. And yet people are working to nd ways around these edicts, at cost and at risk. The playing eld wants to shift.
These machines and many more like them will obsolete human jobs... and they should obsolete human jobs. They accomplish their tasks faster, cheaper, and often better than humans can. They reduce scarcity, freeing us up for better things.
Overall, these machines provide serious bene ts, even though millions of drivers and construction workers may be forced into painful adaptations. That’s what technology does; witness the millions of farm workers who were forced to nd new jobs as the e ects of our top graph caught up with them. Painful as those changes were, none of us want to go back to the days when we all had to work the elds.
At the same time, industrial-age institutions (government schools, courts, etc.) are also past their time. They are currently being evaded by the bravest and most forward-thinking people. Even our currency systems have been surpassed. Digital currencies, cryptocurrencies, and even local currencies are superior to the currency monopolies that have reigned through the industrial era. Dollars, euros, pounds, and yen are essentially obsolete, no matter how eternal they seem. They will sooner or later fade into the past.
It is telling to see good people pulling away from old-style schools, courts, and currencies, even though their use is coercively enforced. Laws are in place to punish people who don’t take their children to government schools, who refuse its courts, or who don’t want to take its currency. And yet people are working to nd ways around these edicts, at cost and at risk. The playing eld wants to shift.
http://www.freemansperspective.com
4
What Keeps the Old Model Going
Fundamentally, there are two things keeping the old model going, even though the ground is moving underneath it: custom and force. We’ll examine them both brie y:
Custom
Custom, surprisingly enough, is a more powerful factor than force, even though it’s always slow and usually at least half blind. I liken it to an iceberg, where the great bulk is unseen, but that which is seen is utterly dependent upon it. Like this:
Custom is what happens below the water line.
In our current situation, nearly every person in the West has been raised under the old model and has been trained to not see beyond it. And so, these people tend to fear the loss of the familiar and to oppose change. This is an old, old problem and one that Thomas Je erson noted as Americans broke away from Great Britain in 1776:
[A]ll experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to su er... than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
My comment above, for example, that robots should obsolete human jobs, could easily seem malicious to people raised under the industrial model and who are clinging to those customs. Get-a-good-job-to-survive is the only model they know and the only model they care to imagine. The fact that robots reduce scarcity would seem abstract and inapplicable to them.
Fundamentally, there are two things keeping the old model going, even though the ground is moving underneath it: custom and force. We’ll examine them both brie y:
Custom
Custom, surprisingly enough, is a more powerful factor than force, even though it’s always slow and usually at least half blind. I liken it to an iceberg, where the great bulk is unseen, but that which is seen is utterly dependent upon it. Like this:
Custom is what happens below the water line.
In our current situation, nearly every person in the West has been raised under the old model and has been trained to not see beyond it. And so, these people tend to fear the loss of the familiar and to oppose change. This is an old, old problem and one that Thomas Je erson noted as Americans broke away from Great Britain in 1776:
[A]ll experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to su er... than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
My comment above, for example, that robots should obsolete human jobs, could easily seem malicious to people raised under the industrial model and who are clinging to those customs. Get-a-good-job-to-survive is the only model they know and the only model they care to imagine. The fact that robots reduce scarcity would seem abstract and inapplicable to them.
http://www.freemansperspective.com
5
However much some of us dislike the fact, custom changes slowly and one person at a time,
at least until it reaches a certain critical mass. Furthermore, getting all those minds to change
isn’t going to be accomplished with charts and gures. Breaking with custom requires
emotional strength far more than it does intellectual strength. The borders of the status quo
are enforced instinctively and emotionally, not intellectually.
Force
The operators of the old order don’t want to let go. The structures of the industrial era gave them power, and they desperately want to retain that power. And sadly, they are willing to spill blood in order to keep it. So, we must expect power-seekers to act like power-seekers.
The Central Economic Issue
The operators of the industrial model now nd themselves between hammer and anvil. They look to technology to support them, yet technology is destroying their system.
Force
The operators of the old order don’t want to let go. The structures of the industrial era gave them power, and they desperately want to retain that power. And sadly, they are willing to spill blood in order to keep it. So, we must expect power-seekers to act like power-seekers.
The Central Economic Issue
The operators of the industrial model now nd themselves between hammer and anvil. They look to technology to support them, yet technology is destroying their system.
-
On one hand, governments need high technology and its mass surveillance to know precisely
what their populace is doing and (especially) thinking. They need mass in uence to induce
compliance without people feeling forced. They need high-tech weapons for several reasons.
-
On the other hand, technology is destroying jobs, and jobs are, to the average man and
woman, the essence of the model. Without jobs that support a reasonable lifestyle, the
industrial model loses its appeal.
