I would like to get back on track here and in the campaign for President of the United States. I was going to opt for an image of a train heading down the track and that didn't seem quite fitting so then I downloaded one of a train going down one of four tracks winding through the hills. Still did not seem to fit.
It is a mess out there. It has been so long since we have stayed on track in a campaign that basically nobody really knows where the track is. Ergo my roller coaster image. I think this says it. Even Carl Rove admitted in an interview that while dirty politics work you can get to far off into lies and dirt that you lose the message (and hopefully the campaign) and he openly admitted McCain has gone into that no-man's land with his warm up act: Sarah Palin.
But there are some very important issues facing us these days (one major one of which is the economy) and if we don't address them it could spell the end for the United States of America as we know it. Alaska is not the only state where rumblings of separation from the US can be heard. The mountain west certainly feels often that it is short changed by Washington and only used an abused for nuclear waste disposal, toxic chemical dumps and exploitation of hydro-electric energy and mineral reserves.
I an not an economist. All I know about that is that my carefully laid aside retirement funds are gone. That what I was depending upon to augment my Social Security - Art - is going through a crash because people no longer have the money to spend anywhere but the pump or on groceries. So I am going to leave the economy for others and try to focus my next few blogs on issues important to my neck of the woods.
In the early days of this country there seemed more land then we knew what to do with. And when we wanted more we just moved on over the next ridge. And actually railroads and the robber barons that ran them was how we got effectively to the West Coast. Congress signed away huge right aways including 10 and 20 miles on either side of the track as incentive for the competing companies to keep clear cutting forests for ties, open pit mining of coal to fire the boilers, and damming streams to provide water for steam.
The robber barons today are the oil companies with their oil leases on "public lands" and the open seas off-shore. When people complained about the abuses of the railroads in their westward expansion they received the answer that it was good for our country. And now when we complain of oil exploration in our national parks or pristine sea coasts we are told it is good for America. Maybe, but an alternative source of energy would be better. And it is wise for the oil companies to realize that even the railroad barons realized the error of their ways and were behind the preservation of these pristine areas we now call the National Parks and which the oil companies want to decimate.
Why don't we reopen some of the thousands of capped off wells before we drill more? Yes, some of them were shut down because they were not economical to continue to pump when oil was below $50 a barrel. But guess what folks, it isn't anymore. Development of oil shale was explored and found not economical below $50 a barrel. But guess what? It is double that now.
Before we go off an authorize the raping of what we will never be able to replace let's take a reasoned view and explore the possibilities. This is the only planet we have that can sustain life as we know it at this moment. Even animals don't mess the nest they sleep in.
Let us pause and think before we get off on one of those side loops of track to nowhere but our own ruin.
There is a lot to think about in this post of yours, Jacqui. And I suppose I am bound to look at from a European angle. Though in fact, a lot of the problems we have in common. Here in the UK, we have a terminally ill government, probably without the will to tackle the gathering economic storm, even if it had the means. Rather too much involved in squabbling over its own corpse...
ReplyDeleteWe have a society which, except for some of us older ones, is used to a life of prosperity and "get rich quick", where materialism is the god. We too have an explosion of the elderly, whose savings and pension schemes are suddenly no longer the cast-iron security they once seemed to be.
We have, in particular, escalating fuel costs, partly, despite denials, the result of greed and profiteering among the "fuel barons". And we are increasingly dependent, particularly for natural gas supplies, on Russia, where, up to a point, Putin can turn on and off the tap if he wishes.
Those of us in the country can at least go and forage for wood to burn to keep warm. Many others, particularly the old and infirm, have no such option. I've no doubt, if we have a harsh winter, that there will be cold-related deaths, someting which has rarely happened for maybe a century.
We probably have few of the unexploited oil resources you mention in the US. But we have coal, which can be extracted much more economically, and in a less environmentally damaging way, than was the case even a relatively short time ago,
Coal, of course, has major adverse environmental effects whem burnt in large quantities. But there seems to be little real effort to do more than "play around" with other alternative sources of fuel and energy. None of our major political parties have the will to grasp this particular nettle.
Separatism is a growing issue particularly in what we could call(a bit inaccurately, but it will do for now) the "Celtic" nations. My own view is that Scotland has gone "critical" on this one, and is beynd turning back. Though, personally, as an English Welsh Nationalist, I see nothing wrong with it. London governments have consistently failed and neglected the further regions in any case.
We are also, I think, gradually heading for major social unrest. There are plenty of scapegoats for the growing far Right here to target,and, as the economy breaks down, they surely will.
Maybe the one political crumb of comfort for the US is that McCain seems to be clearly floundering when questioned on the economic near-collapse. And Palin I doubt has yet progressed much beyond a system of bartering bear skins for ammunition for her AK-47.
Yet can any politicians do a great deal? I suspect a whole lot of chickens (over-population, squandering lifestyles, the rape of our environment) are all coming home to roost together. Maybe humanity has had its chance with Mother Earth and has blown it. Another species may eventually do better.
