Toejamm made an interesting observation in the form of a question, so I would like to state my opinion about the matter. I like to put things into perspective. If you were living a thousand years in the past, you would notice that people were more likely than not saying that the end of the world is near and they would be saying how horrible things are. Mankind has been believing that the world has been coming to an end and the current situation in the world, especially their own world, is bad or getting worse.
I would think those people living during the decline and the fall of the Roman empire, or any other empire or nation, believed that the world was coming to an end. And from the prospective of those people the world was coming to an end; it was just their little slice of the world.
I think that men saying the end of the world is coming to an end or is near is their way of putting changes that are constantly occurring whether the changes are political, economic, climate, or the change of the current state of affairs of their nation or land in perspective. There is some truth to the statement, and all throughout human history the world has been changing and nations have fallen and the little slices of people's universe have come to an end.
Maybe it seems like our slice of the world is coming to an end with the current state of affairs. I have not lived for a long time, so I have a rather short,narrow perspective on the current state of affairs as compared to the historical picture. The human life is too short to really comprehend or notice the changes that are occurring in the world over the course of history, and too few people devote their life to the study of history, nor do they have any effect on the direction of the world. Most people are swept up in the tide of change. John T Flynn states: "Human societies come under the influence of great tides of thought and appetite that run unseen deeply below the surface of society. After a while these powerful streams of opinion and desire move the whole social mass along with them without the individuals in the mass being aware of the direction in which they are going. Up to a certain point it is possible to resist these controlling tides and to reverse them, but a time comes when they are so strong that society loses its power of decision over the direction in which it is going." I believe that the tide that is coming is some dictatorial rule--not the brutal Hitler or Stalin rule but the soft, mild, and parental dictatorship-- of some sort engulfing the whole world. One that the whole world will willingly and eagerly bring about and submit itself to.
The current state of affairs could be no different than what has happened throughout history. But the current state of affairs are different from those of the past ; much like the past, from that point of history, state of affairs have been different from that past . The current state of affairs are very unique from those of the past. Technology has advanced at such a rapid paste throughout the past 110 years and is continuing to expand at amazing rates exponentially. For example, the rate of computer processing power. Look at the JOE 2008 report. No doubt the world ten years from now could be very different than what it is today from due to the rate of change occurring in technology. The question is if mankind can keep up with those changes?
Nuclear technology is a deadly and new weapon that changes the nature of war and the how nations relate to each other. No longer is it likely for major warring states to have an all out battle. Now warring or competing nations will try to take each other over through peace, diplomacy, collaboration, and infiltrating each others political structure to bring about change from within their opposing state. This is a catalyst to bring about the need for world wide collaboration and unity. A fundamental change in how nations relate to each other. Look at how China is building itself up by linking its economy with America's and their constant hacking of the pentagon's defense systems, and one should note the previous attempts of the communist to take America over from within. To deny that this happened is to gloss over historical facts. Today the communist and socialist fall under the liberalism banner. Six time presidential candidate for the socialist ticket stated that: "The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." So in effect the socialist have been successful in their attempt to take over America by taking control of a major political party and implementing most of their ideals. Notice that they brought this about by appearing to be something different than what they are. Disguised.
From reading the JOE 2008 report you can ascertain that the world is very volatile and there is a lot of potential for conflict and for trouble spots around the world to erupt into major situations, and that these eruptions can easily impact the world as a whole. Globalization is another factor that makes the current sate of affairs different from the past. Globalization is a fact of life-- it is here to stay. The world is now interconnected and more dependent on each individual nation. What happens in one little part of the world could easily effect the whole world and warrant action by the whole world. The world is becoming one, more united, and more interdependent. This affects the current state of affairs by the fact that an event or societal change or a collapse of one nation, especially a major world player, has potential to effect the whole world by becoming, in effect, a world wide situation; whereas in the past these events would be relatively isolated to a particular region of the world. The changes that are occurring in one part of the world will effect the whole world and warrant a united action on the part of the world, so the fate and direction of the world as a whole is more united. Listen to the various speeches of the most powerful man, for the time being, in the world, Barack Obama, to get a general feel for the direction of the world-- globalization, the need for the world to work together and unite behind a common cause, terrorism, climate change, health care crises, and economic crises etc. There is still a lot of tension in the world that would prevent a truly united one world government to occur without a major event happening to force this to come about but the general direction of the world is headed towards that one world rule.