Also along this same ‘two hands’ model: Since 1970 or so, women have ooded into the workforce. On one hand, they are generating tremendous tax receipts. On the other, that many more jobs are required. After all, very few families can survive on a single income these days.
So, the lords of the status quo are stuck. The technology they rely upon has tilted the playing eld against them, and they are being forced into defense.
Stated brie y, their core problem is this:
So many jobs have been made obsolete that there are simply not enough to go around. Both North America and Europe are already lled with the unemployed children of industrial workers. (Recent US numbers specify 94 million adults outside the workforce.)
At the same time, however, we are su ering no shortages; we have more than su cient production. This lack of scarcity illuminates a simple but critical point:
Where commercial goods abound, additional jobs are not required.
And so, the overseers of the industrial model have a problem: Custom requires jobs, but there is simply no need for that many jobs. We have more than su cient production, and there seems to be an unnecessary shopping center around every corner.
Under these conditions, the operators of the status quo will have to take strong actions if they wish to hold things together. Either that or they’ll have to pull back on taxes and regulations, which they cannot be seen doing. If their image of power and con dence fails (as it would if they pulled back), the automatic compliance of the populace would likely fail with it.
http://www.freemansperspective.com
6
So, aside from truly horrifying options like purposeful population reduction and/or a new world war,
here are the methods that make the most sense for the agents of the past:
To be clear, I’m talking about major corporations here, not the small, private corporations that many of us use because of the current legal environment.
Like the governments they are so closely joined to, big corporations are threatened by declining scarcity. Once there is more supply than demand, oversized pro ts are hard to come by. So, in order to maintain their quarterly numbers (and thus the bonuses of their CEOs), the managers of these corporations have little choice but to maintain scarcity – which is against nature – either that or return to old-style business operations and old-style salaries.
These entities have learned to protect themselves from reduced scarcity by rigging the marketplace. And this has been accomplished by securing appropriate government regulations.
As a result, the US government is currently spending more than $60 billion every year to restrain business activity... and the EU is probably worse.
-
Keep the jobless on the dole. So long as at currencies survive, delivering payments to
former industrial workers makes sense. People with plenty of food, at-screen TVs, and
refrigerators full of beer don’t often rebel, even if they aren’t employed.
-
Keep fear alive. That line is an actual quote from an FBI o cial, by the way. And it makes
good sense in a Machiavellian sort of way. If you want a group of humans to remain
dependent upon you, you need to keep them in fear.
-
Keep them distracted. Unemployed people have often been a problem because they lacked
structure in their lives and became easily agitated. Distraction tends to solve that problem.
And smart phones are, to a very real and a very serious extent, ‘distraction terminals.’
-
Prepare for civil disturbances. Especially if an economic crisis is anticipated.
-
Retake the narrative. At the height of the industrial era – 1960 or so – power structures very
closely controlled the information that their citizens received. But by the 1980s, technology
began venturing outside those borders. (Cable TV, for example.) Then came the Internet in
the early 1990s, and it simply blew up those borders. The Internet was a genie accidentally
let out of its bottle, and since at least the mid-1990s, people in power have been working to
put it back. I’ll pass up the details in this issue, but the old power structures are very close
to getting the genie back where it was. They won’t entirely close the Internet of course, but
they are very close to licensing and controlling content providers, enforcing regulations
that make operations impossible for most independents.
-
Limit technology. This is an area where the current overseers have fallen short. But if they
want to retain power in its current form, this is something that they’ll have to do sooner or
later. And with nearly all new research controlled by government grants, they already have
a control mechanism in place.
To be clear, I’m talking about major corporations here, not the small, private corporations that many of us use because of the current legal environment.
Like the governments they are so closely joined to, big corporations are threatened by declining scarcity. Once there is more supply than demand, oversized pro ts are hard to come by. So, in order to maintain their quarterly numbers (and thus the bonuses of their CEOs), the managers of these corporations have little choice but to maintain scarcity – which is against nature – either that or return to old-style business operations and old-style salaries.
These entities have learned to protect themselves from reduced scarcity by rigging the marketplace. And this has been accomplished by securing appropriate government regulations.
As a result, the US government is currently spending more than $60 billion every year to restrain business activity... and the EU is probably worse.
http://www.freemansperspective.com
7
Notice on the graph that in 1960 – more or less the height of the industrial era – government spending
on regulation was nearly zero. Arti cial scarcity wasn’t necessary at that time.
However these regulations are justi ed to the public, their fundamental purpose is to assist those who pay for them. And those buyers, no matter how well disguised, are the major corporations. Their purchases are made as donations to the politicians who then enact their regulations. Why else would the corporations pay billions of dollars to political action committees and to lobbyists? How else could Senatorial candidates collect $100 million or more in ‘donations’?
