Some
decades are easy and expansive, others are painful but necessary to
lay the foundations for future progress.
Many people reject
the idea of historical cycles due to their imprecision. I understand
the appeal of this objection, but it is nonetheless striking that
transformative decades tend to manifest in cycles rather than evenly
over time.
Compare the decades of the past 70 years: 1952 to
the present. How different was the culture and economy of the U.S.
between 1952 and 1959?
While there was progress in civil
rights and prosperity, the zeitgeist (the look, feel, values,
expectations, beliefs, outlook, mood, etc.) of 1959 was not much
different from that of 1952: clothing, films, the Cold War,
segregation, etc. were identifiably in the same era.
Elvis,
Chuck Berry, et al. enlivened popular music, but the overall impact
of rock/R&B was limited to entertainment and youth culture.
Now
compare the zeitgeist of 1962 and that of 1969. The zeitgeist of 1969
was nothing like the zeitgeist of 1962. It wasn't just clothing and
music that changed; the values, expectations, beliefs, outlook, mood,
and the political, social and economic structures had been
transformed in ways that reverberated for decades to come.
The
1960s were not just tumultuous; the decade was transformative. The
civil rights, feminist and environmental movements changed laws,
values, culture, politics, society and the economy. Economically, the
stagflation of the 1970s was a consequence of changes that occurred
in the 1960s, much of it beneath the surface.
In 1969, the
popular music from fifty years before (1919) might as well have been
the music of a previous century. Yet here in 2022 the music of the
late 1960s and early 1970s is still listened to, purchased and
influential today, 50+ years later.
Cycles are often the
result of the interconnecting forces of wars, economic turmoil,
energy/food scarcities and large-scale economic and social forces:
the transition from wood to coal, for example, or the mass
immigration generated by crop failures and poverty.
The 1920s
is another example of a decade of rapid transformation that laid the
groundwork for the Great Depression of the 1930s. New freedoms of
personal expression made the 1920s different in look and feel from
the immediate post-World War I era of 1919-1920.
The 1870s
was another decade that transformed economies and societies globally.
The investment boom in railroads following the end of the American
Civil War, the reparations imposed on France after the
Franco-Prussian War of 1870, the end of silver coinage in the U.S., a
speculative stock market boom in Europe that crashed in the Panic of
1873--all these dynamics reinforced each other, leading to a global
depression that by some accounts lasted into the 1890s.
Yet
despite the failure of railroads and banks and widespread
unemployment and suffering, the Second Industrial Revolution
continued transforming economies as coal, iron, steel, manufacturing,
transport and urbanization all changed the underpinnings of global
economies.
The western powers' industrial expansion drove
colonization and reactions to colonization such as the Meiji
Restoration of 1868 transformed Japan.
We can of course
detect change in every decade of human history, but Lenin's famous
exaggeration ("There are decades where nothing happens; and
there are weeks where decades happen") speaks to the way various
dynamics build up beneath the surface, interact with other forces and
then burst forth.
Could the world of 2030 look and feel
completely different from the world of 2022, which is still coasting
on the excesses of the waste is growth Landfill Economy of extreme
financialization and globalization?
My guess is yes. Previous
cycles emerged from financial excesses of either expansion or
contraction, the aftermaths of wars, deep economic changes as energy
sources expand (shifts from wood to coal and then to oil) or contract
(forests depleted) and climate change (the "years without
summer" in the 1630s, etc.).
Though many believe the
next energy expansion is starting (fusion or other nuclear power,
solar/wind), the practicalities of physics, resource depletion and
cost provide little support for these projections.
For
example, the U.S. would need to build hundreds of nuclear reactors in
the next 20 years to make a dent in hydrocarbon consumption, yet only
two reactors have been built in the past 25 years.
There is
no evidence that the resources, material and financial, and the
political will required to build 500 reactors in the next 20 years
are available.
If a massive quantity of wind and solar power
is installed over the next 20 years, all the systems that are 20
years old will need to be replaced because they're worn out. These
aren't renewable, they're replaceable.
Thus we face an energy
contraction at the same time as the extremes of financialization and
globalization that have driven expansion unravel.
This
unraveling won't be linear, i.e. gradual and predictable. It will be
non-linear and unpredictable, with apparently modest changes
collapsing supply chains and speculative excesses.
Extremes
of inequality and repression act as pendulums. Once they reach the
maximum endpoint of momentum, they reverse and trace a line to the
opposite extreme, minus a bit of friction.
Many of these
dynamics are already visible. What's not yet visible is the rapid
acceleration and mutual reinforcement of these dynamics.
Eras
of expansion may be liberating and fun, but there is no guarantee
that the liberation and fun will be evenly distributed.
Eras
of contraction are rarely fun, and the misery is widely distributed.
Whether we like it or not, the era of the waste is growth Landfill
Economy is ending in what promises to be a non-linear process.
But
that doesn't mean the eventual result won't be positive. Tumultuous
transformations can set the stage for more widely distributed
prosperity and liberation. Some decades are easy and expansive,
others are painful but necessary to lay the foundations for future
progress. Which will 2022-2030 be? Stay tuned.
from the September 23, 2022 blog of Charles Hugh Smith at oftwominds.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.