Wonderful comment and a lot to digest. Let me say first that it occurs to me (the non-economist) that a global economy means a global depression if one of the G8 heads that way. And I also think it means global unrest. I keep hearing Marie Antoinette saying, "Let them eat cake."
ReplyDeleteA middle class or merchant class that has gotten used to some of the comforts will balk at being shoved back into the lower class. Yes, first they will look at their gluttonous spending and decide to trim a few frills-be more green. But there will come a sticking point especially when they look at the profits of Exxon and the bank account of Bill Gates and McCain with his seven houses.
I think we are headed for one hell of a correction point. And hopefully we will just fall back to a "restore" point like on our computers and not do a full blue screen crash. And whichever it is there will most likely be a reduction in population be it from starvation, or freezing to death in your flat, or bird flu that goes to epidemic proportion because here in this country there is no insurance.
I moved to the mountain west almost 20 year ago because I foresaw this coming. And I can down trees and chop firewood, and barter with neighbors, even bring buckets of water up from the stream if need be. And I can hunt or trap.
Lots to munch on in your comment. Lots of tracks to take in future blogs about the issues facing the world evidently.
Thanks for contributing.
Once again a lot of thougt-provoking ideas, Jacqui.
ReplyDeleteFor now, I'll just zero in on one - your decision to become a countrywoman in anticipation of what was to come.
A couple of years ago, a group of around three or four of us here began to talk seriously about the probability of some major collapse in the social fabric, whether through epidemic or economic catastrophe.
One of us had been a government advisor to local councils on what measures to take in the event of nuclear conflict. which he agreed, meant in fact death -for the lucky ons immediately, for the rest in more or less unpleasant lingering ways.
But we agreed that in the event of non-nuclear collapse, we in rural areas stood a better chance than the city dwellers. We could, as you say, hunt or forage for food and fuel. We had the skills for crop-growing. We would be able to maintain a (reduced) number of livestock.
Bartering would be a staple aspect of survival with "barter markets" for that purpose.
Even in this small village of just over 1,000 people, there would be problems of a population too large to support with resources available, which would be harshly rectified by the spread of disease and the breakdown of health provision. The seriously ill and the infirm elderly would die.
There would be a breakdown in law and order, with the prospect of having to defend ourselves against an influx from the chaotic cities.
Our horizons would dramatically shrink, with horsedrawn transport once again coming to the fore. A world of our neighbouring villages and nearest small town.
Inevitably, one finds oneself in danger of becoming indistinguishable from the average fascist bible-bashing survivalist. I'm not sure of the way around that.
We used to be regarded as eccentrics (which in many ways, I'm glad to say, I am;-) ) But people don't laugh at us quite as much anymore.
Lots more potential consequences, of course, but these are maybe enough to make the point.
I do think you can get so far left your are right(and don't tell the conservatives this)and so far right you are left. I now call myself a centralist because while I have some very liberal views I am also for strong borders and strict adherence to the constitution (boy have we gone off base on that one).
ReplyDeleteThe population of the world has been reduced to very small numbers in the past as when the black death swept Europe but even before then people tracking the human genome have found there at one time might have been a volcanic winter or asteroid or plague that got the population down to about 2 to 10 thousand.
The black death in Italy may have in fact been responsible or the cultural and social re-awakening. Partly because fewer people to support and more land to supply food to those few. And the land was distributed more fairly. There arose a strong merchant and craftsman class (or middle class) which is necessary for a democracy.
I do think the human species will survive on some level but probably only those that can live by their wits and skills.
Also if you have studied the flu epidemic of 1918 it began to weaken as it got out of the cities and into the fresh air. A similar thing was noted with the plagues of Europe. The highest percentage of mortality was in the crowded cities and oddly enough among the males of breeding age. Earth making a population correction?
I have also taken an interest in learning some basic skills like weaving spinning, making rope from fibers found in plants, etc. These are all needed if technology gets knocked for a loop. And they are all skills which can be taught with products that can be bartered.
Once again a lot of stimulating potential tangents here. One of the basic "laws" of nature is natural selection and correction of population levels. If resources, in most cases food supply, is insufficient, then the population of the species is reduced to manageable levels, usually by disease, or in the case of some animals, lemmings for instance, by species
ReplyDeleteself-destruction.
We really have no reason to suppose that nature has for some reason exempted the human race from this process.
Disease seems the most likely method in mankind's case.
And as you say, Jacqui, these catastrophic episodes in the past have been followed by a great resurgence and flowering of human civilisation in one way or another. It would be an over-simplification to say that we are talking of the "survival of the fittest", perhaps, though there is a strong resemblance to that.
As you also say, there is in practice often little difference betwen the hard left and the hard right. I'm aware, for example, that some would say that some of these thoughts are uncomfortably close to those of Hitler. One difference , perhaps, being that Hitler didn't leave nature to carry out its own corrections, but instead inflicted a regime of bestiality on all who became his unfortunate victims. As did such one-time icons of the left as Chairman Mao and Joe Stalin.
