Here today, gone tomorrow (hopefully back again).

[Necron2.0]

A topic came up in another thread that I would like to explore with you guys. I chose not to post this question there, partly because I don’t want to drag that thread “off topic” (if that were even possible), but also because I would like to explore this rationally without overly much drama and emotion (again, if possible).

I have said (multiple times actually) that where we are now, is where we have been, and where we will be again. I say this because I have read something of history. Certain social groups, which I shall not name (and probably aren’t the ones you’re thinking of) have over time gained and lost power, both political and social. This has been going on since pre-history. There is no direction to this change – it simply waxes and wanes. This is why I say the very notion of social progression toward some “enlightened state” is a singularly large, steaming pile of horse flop.

Now, let us forget the past for a moment, and consider current events. There has been a lot of hoopla over perceived social progress of late. On what side of these issues your opinions fall is completely irrelevant to this discussion. The point is … in fifty years (and most likely less) all of those social “advances” are going to be gone, and probably many others, perhaps going all the way back to suffrage. Why do I say this? Look at the news. Pay attention to current events. See what is happening in the world. Understand what is going on in your own back yard.

Western society is collapsing. Western society is not producing.

First and foremost, we are not producing people. In a world with a population of 7+ billion, and expanding every day, populations of those born in the west are decreasing, according to demographic studies. This means (by definition) the world is filling up with people from cultures that are most likely misogynistic, homophobic, and if not expressly anti-democratic, then at least lacking the nurtured cultural respect for democracy that the West has developed over centuries. This impacts you. This impacts you today, because chances are some of these folks countermanded your vote in your most recent political election. Now is that a giant evil conspiracy? No, it’s simple math (or chemistry, if you prefer). The more you dilute a solution with something else, the weaker its potency.

Second, the west is not producing materially. I don’t even have to talk about this. You should already know it. If you don’t, it’s easy enough to see – go to your closet and see who makes your stuff. The world’s economic power is simply running away from the west, and with it goes standards of living and educational opportunities.

Lastly, political power is shifting. This is actually just a special case of the second plank, really. Today political power and economic power are almost the exact same thing. Back in the 60’s and 70’s the US alone had the political muscle to send its armies, with its most sophisticated weapons, to beat the unholy crap out of a small and largely unarmed country of rice farms. The US did this for 20 years (depending on how you gage the war) and there wasn’t a single power outside of the US that had the clout to say boo about it. Today, the US couldn’t even think about doing something like that, no country in the west could. Now you may say that’s great, and from a moral perspective I would completely agree with you, but from a purely analytical perspective what this means is power has shifted out of the US. Where did it go? It didn’t go to Western Europe. The only places it could have gone are to Asia, the Middle East, and Easter Europe – and if you’re a woman or gay, those places are NOT your friends.

This is why I say we will be here again, because we’re not likely to stay here for long. Hopefully we’ll get back around again, though. Now, could I be wrong? Sure, I could be doing the back-stroke in an undulating ocean of BS. I just don’t think I am.

[Wildeybeast]

To say we aren't producing is little misleading. We don't produce much in the way of raw goods (unless you happen to be in Germany) but the companies paying for the production are Western. To suggest that transfer of production to developing nations is a sign of decline would suggest that we had no control over it. Quite the opposite, but the companies paying for the production are overwhelmingly western. To suggest that transfer of production to developing nations is a sign of decline would suggest that we had no control over it. Quite the opposite, we have deliberately contracted out labour to areas where it is cheaper and have instead focused on less 'tangible' economic areas. We are still at the forefront of development and innovation. With the exception of Japan and S Korea, the rest of the world doesn't hold a candle to the US and Europe in terms of scientific & technological advances. Two recent examples off the top of my head - graphene and the human genome project, both of which have the potential to shape the future of human society for some considerable time.

Your suggestion that the change of political power can be seen in declining military power is also mistaken. The USSR provided a continuous rival to the US, whilst the Chinese also demonstrated in the Korean War that they are perfectly capable of not letting the US have their own way. Whilst the US may seem have enjoyed a brief period of unchallenged military dominance since the collapse of the Soviet Union, that is only because no one has ever decided to challenge it. They have deliberately chosen conflicts where they knew there would be no serious objections from other 'superpowers' and ones where there was some gain for them in it. No one gave a stuff about Afghanistan or Iraq or Lbyia. By contrast, Chinese and Russian support for Iran and Syria has prevented any military intervention there.

