To:
Guardian CiF Re: The existing socio-economic environment is an evolutionary cul-de-sac Date: Friday 29 June 07 |
|
|
|
In
response to article by Polly Toynbee, "Brown can't talk like he does
and ignore this debauchery", on the unacceptable differences in
wealth and income in British society Link to article and thread at The Guardian. |
The REAL problem with the rich, especially the super-rich, is the grossly materialistic and wholly unsustainable values, attitudes and aspirations they embody, which the media publicize and glorify to the masses, who are thus encouraged to emulate them.
It is not just, or even primarily, a problem of social justice, but of sustainability, and thus SURVIVAL, on our finite and vulnerable planet.
We will not solve the Problem (and save ourselves) simply by taxing the rich more. We must go to the "root cause" of the Problem, which lies in the primitive, grossly materialistic values, desires, attitudes and aspirations (deeply rooted in man's animal nature and behaviour) on which our economy is founded and dependent - presenting us with the dilemma of a double bind.
It's time we stopped beating about the bush (Polly's speciality) and faced up to it.
2nd Post
Polly's fundamental mistake, which is central to New Labour, is in believing that the Dragon of free-market capitalism can be tamed, made sustainable and milked to provide for everyone's needs, if not desires. Our politicians, she believes, just need to get a better hold of the reins and give the brute more stick (e.g. higher taxes for the rich), so that it knows who's the boss.
Like all Social Democrats, she fails (or refuses) to recognise that the Dragon cannot possibly, will never, be tamed, but has a mind of its own (deeply rooted in man's animal nature and behaviour, which it has grown and developed specifically both to serve and exploit), and is hell-bent, in its dumb-animal stupidity, on carrying us towards our doom.
Gordon Brown wants to convince us more than ever that he can ride, steer and milk the beast, now from No 10, to SERVE the British people, but he is lying (to himself as well, no doubt). What he really wants (but cannot admit, certainly to us, and probably not even to himself) is POWER, the desire for which is rooted in the same animal nature that drives the Dragon.
But what to do about it, when we ALL feed and depend on dragons milk?
3rd Post
[heavyrail]: "Every time you see something you don't like, you accuse it of being "deeply rooted in man's animal nature and behaviour" and therefore bad or unsustainable - ignoring the fact that this is a non sequitur."
Non sequitur? Not at all !
If you examine closely what I am saying, you will find that I am being very logical, and also following the logic through to some very important implications, which others, who should know better, seem to have missed.
Darwin correctly pointed out more than 100 years ago, as most will now agree, that we are animals. It follows that our human nature and behaviour evolved to serve our survival and advantage, in family groups, in the natural environment (which included other, rival, groups of humans). With the advent of civilization, just a few thousand years ago, the natural environment was increasingly and effectively replaced by an artificial "socio-economic environment", where our blind, dump-animal, Darwinian struggle for survival and advantage continues to this day - although we are loath to admit it, and being completely immersed in and dependent on it, it is difficult to recognise anyway. Although, once you have, it seems obvious and you wonder why you didn't see it before.
This is why I keep tying to point it out, and because it is so important.
Further - admittedly, revolutionary, and thus unwelcome - implications are that both our nation state and economy are deeply rooted in and dependent on our animal nature and behaviour, which they developed specifically to serve and exploit. This makes both inherently unjust, inhumane and unsustainable.
I use the dragon as an analogy for this development in respect to free-market capitalism, that's all. As a fantasy creature, it produces milk, and golden eggs, as well, for the lucky, privileged or cunning few.
4th Post
[Eachran], referring back to your first post on Tuesday: "I agree with Roger Hicks on this, it does have animal origins: pack behaviour or my beloved bowerbird, but it does seem to me to be genetically based. I am not sure how societies deal with this problem but we need to."
We are hardwired (genetically predisposed) to desire and admire (and fear) POWER, because when human nature and behaviour were evolving (when we lived in and depended on extended family groups in the natural environment) that was what an individual needed to survive and thrive.