There is no doubt in my mind that if America doesn't change course--Big IF, America will become a centrally planned country ruled by a select few. There is a very real threat of America having an economic collapse, IF America doesn't change course. Look at my other posts. The world's economies are very interconnected, look at how the current economic crises started in America then spread throughout the whole world and cause a world wide economic recession. If America's economy were to collapse that would cause a chain reaction throughout the whole world and warrant a united action by the whole world. The economies of the world are being built on a foundation of debt, and to understand where this is leading you must understand what deficit spending is and the end result of it. Current events are an illustration of the fact of globalization; and that coupled with the changes taking place in the world shows one where the world is heading. The current economic conditions could eventually turn into a catalyst that would force the world to unite for a common purpose and bring about some new world order or rule.
The current state of the vast majority of people is interesting. Ayn Rand stated that: "Culturally, we are approaching the point where anyone can take over, provide his doctrines are sufficiently irrational." The people of today are ready to follow and be ruled over by some "rock star." Look at how people blindly followed President Obama with a god like reverence and how people emotionally fall in love with pop stars. All throughout the various books I have read there has been a theme that runs throughout all of them, and that theme--the fact that their point is not to prove this particular point makes it more compelling to me-- is that from the perspective of various authors the world or a single nation in the past eighty or so years has been approaching a point of decline or standing on an edge of a cliff about to fall into some form of socialism/communism/fascism or some form of world wide dictatorship. The parental dictatorship. Not some Hitler bringing death and destruction, but through peace and under the guise of taking care of you and saving you from some disaster. Not the end of the world apocalypse version of anarchy and roaming bands of marauders and utter ruin. Nor the world being consumed in fire and brimstone. But the world existing much as it does today only that it will be ruled by some one world political system that people willingly submit themselves to. It is conceivable that if the world is provided with a catalyst people would be willing to submit themselves to some one world rule. Look at how America reacted to a relatively mild economic crises-- they chose a bigger government to solve this problem and are giving up a lot of their freedoms in the process.
The themes throughout movies and pop culture are another indicator of the direction that America and the world is heading and is helping to prepare the minds of people for some one world rule--usually one man saving the world from a worldwide disaster by uniting the world. People are so eager to hero worship some person. Look at the plane pilot who landed in the New York river or how eagerly people label servicemen heroes not for going beyond the call of duty but for only doing their duty--the term now has no meaning. I believe the current state of people that is reflected in movies and pop culture is another proof of the fact that people will follow one man or one political group if a catalysis presents itself.
Religion is also helping to prepare the people of the world to accept some form of one world rule. Most religions are looking for a return of some deity that will set up some paradise here on earth or take them away to that paradise. Most people are waiting in hope for a deity to appear. What if the state or some government equates itself as this world savor and usher in of the paradise and people equate and incorporate this with their religious views? The leaders of Iran believe that their deity will return soon but first Israel and the west needs to be destroyed. Communism and socialism have already tried to create this utopia in the past.
There is an attempt to destroy the foundation of our society through the education system, economic realm, pop culture, religion and the education system and rebuild it into some form of a united world ruled by some one political group. Read Toohey's speech in chapter 14 in 'part 4' of _the Fountainhead_ to learn the methods of subjugating a people to a political system. You will find that these methods are being implemented by the political systems of the world and President Obama's speeches, min 12 is good place to start, are very similar to Toohey's.
Overall, the state of the people is at the point where it is very possible for one political group or some new world order to take over the world by having people willingly submit themselves to this rule provided there is some major catalyst such as a world wide economic crises or some unique threat to the whole world or this is possible to happen over the natural course of history without a major catalyst to push the world to that point. The current direction the world is heading--IF things don't change-- shows that decades down the road the world could united and under the thumb of some one world political system. It will be brought about by peace and appearing to be something other than what it is. I don't think this is necessarily some big scheme but just the natural evolution of human affairs playing itself out, not some big "uu and awe amazing out of this world conspiracy theory". Most of mankind is and has lived under some kind of brutal rule by a small group of men. The global, united nature of the world today will just lead to this rule being a world wide situation although in a much more mild form.
Is the world coming to an end? Not anymore so than it has in the past. Mankind is still here and will be for a very long time in my opinion. What will the world be like that mankind of the future will be living in? Not some death camp but maybe similar/milder to the world of _1984_ like Tocqueville talked about. One where we will still have lots of freedoms but with some big brother watching over us. Most people are unconcerned with the tides that carry us to our future and will be blindly swept away to wherever it will take us. I hope to be one that is aware of that tide that is rolling beneath the waves, possibly to hit land and manifest itself, and the direction it will lead us. Hopefully I am over stating the tide. An interesting extreme take on the current events that might make one see things differently. Some constructive criticism would be helpful. Anyways, a fun and interesting take on things, although overstated.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yawn...Did you say something?