You are correct that the balance of power is changing, as it always does, but your idea that Western civilisation is doomed at the hands of uncivilised barbarians is overly dramatic and over simplified. People painted the Greek resistance to the Persians exactly the same way, but it wasn't and nor is this.

[eldargal]

Yep, really don't agree. In general the trend across human history has been one of gradual improvement, even if things often fall back significantly we tend to bounce back in time.

As to economic might, it is true the balance in changing but to view it as a zero-sum game is erroneous. The great strength of capitalism is that, unlike mercantilism for example, it creates wealth rather than viewing it as static. As the developing world continues to develop it creates more wealth, it isn't just shifted around from developed to developing. As Wildey says, the developed world is still at the forefront of R&D, knowledge, finance etc.

If anything we are headed towards a more equitable global system, even if it is happening slowly, where poorer countries aren't seen just as resourced to be exploited. There will be set backs, of course, but I doubt we will see a major, Dark Age style reversion in the foreseeable future. This isn't an optimistic view by the way, this is a realistic view. By virtually every measure the past two hundred years have been one of immense improvement in the standard of living humanity enjoys and not just in the West. Two hundred years ago 99% of the population lived in poverty, now anywhere between one seventh and a quarter depending on how you measure it.

[Necron2.0]

To say we aren't producing is little misleading. We don't produce much in the way of raw goods (unless you happen to be in Germany)
And Germany, by and large, does not outsource. Coincidence? Not at all.


but the companies paying for the production are Western.
No. They are not. They are multi-nationals, whose main corporate offices happen to be Western … for now. People always miss this fact. There is precious little tying these companies to the west, and those ties are eroding. Just because the hurricane hasn’t hit you yet doesn’t mean the wind isn’t blowing.


To suggest that transfer of production to developing nations is a sign of decline would suggest that we had no control over it.
And are you suggesting that we do? Money is in control. Nothing else is.


… we have deliberately contracted out labour to areas where it is cheaper and have instead focused on less 'tangible' economic areas.
Again, no. We outsourcing management at the same time we’re outsourcing labor. We’re also in-sourcing. If present trends do not change, keeping corporate HQ’s in the company’s parent country will be superfluous fairly quickly. Again, just because we’re not there yet doesn’t mean we’re not headed there.

A really, really basic question you should be asking yourself is why is Europe in recession? Why is the economic recovery in the US so sluggish? I'm saying right now that these aren't oddities - they're trends. We are literally witnessing power (economic, social, political, whatever) shifting out of the west. Right now, you are watching it happen.


We are still at the forefront of development and innovation.
Today, sure. What happens when the educational system collapses due to lack of funding? What happens in the next few years when the developing nations have a more highly educated cadre of elite than the west does?


Your suggestion that the change of political power can be seen in declining military power is also mistaken.
Military power has been somewhat superfluous since the about the mid 90’s. Economists and security experts have been saying since the 80’s that future battlefields would be economic. Of course, when they said this, they thought we’d be losing to Japan and S. Korea. They had no idea we’d be losing to China, India and the soon-to-be former Soviet Union.

The example I gave illustrated political power, not military. The US waging a 20 year war against a backward third world nation would simply be impossible today because we do not have the international political power to do it.


You are correct that the balance of power is changing, as it always does, but your idea that Western civilisation is doomed at the hands of uncivilised barbarians is overly dramatic and over simplified.
I didn’t say they were “uncivilized” but they do not share our political and social views, so that the recent political and social victories of the moment are probably fleeting. Still, you do give me a moment of pause. I wonder if the Romans realized their civilization would collapse when the hired the Visigoths to guard their gates.

Again, we’ve been here before. ;)


Yep, really don't agree. In general the trend across human history has been one of gradual improvement, even if things often fall back significantly we tend to bounce back in time.
Well … two things. First, define improvement. We don’t have as many monarchies as we used to, but we still have dictatorships, tyrannies and the like.

