| « | The coming crises |
»
|
|
Saturday, June 19, 2010
The Coming Crises: A Coda
Fran here. I hadn't intended to write a post today; I've just completed a new novel, and I've been wallowing in the sense of completion of a long and difficult project.
BUT...
Just below, Esteemed Co-Conspirator Aaron Brenzel has posted a terrifying piece. Outstanding, but terrifying, and based entirely on facts available to anyone with sufficient eyesight to read the newspaper. It's resurrected fears I'd though securely locked into their crypt at the bottom of my soul.
I must admit I find Aaron's vision plausible. It might lead, as he suggests, to an entirely "new order" in the ultimate outcome. However, should things eventuate at their worst, there would be an intermediate period of chaos which we would first have to survive to enjoy or suffer that new order. It's that intermediate period that's most on my mind at the moment.
The pitchfork of chaos would have three prongs.
First, the economic prong. The economy of the Western world is mere inches from its stops. America in particular has been "decapitalizing" -- transitioning from asset-based endeavor to credit-based endeavor -- for nearly sixty years. But a credit-based economy depends on the readiness, willingness, and ability of some to lend to others. Should that boon come to an end, it would take the dollar and virtually all dollar-denominated assets with it:
"Paper has a current intrinsic value of $80 per tonne no matter how many zeroes are printed on it." -- "John Galt," Dreams Come Due: Government and Economics As If Freedom Mattered, Simon and Schuster, 1987.
Boomers would be the worst affected of all cohorts, owing to our ages, our average dependence on government for our incomes, and our trust in the dollar and the equities markets. Even among those of us who've tried to save, too many have reposed too much confidence in paper assets, whether in dollar-denominated bank accounts or shares of stock.
In that vision, the advice to "sell and hunker down" acquires great force. It would be mandatory to convert as much of one's savings as is feasible to precious metals. Nothing else has demonstrated the ability to store value at all reliably when a fiat currency collapses -- and today, every currency in the world is a fiat currency, backed by nothing but the "full faith and credit" of some government.
Second, the social prong. The entitlement mentality is widely held and deeply established. He who believes himself entitled to something tends to behave very badly when it's taken away. There are far too many such persons in the United States today. Many of them are members of sociological cohorts based on race or ethnicity. These would view persons outside their cohorts as enemies...particularly those of us who've managed to prepare for the shock in a sensible and sturdy way.
In that vision, it would be essential to acquire and train in the use of armament. As "no man is an island," and most of us can't zero two targets with one round, survival would demand that each man become a friend and ally to his neighbors. One's neighbors are one's best defense against any sort of direct threats. Your odds of surviving true social upheaval are greatly increased if your neighbors know you've "got their six," and if you can trust that they've got yours.
Third, the political prong. "Politics" in the colloquial sense is about campaigns, elections, legislative maneuverings, and so forth. That is not what I have in mind.
A large part of the American infrastructure has been arrogated to the authority and operation of governments, whether municipal, county, state, or federal. Many electrical power systems are now operated by a government. Most water systems are operated by a government or a government-protected monopoly. And of course, the schools, the roads, and a significant number of hospitals are government-owned and operated as well. Should the conditions currently bedeviling Greece and Spain come to America, whether these facilities would continue in operation is anyone's guess, especially considering the prevalence of the Washington Monument Defense in quelling popular demands for cutbacks in government.
In that vision, it would appear wise for American families to lay in a store of nonperishable foods, to bolster their toolboxes and expand their libraries with guides to the maintenance of vital home mechanical systems, and to look into alternative sources of water, heat, and electrical power. The breakdown of the transportation infrastructure could render all of those things much harder to obtain, if not entirely unavailable.
Some persons would find the preparations enumerated here unfeasible, especially those who live in large cities. I'm afraid there's little to be done for anyone whose livelihood depends on such an environment. Getting out would be very difficult at best; remaining and surviving would be close to a miracle.
I'm sure Aaron hopes his foresight is incorrect; I certainly hope mine is. And indeed, as plain as the harbingers of disaster seem to us, we could both be wrong. But that doesn't make some degree of preparation for the worst possibilities unwise. It might be expensive, but were the storm to break as Aaron and I have imagined, that would be the price of a decent life in the aftermath, if not of survival itself.
There would be no safe harbors.
UPDATE: There are intelligent persons -- at least they believe themselves intelligent -- who think this is an excellent time to treat belated but potentially important insight:
The reviews of Obama’s performance have been disappointing. He has seemed uncomfortable in the role of leading other nations, and often seems to suggest there is nothing special about America’s role in the world. The global community was puzzled over the pictures of Obama bowing to some of the world’s leaders and surprised by his gratuitous criticisms of and apologies for America’s foreign policy under the previous administration of George W. Bush. One Middle East authority, Fouad Ajami, pointed out that Obama seems unaware that it is bad form and even a great moral lapse to speak ill of one’s own tribe while in the lands of others. Even in Britain, for decades our closest ally, the talk in the press—supported by polls—is about the end of the ’special relationship’ with America. French President Nicolas Sarkozy openly criticized Obama for months, including a direct attack on his policies at the United Nations. Sarkozy cited the need to recognize the real world, not the virtual world, a clear reference to Obama’s speech on nuclear weapons. When the French president is seen as tougher than the American president, you have to know that something is awry.
as merely an opening through which to alienate a potential new ally:
Listen up, you punked, chumped boobs: We looked at Obama not through your rose colored hallucinations, but through the cold, clear spectacles of reality. None of what he’s done since has surprised us one bit. In fact, many of us, myself included, predicted it even before his coronation by people like you. Yes, it’s nice that after a year and a half of horrible examples, the truth about him is finally beginning to penetrate your skulls. But why, for the love of god, couldn’t you see it at the beginning, when it was no less obvious, but your understanding of it might have done some good?
Call the "Pride goeth before destruction" macro...
Comments
We just out up a link to this post over at CR, together with a fine article from Brussels Journal which certainly underlines what you and Aaron are saying.
The next few years definitely won’t be “business as usual”.(word verification is “costs")
Posted by KG on 06/19/2010 at 07:07 PM"But why, for the love of god, couldn’t you see it at the beginning,...”
Because they could only see black.
Posted by on 06/20/2010 at 12:47 AMSuperb.
Posted by cmblake6 on 06/20/2010 at 11:01 PM"In that vision, it would appear wise for American families to lay in a store of nonperishable foods, to bolster their toolboxes and expand their libraries with guides to the maintenance of vital home mechanical systems, and to look into alternative sources of water, heat, and electrical power. “
This is true for natural disasters as well. In fact, if that was our motto as a nation we’d be in a completely different situation.
Posted by Russell on 06/21/2010 at 11:59 AM
Comment Form
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