ReplyDelete"Consumption is the final, not the efficient, cause of production. The efficient cause s savings, which can be said to represent the opposite of consumption: they represent unconsumed goods. Consumption is the end of production, and a dead end, as far as the productive process is concerned."
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Rand, to a certain extent, that consumption is an end onto itself. Consumption might be an end, but it is the primary impetus for the entire economic cycle(!) as it functionally is demand (the indicator which tells the economy what to do). Savings are actually the worse possible thing for an economy (or too much) as stagnate money decreases the velocity of the economic cycle, thus less goods are bought which means less goods are produced ergo, people lose jobs. Extra money through ingenuity should be viewed as money gained vs saved as more of it is a reward for the individual to obtain increased goods the efficency of their labor. This might seem a trivial point, but in some countries excessive savings is national problem (in Japan, where they have government campaigns to get people to spend, as well as a next to nothing interest rate in their banks for savings accounts). I know that Rand's point is mainly targeting credit and our current conception of money, I just wanted to put this point in there.
Overall, I think there is a thin silver lining in this recession that may negate much of the "End of the world" hysteria that grips us.
To return to Rand for a second, I chuckled at her definition of "inflation" (reality) but think the same thing can be said of the recession. A recession forces reality upon all of us. Rand argues that governments seek to avoid the consequences by spending our future's money now. Yet such a reality only exists when a government is able to deficit spend in such a fashion. For state governments this is a different story.
http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0832492220090608
Unlike the federal gov't, states can't deficit spend. They're forced to live within their means, thus, like California, when raising taxes becomes impossible and the state can't get anything from the Federal Government, people face the "grim reality" that the state will need to cut numerous jobs (California: 5,000) and review their expenses:
"His (AAAAHnorld) order directs state departments to submit to the Department of Finance plans to cut their future spending on contracts and purchases by at least 15 percent no later than 30 days after the state's 2009-2010 budget becomes law."
This kind of "state reduction" is only possible when policy makers have no other choice. The same thing is happening in the state of Oregon and throughout the country as states are forced to tax or cut. Thus, on the state level, this recession forces us to be the best conservatives possible. Some states will attempt to avoid this by taxing the able, but when the "men of ability" flee such states to others that don't use such parasitic practices (see Bud-D's WSJ post a while back), even these rich taxes fail to garner enough revenue to stay afloat.
have to go, someone else can find that WSJ link that Bud-D put up. Will deal with the Federal Gov't later....
also, there's a limit on the amount of characters in a comment, I had some criticisms
ReplyDeleteWell said Jeff. Someone will inherit the future. We ain't all gonna die, well, not all at once anyway! The question is who will be here to inherit? And can we maintain the shining beacon on the hill that we have had or not? The best hope for humanity? Can we maintain the leadership of the Anglosphere in the world? These are questions the RTP faces head on!
ReplyDeleteDeficit spending is OK if it results in a roaring economy that then fills back the gov't coffers with taxes. If the way the Gov't spends the money doesn't result in a stimulated economy, then it's a huge debt to service, putting brakes on everyone, and making things worse (see Weimar Germany). The gov't is forced to print money to devalue the debt and inflation skyrockets. This is what happened under Carter as well.
ReplyDeleteDeficit spending only works when it is done to stoke the economy a la Reagan, not payback political allies a la Obama.
So, yes, there is much danger, but no, it's not a certain disaster...yet.
http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/1917387.html
ReplyDelete"It would be a huge regression," said Nancy O'Hara, assistant director of the Yolo County Department of Employment and Social Services. "My mind reels just thinking about all of this."
This is in response to proposals that are coming out as to California's Welfare program. There's talk of completely eliminating various programs which has such Human Services personnel like Ms O'Hara freaked out...probably because her job will be cut next.
My whole point was to state that this is not the end of the world, but to state that the current policies being carried out and the general direction the world has been going in the past 80 years could lead to some form of universal tyranny in the future. On the economy, I don't think the current recession is the end of the world, but if the current economic policies and deficit spending is carried out it will lead to a problem down the road. How big depends on the extent that these policies are carried out.