Second, “things often fall back significantly [but] we tend to bounce back in time.” So what you’re saying is, “we’ve been here before, and we’ll probably be here again.” I’m having a severe case of Déjà vu. ;)


As to economic might, it is true the balance in changing but to view it as a zero-sum game is erroneous.
Not sums … percentages. Regardless of the sums, the percentages are shifting.


There will be set backs, of course, but I doubt we will see a major, Dark Age style reversion in the foreseeable future.
I hope you’re right, but I’m not optimistic. The Visigoths are at the gate, after all.


Two hundred years ago 99% of the population lived in poverty, now anywhere between one seventh and a quarter depending on how you measure it.
I’m not sure I believe that statistic, but even so, two words: “Arab Spring.” Fundamentally it happened because of a lack of employment. I guess another two words would be "Somali Pirates." In general piracy is on the rise across the globe, and usually that's not a sign of full employment nor political stability.

Again, we’ve got 7+ billion people on this rock, and growing every day, and we’re having troubles employing them all. Entire populations are moving to the west, looking for work. They are bringing with them they’re cultural norms and their political views. These norms and view mostly conflict with the traditions of the west. This means, fundamentally, that the past 200 years ... are history. Today and tomorrow are going to be different.

[Denzark]

If more people were in indentured servitude a la Downton Abbey, there would be less unemployment. Also, if we treated pirates how we did 200 years ago, there would be less piracy.

[eldargal]

Fewer monarchies is one of the areas where we've gone backwards certainly, a few more restorations should sort that out though...

As to percentages, yes, the developed world (or West if you want to be simplistic and wrong...) economic percentage is shrinking, slowly, but the size of the pool is growing. To paraphrase one of the greatest political minds known to man (Lord Vetinari) the slice of the pie is smaller but the pie is much larger.

By improvement I mean standard of living, food security, personal security, human rights etc. all the standard measures. In every measure there has been a massive global improvement over the past century (two really but a lot of people like to ignore the nineteenth because it was focused on the West)

The Visigoths are at the gates with a cart full of cheap rubbish (that we designed) to sell us.;)

The Arab Spring and Somali pirates aren't particularly indicative. At a global level things have never been better, even if many areas lag behind the West. Also to argue the Arab Spring was caused primarily about unemployment is such a gross simplification I don't know where to begin to address it. One of the route causes of Somali piracy was that foreign fishing fleets destroyed the fish stock and the fisherman turned to piracy. While serious it is hardly endemic either, far less significant even that Oriental piracy in the nineteenth century.


Again, we’ve got 7+ billion people on this rock, and growing every day, and we’re having troubles employing them all. Entire populations are moving to the west, looking for work. They are bringing with them they’re cultural norms and their political views. These norms and view mostly conflict with the traditions of the west. This means, fundamentally, that the past 200 years ... are history. Today and tomorrow are going to be different.
That is a gross simplification and incredible hyperbole. According to the UN (http://www.unfpa.org/pds/migration.html) 3% of the worlds population live outside their country of origin, that is not 'whole populations'. Many of those do head to the West, many more stay in neighbouring countries. If you actually look at lists of nations ranked by foreign births the spread of migrant populations is spread relatively evenly accross developed and developing nations. The USA bears in the brunt in terms of raw numbers but it amounts to around 12% of the population, Jordan in contrast has nearly 40% largely due to influxes from Syria and so forth.

[Kirsten]

It simply isn't true that western civilisations are about to be taken over by barbarity that will reset everyone's rights.

[Wildeybeast]

A really, really basic question you should be asking yourself is why is Europe in recession?

Europe is in recession because someone had the bright idea that a unified currency without unified economic controls was a good thing. In short, the PIGS spent well beyond their means and failed utterly to control their economies, whilst assuming the Germans would pick up the tab. The Germans have, which is the only reason several European nations haven't filed for bankruptcy, but I'm not sure I see your point. That several European nations, specifically those without traditionally strong economies have ballsed it up for everyone else is not an clear indicator of the Fall of the West. Those European nations outside the Euro (with the exception of Britain) have been largely unaffected by the global financial crisis (like Canada) and the Germans have ridden the storm because they had a sensible economic policy.