The hidden purpose of all this regulation is to kill market supply so the big corporations can maintain their positions and their margins. Already it’s impossible to compete in a huge number of markets unless you employ a team of lawyers. That simply chops o the majority of potential suppliers, and a reduced supply equates to higher pro t margins for the players who remain.
And so, the government-corporate alliance is supporting itself at the expense of the millions who pay higher prices for goods and services than they would naturally be paying, and by preventing all the small and medium businesses from playing on their turf.
More Arti cial Scarcity
Just over 100 years ago, there was no national income tax, no state income tax, no sales tax, and far lower property taxes. Currently these taxes plus taxes on seemingly everything else take roughly half of what a full-time employee makes. That constitutes an additional and large arti cial scarcity.
However these regulations are justi ed to the public, their fundamental purpose is to assist those who pay for them. And those buyers, no matter how well disguised, are the major corporations. Their purchases are made as donations to the politicians who then enact their regulations. Why else would the corporations pay billions of dollars to political action committees and to lobbyists? How else could Senatorial candidates collect $100 million or more in ‘donations’?
The hidden purpose of all this regulation is to kill market supply so the big corporations can maintain their positions and their margins. Already it’s impossible to compete in a huge number of markets unless you employ a team of lawyers. That simply chops o the majority of potential suppliers, and a reduced supply equates to higher pro t margins for the players who remain.
And so, the government-corporate alliance is supporting itself at the expense of the millions who pay higher prices for goods and services than they would naturally be paying, and by preventing all the small and medium businesses from playing on their turf.
More Arti cial Scarcity
Just over 100 years ago, there was no national income tax, no state income tax, no sales tax, and far lower property taxes. Currently these taxes plus taxes on seemingly everything else take roughly half of what a full-time employee makes. That constitutes an additional and large arti cial scarcity.
http://www.freemansperspective.com
8
If we could go back to the arrangements of 1910, working people would be keeping roughly twice
the income they are taking home now. And if those conditions remained, the industrial model’s
replacement would already be forming. Losing a job wouldn’t be a crushing blow for example, nor
would it destroy self-respect.
The fact that people are pushed to the extreme to keep up with their bills is an arti cial construct. People are needlessly being tied into the existing order, straining every muscle to scratch their way ahead just a little. (Or working for a government, which is the greatest pillar of the old model.) In these conditions, new experiments can’t be undertaken, and new ways of living and working are almost suicidal, at least from an economic perspective. There is no room to maneuver.
So, the current oppressive tax climate is, again, enforcing the old model and preventing the future from being born.
Outside Complications
Aside from everything we’ve covered above, the governments of the West are facing a separate set of exterior problems. Beyond the usual competition between states (proxy wars, etc.), their model of nation-state rule is being undermined by something I call a “sovereignty trap.” It works like this:
This strategy was held in check under a bipolar US/Soviet world, but it has since become viable. And this is why the US, UK, and other large powers are so interested in transnational warfare. So long as the sovereignty trap functions, they will also need worldwide spying, drone programs, wars on drugs and ‘terror,’ and covert kidnappings.
Their other option would be to reconsider the system of sovereign states, but that would be among the last things they’d consider.
The Next Steps
There are two primary avenues for what comes next, and it seems that each new step will be in one or the other of these opposing directions. Some type of middle course seems unlikely. Rigid systems don’t generally soften; either they hold or they break.
I call these two paths the natural evolution and the unnatural evolution, and I will describe each brie y: The Natural Evolution
A natural evolution from our current state to a new organization for human life would look
The fact that people are pushed to the extreme to keep up with their bills is an arti cial construct. People are needlessly being tied into the existing order, straining every muscle to scratch their way ahead just a little. (Or working for a government, which is the greatest pillar of the old model.) In these conditions, new experiments can’t be undertaken, and new ways of living and working are almost suicidal, at least from an economic perspective. There is no room to maneuver.
So, the current oppressive tax climate is, again, enforcing the old model and preventing the future from being born.
Outside Complications
Aside from everything we’ve covered above, the governments of the West are facing a separate set of exterior problems. Beyond the usual competition between states (proxy wars, etc.), their model of nation-state rule is being undermined by something I call a “sovereignty trap.” It works like this:
-
The system of sovereign states requires the operators of nation states to respect borders and
not to cross them without publicly declaring their reasons for doing so.
-
By hiding in a state that can’t or won’t hurt them, criminal groups are insulated from the other
states of the world. Al Qaeda for example hid for a long time in Sudan, then in Afghanistan.
National borders can provide excellent protection for criminal groups.