ReplyDeleteOn the point of savings, savings are what allow economic production to be maintained and continue. What do banks do with people's money that they keep in the bank? They invest it and loan it out to people or businesses or invest it in future economic production. Investments and savings are what drives an economy. Without these there can be no economic production to drive or have consumption. Can you consume anything that has not been produced? I think consumption is part of the economic cycle, but the producers are the ones that drive economic activity. Government spending does not stimulate an economy. I have not studied the "lost decade" that occurred in Japan so I don't know the exact causes. People were saving money but there was no investment occurring because of uncertainty. You have to look at why they were/or saving and not spending. Government policies.
On the point of inflation is reality, that is an oversimplification but true. It is a destroyer of savings. Savings represents a specific amount of human lifespan that was required to go out and produce that money and therefore save it. The government is spending money without any corresponding representation in reality, I.E. material goods. That means there will be more dollars chasing the same amount of goods; therefore, raising the base line of dollars that everybody has causing goods to increase in price. Wages do catch up eventually but it is a hidden tax on people that have money saved up and people on fixed incomes. Extreme inflation has in the past led to unrest and rightfully so. This in part led to the rise of Hitler. Will that happen again I don't think so. But IF carried too far it does have the potential to destroy an economy.
The Chinese know that the dollar is being devalued and destroyed that is why they are worried about their investments and actually laughed at Geithner when he went over there to tell them that their investments in the dollars were secure and safe. This is also why China and Russia have called for a new international currency to replace the dollar. http://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-students-laugh-at-tim-geithner-2009-6
It is true that the California gov is running out of money and is therefore required to cut spending and government programs--good. But what if the Federal gov just bails out California and assumes its debt? The whole country will just assume the debt. This is yet to be seen if this will happen. The Federal government is assuming every body's debt and spending money it doesn't have. Deficit spending can't go on forever and eventually destroys capital, the driving force of the economy. If the economy becomes build up on too much debt this will lead to no capital to maintain economic activity. Eventually the money must be paid back with actual material goods. The nation is becoming indebted to the world and more of the nation's capital will go towards paying the debt down. This mean a more sluggish economy
Their is a possible silver lining to all that is happening. The current conditions led to the Reagan presidency. This depends on people waking up though.
I think the Western world is on the declining economically and culturally. America's influence in the world over the next 30 years will be on the decline, JOE 2008. China is rapidly becoming the new world leader economically and in terms of its influence and power on the world stage.
ReplyDeleteThe America is rotting away and is in need of a resurgence or renaissance. This needs to start in the education system and in the hearts and minds of each American. America needs to learn what freedom is and what makes it possible.
Deficit spending is necessary to a certain extent. But the current deficit spending is not the necessary kind. The kind taking place leads to a slow and sluggish economy.
I decided to just make a short comment about this since the subject is already being discussed. I read an interesting article stating that inflation will be coming and it could possibly be worse than the level that occurred during the 70s. The money supply will be expanding at an unprecedented level.
ReplyDeletehttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB124458888993599879.html
Back to Melkor's point about state governments going bankrupt and stating that it only means that governments will be forced to cut back spending and programs, the Federal government is going broke and running at major deficits and at the same time the Federal government is assuming fininical responsibility for several major US industries, banking and auto and now health care, and around 2030 social security will be going bankrupt, I received a statement in the mail stating this. What does this mean? The government is taking over economic activity that was once the responsibility of the private sector. So if the Federal government goes broke then most of the economy will be going broke along with the federal government. There will be less or no capital to drive the economy.
People and businesses will be dependent on the government's management of out resources and their economic well being will be tied to how well the government uses are capital. So the Federal gov running out of money will not simply lead to downsizing of the gov but downsizing of the whole economy. They will be required to use the only capital they have left and that is us. That is the point I got from Rand's article. The nations stock seed is being wasted and consumed by the gov.
Inflation is coming. To what extent is unknown but according to the opinion piece I read it could be unlike anything America has seen. Inflation in the past leads to social disorder and big problems. There is a real potential for economic troubles. The end of the world? No. but troubles none the less.
People with any amount of savings should be aware of the potential for inflation and be watching out for it. If it will be 12% like the 70s then 12 dollars for every 100 of savings will be lost. An average savings of 10,000 that means 1200 lost in the first year then 1056 for the next year. This destroys savings. Could be more this time. The gov is stealing your life. Anyways I hope the inflation scare is just that a scare and that it won't happen.
ReplyDelete