In the artificial, "socio-economic environment" of modern society (which has effectively combined, confounded and replaced both our extended family group (largely taken over by the nation state) and the natural environment (which included other, rival, groups of humans)), money is by far the most important and versatile form of power, where - cleverly exploited by our large "prime-ape" brains and dumb-animal nature - it now dominates, in a very unwholesome (undemocratic, unjust and inhumane) and totally unsustainable way, virtually everything.
We are so familiar with, our society and economy so dependent on, the misuse of power (money) that we don't recognize the terrible and quite untenable situation it has got us into. It's a bit like a drug that we are addicted to and dependent on, which has ruined our (society's) health and will soon kill us - if we do not manage to come off it soon.
5th Post (unposted because I missed the deadline)[heavyrail]: "The majority of our decisions are not based on the struggle for survival or advantage. Of course it still goes on, but society has evolved beyond that now."
Darwinian Evolution is a VERY slow process which in humans - unlike in ants, for example - operates at the individual, not at the societal level, as you suggest. From an evolutionary perspective, we are exactly the same creatures now as we were before the dawn of civilization, when the artificial, socio-economic environment we live in and depend on today started to develop. The evolution, i.e. development, of society is something quite different from biological evolution, but you seem to have confused them.
Human nature and behaviour (patterns! i.e. dispositions, which are very malleable, of course) are not "controlled" by our evolutionary biology, but were formed by it - in an environment (and this is central to my argument) entirely different to the socio-economic environment we effectively (behaviourally!) live in today. It is an artificial environment we have created ourselves (not consciously and rationally, but driven by our old, blind, dumb-animal, behaviour patterns), which "we" have adapted (to exploit!) and adapted to, behaviourally, but not in respect to the underlying behaviour patterns created by evolution for a very different environment.
We have in fact entered an evolutionary cul-de-sac, which will soon (probably before the end of this century) result in our extinction (certainly of our civilization). Unless, that is, we develop a far better understanding of the actual situation (the reality) we are in and modify our behaviour, and the social structures which collectively determine it, accordingly.
6th Post (posted on another thread we continued our exchange on: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2114637,00.html)[heavyrail]: "There are specific threats that could lead to the end of civilization, [but] our animal instincts are not [one of them]."
I think I see where you are misunderstanding me now.
Human behaviour is not instinctual in the way (certainly not to the degree that) other animals' behaviour is. The point I want to make is that we are not, as our scientific name would have us believe, wise and rational beings, but still very much dominated by feelings and behaviour patterns which evolved to serve Earth's "Greatest Ape" under totally different circumstances and in an entirely different environment to the artificial, "socio-economic environment" in which they continue to operate (greatly facilitated by the development of the nation state and free-market capitalism) today.
This is what I meant by us being in an "evolutionary cul-de-sac". We really are, which puts us in great peril. We have to get out of it, if we want to survive, but to do that, first we must recognize and face up to it.
This is difficult, because we do not experience reality itself, but an interpretation of it, produced by our brains, which it adapts to be more-or-less consistent with the views we already have. It is also very strongly influenced by our dependencies and vested interests in the status quo. There are countless examples of us resisting facing up to reality because it doesn't suit us or seem to serve our interests. How long, for example, did the tobacco industry resist facing up to the harm their products do? I don't think they have even now. Why? Because it make money out of them. It's as simple as that.
Indeed, wars and the Sustainability Problem (including global warming, environmental degradation, depletion of natural resources etc.) are all caused, directly or indirectly, by our animal nature, because it still dominates our behaviour (just observe our leaders, for heaven's sake, the way they deceive us, and themselves, in their pursuit of power). Added to which, the power structures of the nation state and the economy have developed specifically to serve and exploit it (open your eyes and you can see it happening, all around you, all the time).
Our animal nature is NOT a red herring - but the KEY to understanding the "root cause" of our problems - which we urgently need to do, before they overwhelm us completely, which even now they are beginning to do.
I'm currently reading a Ian Kershaw's biography of Hitler, who, it seems, sincerely believed that there was a world Jewish conspiracy, the aim of which was to destroy Germany and European civilization, which is why he hated the Jews and tried to eliminate them all. A bit of psychotherapy (going to the "root cause" of the problem) earlier in his life might have rid him of this ridiculous and dangerous illusion, and spared the world a lot of death and destruction.
http://www.spaceship-earth.org