There are few things worse than an ideologue who believes in his or her own infallibility :-)
As Cromwell once pleaded with such : "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, to believe that you may be mistaken!". They didn't, of course...
Sorry, Jacqui, wandering way off the point yet again...
It is rather hard to keep things on track as it were with so many issues pressing down on civilization as we know it. Certainly for our presidential candidates it is easier to just discuss lipstick and pigs.
ReplyDeleteMy father used to always quote, "If you can keep your head when others around you are losing theirs you clearly do not understand the situation."
I think it is clear from my opinions here I can kiss the chance of ever being picked to run for VP lipstick or no.
There's nothing like a healthy dose of panic from time to time... Though I've rather given up on it these days, when there are so many potential things to panic about... The legendary (and largely mythical) British "sang froid" is maybe better.
ReplyDeleteI suspect you would make rather a good VP. In my case , in our imaginary little post-Armageddon world here, I'm down to be "Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces of the Welsh Independent Princedom of Henllan" and "possessor of mens' necks" - the latter one of the titles of the 16th century Ottoman Sultans,which has always rather appealed to me...
After all, if civilisation as we know it is doomed, as seems likely, we may as well go down into the dark as cheerfully as possible...
Even drilling will not result in enough oil to "fix" the situation. It's all about the short term solutions to the long-term problems...
ReplyDeleteShort sighted speculation. They want to go for the quick fix and the quick bucks and postpone the problem for a few more years. It is that sort of thinking that has gotten us into this situation.
ReplyDeleteEven the financial situation. Sell the house with the mortgage they know they cannot pay for. Continue our oil dependence until we back to horses and wagons. Export manufacturing and tech jobs until American can not longer make any product or fix any product.
We have let the corporations go for the big bucks quick with no responsibility for the long run. This could be laid at the door of deregulation.
The intermeshing of politicians and big business also prevents any radical long-term action which might adversely affect, for instance, the oil companies. The connection between the Texas "oil Barons"" and the GWB administration is well-known. And then we have the close links between politicians, and, for instance, the armaments industry.
ReplyDeleteSimilar situation in the UK, and indeed across Europe. The problem is that even if legislation banning actve politicians from being involved with business companies could ever be passed and enforced, it wouldn't solve the problem. Politicians, on their "retirement" are rewarded by businesses whose interests they have promoted whilst in oficce, with fat fee-paying "directorships".
As you point out, Jacqui, "deregulation" and in the case of the UK, "privatisation" of hitherto state-run concerns has been a major factor in what is happening. The appalling Margaret Thatcher, whose own family had some business connections worthy of investigation, "sold off", among other things, the rail network, energy supplies and the mail service.
All have been more costly for the user, and less efficient, ever since. In the case of the railways, investment has been so poor that safety has beome an issue. And yet the fat profits which most of these concerns make go somewhere - into the pockets of directors and shareholders of course...
One typical example is the cost of a rail journery from North Wales here to London. It now can run into hundreds of pounds - with the result that I, at least, never go any more (not that I particularly miss the place). The railways are increasingly used by businessmen, whose companies pay the high fares involved, then plough it back by increasing the prices to their customers.
Trains, certainly suggested with the title of this blog, are whole other blog in the future. After 9/11 we shut down the airlines for almost 2 weeks and there was a lot of talk about our over dependence on air transport. I certainly expected congress and the president to urge and approve funding to upgrade our rail system. But no. They just poured billions into the airlines.
ReplyDeleteNow with the price of diesel the trucks are biting the bullet and more and more companies are looking to ship by rail. There has been a tremendous increase in rail transport and they look for it to get even more. But this will mean a huge investment in new track and equipment.
I personally would like to see more alternatives for rail passenger traffic. And in fact New Mexico is pushing the Rail Runner for commuters up and down the I-25 corridor to cut down on automobiles driven by one person. I think planes only make sense if I am going from coast to coast. If I want to go to Denver I think it would be nice to take the train. Now I must drive.
Not sure where to post this link, but its vaguely relevant to something, I suppose...
ReplyDeletehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7623256.stm
God knows where I would fit in all that...;-)
Interestingly enough I read this article earlier today and found it frankly rather depressing. But it seems to make sense. After GW stole the first election in 2000 people became very entrenched as if to question the legality of it at all would bring down the wrath of God upon them.
ReplyDeleteAnd after 9/11 and Gitmo being established even the liberals became more afraid and ergo more entrenched but very secretly so.
I am an idealist that prefers to think all people are opened to logical and reasoned argument but that is definitely not the case. Just look at those that support Palin regardless of what the news reveals about her.
Sadly, Jacqui, I suspect you are right. I've never found many Brits who are particularly open to reasoned argument on politics. There is a depressingly large "hard core" who will stick with their traditional political views regardless of events and arguments.
ReplyDeleteI guess the only way I get away with being elected as a local councillor is that folk know me as the "guy with the fedora with black feathers and the little white dogs", who is always around, and sometimes appears deceptively genial and sane... Whilst they tend not to know my usual opponent at all...
So even on that level, politics is a matter of habit and set opinions.