Sorry for the absence

Comments (3)

1. Have you ever wondered if central planning by governments in response to crisis is not the only central planning going on? In other words, are there other groups of people in the world whose spheres of influence overlap those of our nation states, and whose means in many cases may exceed those of many of the smaller national economies?

   I am always struck by the fact that the entire population and economy of Canada is smaller than that of California. And there are corporations in the world whose “population” is tiny, compared to most nations or states (or even your average city) but whose financial and infrastructural resources are larger than many of the smaller nations in the world.

   What if we are bewitched by the idea of citizenship in any particular country, and limit the scope of our thinking because of this In analysis of the causes and the potential solutions to the fix the world is in right now, have we been overlooking the kinds of business and financial institutions that have been growing economically and politically powerful enough to rival nation states, without the constraints imposed by having to keep their “populations” in line.

   I know this is straying dangerously close to “conspiracy” theory talk. (BTW it is interesting that we all know when that line is crossed – I wonder how we have been taught this?)

   But I am not talking about conspiracy at all. I am talking about the structural differences between the entities that compete for control of the world economy and its direction.

   The entities are not inherently either good or evil. I doubt that any socially constructed entity = whether it is a sewing circle, a political party, or a corporation – is composed of people whose personal qualities differ very significantly from the normal mix in the population they are drawn from. But I do not doubt that such entities take on an internal dynamic which CAN under certain circumstances be ultimately damaging at times to the larger interests of that larger population. As when the interests or even survival of the entity entails that its members act in ways that pass on costs to the larger society rather than paying their own bills.

   People do not have to be evil to do evil things – they simply have to be convinced that what they are doing is within the norms of the soci-economic entity to which they have loyalty.

   This is another way of framing an image a friend of mine suggested earlier, about corporations being like machines, that make of the individual human component a form of cyberg.

   I think if we humans are vulnerable to to this kind of thing, it is not because we are flawed and doomed by out own nature, it is because we have not had time to evolve cognitive, neurological systems of reactions that permit us, en mass, to avoid the pitfalls of “civilization” and all its attendant (often inhuman) structures. (And maybe we are about to see a burst of selective pressure that will fix that?)

   If humans are vulnerable, because of innate and mostly subconscious limitations, it is because most of us are involved in a very long-running and increasingly precarious experiment in collectivity run amuck. this experiment has been sunning since about 10,000 years ago.

   We did not, however, actually evolve into our present genetic and physical configuration as members of nation states, “organized” religions, multinational corporations or financial and banking empires.

   We did evolve to have constant insecurity about our personal and kin-group survival. We are the product of intense selection for cooperation, loyalty, emotional bonding, compassion, generosity, parental protectiveness. Hot and ready courage too, although selection for that trait seems to have been balanced by selection for prudent retreat or even rational thinking (science, planning, plotting and tactical strategy ). Those attributes of humanity that we always admire are also our Achilles Heel. In-group: out-group dynamics are potential dynamite. That is the flip side, then: we are also the product of selection for potentially lethal hostility toward threats to our family and kin-group.

   All animals have some variant of the automatic flight or fight response. In every species, the tweaking of this system is individually variable as well, depending on genetic modifiers, as well as learning or conditioning. The “flight response” as we see them in a certain proportion of threatened or severely frightened human beings are (not generally admired) like the tendency to simply freeze, flee in panic,or go into denial or even a dissociative state.. The resultant “lying low” or rapid flight might also have been a successful adaptation to some kinds of threats – perhaps they are an ancient variation that was more adaptive when our ancestors were mostly prey species.

   Splits tend to appear in any given population along the lines suggested above when the pressure is really on.

   As a result, some people keep their heads in a crisis and others freeze. So people think better and come “alive” when a volcano erupts, war erupts, or peak oil happens and TSHTF. A great many can cognitively handle an immediate crisis or threat, but not one that happens at a distance in time or space.

   In each person, the responses we see are, I think, often simply the best they can do. If they fold in a crisis, it is sad. If they fail to comprehend a threat because it is too far off, it is also sad. If they go into denial despite comprehending the threat, it is even sadder, and if they go mad, sadder still.

   Sad. Because this will not help us to survive as a species.

   But does this mean we are doomed? How often do you think that means we are doomed?

   I don’t. Because I know I will not fold. I have been tested to destruction in my life, and I won. It is not that I have “faith” in humanity. It is simply empirical observation – that convinces that I am not all that unusual. Courage and strategic thinking are everywhere in evidence. As common as stupidity, wishful thinking, and willful ignorance? That is debatable. But it might be common enough. As for religion, it is as dangerous as nation states, corporations, and tribal loyalty.

   If our world is going to become a better place, we have to stretch outside of the evolved limitations of our kind. We need, first in the privacy of our own minds, to step outside of the kinds of socially constructed entities that came into being with civilization. like organized governments, organized religions, and organized warfare machines. Think of humanity, not our country. Think of everyone’s children, not our own. Think not about our own sister, but of the sisters we have in all women, and the brothers we have in all men.

   This, believe it or not, was THE message inherent in the words of that amazing humanist philosopher we know today as Jesus Christ. He is not alone in these views. All of those who have similar beliefs about humanity’s peril are, however, generally very lonely people.

   I, an atheist, assert this. I believe it to be truth. Or, as close to it as I can get right now.

   1. I know this is straying dangerously close to “conspiracy” theory talk. (BTW it is interesting that we all know when that line is crossed – I wonder how we have been taught this?)

      It is patently obvious to me that we do not all know when the line is crossed, otherwise conspiracy theories would not be so common.

2. You don’t need to apologize for having a life, especially when it’s the part of your life that pays the bills.

Comments are closed.