This strategy was held in check under a bipolar US/Soviet world, but it has since become viable. And this is why the US, UK, and other large powers are so interested in transnational warfare. So long as the sovereignty trap functions, they will also need worldwide spying, drone programs, wars on drugs and ‘terror,’ and covert kidnappings.
Their other option would be to reconsider the system of sovereign states, but that would be among the last things they’d consider.
The Next Steps
There are two primary avenues for what comes next, and it seems that each new step will be in one or the other of these opposing directions. Some type of middle course seems unlikely. Rigid systems don’t generally soften; either they hold or they break.
I call these two paths the natural evolution and the unnatural evolution, and I will describe each brie y: The Natural Evolution
A natural evolution from our current state to a new organization for human life would look
http://www.freemansperspective.com
9
something like this:
-
· The existing currency systems crack.
-
· Deprived of unbacked currency, governments can no longer sustain their spending. Taxes
spike in ‘emergency measures,’ but most people cannot or will not pay them. Wars, at the
same time, will have to be scaled back.
-
· Government services cannot be maintained everywhere and are therefore pulled back to
core areas, primarily the centers of important cities.
-
· Outlying areas where services are not supplied become ancillary zones and are partly
ruled and partly taxed, each controlled only as far as possible. And the farther from the
core city, the less ruled and the less taxed.
-
· A new model of human organization – or several new models – take shape over time in
the ancillary areas.
-
· Along with a general decline in scarcity, status (which rests solely upon scarcity) melts away
from the center of human consciousness. Over time, it comes to be seen as ornamental
pu ery: a shiny coat with the word “Important” emblazoned on it, worn by a sad little
man.
-
· Having a job becomes less than the de ning factor of life. Rather, it becomes a tool, even if
a necessary tool. At the same time, business becomes more of a cooperative game, more
like play. It is undertaken not just for the bene ts it produces, but for the thrill of creation.
-
· Self-determination becomes an adventure; responsibility is sought rather than feared.
And remember, please, that this list re ects evolution over some signi cant period of time and not an immediate change.
The Unnatural Evolution
An unnatural (or ‘dark’) evolution from our current state to a new organizational model for human life would look something like this:
-
· Mass surveillance and social media grow into the Descartes’s Demon system we described
in FMP #59.
-
· Transnational warfare (the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, etc.) is continued and expanded,
underlain by fear-stoking campaigns in all the major media. Whether purposeful or not,
terrifying events are kept at the forefront of the public consciousness.
-
· The existing currency systems crack and are quickly replaced with new currency systems.
These new systems are wholly owned and rigidly operated by governments, with no
transparency and no unapproved options.
-
· Elite classes, probably after the Roman decurion model, form in every major city where
power is centered. Status hierarchies take form beneath the decurion class. In all likelihood,
a modi ed Roman model eventually follows.
http://www.freemansperspective.com
10
-
· People living at state expense (welfare recipients, etc.) will be forced to work a certain
number of weeks per year in return for a low-level, guaranteed standard of living. This will
be a restoration of the ancient corvée model.
-
· Tremendous pressure will fall upon the rulers of these systems to reduce their populations,
especially among the corvée classes.
Which One Wins?
The di erence between these two models of societal evolution is simply the extent of centralized power, and central power rests upon the willingness of average people to re exively obey without question and without delay.
So, the more people ask questions, examine things themselves, draw their own conclusions, and nd the courage to hold to them in the face of intimidation, the more real life will skew toward the natural evolution model. We’ll move slowly into a better world. It will be a world of greater abundance and increased autonomy. The down side is that we’ll have to discover ways to get through life without relying on status. Status is stupid and wasteful of course, but it has been woven deeply into our lives, and tearing ourselves away from it will be uncomfortable. (Children born into the new era will have far fewer di culties with it.)
The more people slough o caring, nd refuge in being boring, toe the company line, and drink in the fear of each night’s broadcast news, the more we’ll skew toward the dark and unnatural path of evolution. We’ll be cocooned by the new system’s ever- ashing images, right up until we’re sent o to war, moved to a corvée district, or have our medical care denied; and at that point, we’ll have no choice. Orwell meets Huxley – 1984 meets Brave New World – supported by awesome 24/7 distractions.
For those of us who prefer the rst model, my advice is simple: Start talking about these things to as many of your friends and neighbors as possible. And remember that the roadblocks in front of them are primarily emotional, not intellectual.
For all our sakes, I wish you Godspeed.
See you next month. PR
**** *
http://www.freemansperspective.com
Here, you will find a full range of personalized watch box UAE and cases, as well as watch storage boxes. These can make great gifts for birthdays, anniversaries, graduation ceremonies or anything else – just customize it with the recipient’s initials! Shop today for quality watch boxes at competitive prices.
ReplyDelete