Our leaders, what are they good for? I always complain about
how our political leaders do nothing to help us. They always seem to me to take
baby steps when a good idea comes up, and they always seem to react too slowly
when something dangerous presents itself. They spend our money foolishly. A
large portion of them seem to work only on self-enrichment and
self-aggrandizement. The world is
rushing off to hell in a handbasket, and they, after all, are in charge of
day-to-day operations. Maybe it’s a fair complaint, but maybe it’s possible
that they do all that they can do, all that is in their power. Clumsily,
usually, but maybe I’m overestimating their ability to affect change or control
events. Perhaps it’s all out of control for another reason altogether.
Question: who performs the actions that really form, or
could affect change in, the world?
It occurred to me that the flow of history may be formed by
a much larger group of entities, including individuals and groups from not only
politics, but also from the business community and from society itself. It may
be formed by the actions of selfish, local entities of all types, acting individually
and reacting to the same or similar stimuli.
Identifying these groups gets out of hand quickly. It doesn’t
have to be limited to political or economic groups that wield real power. It
wouldn’t be only governments and corporations. Any individual who is truly rich
would certainly qualify. So would powerful families. But why stop there?
It might be all of us that share collective guilt for the
mess our society is in. I mean the society of human beings here on the earth.
Autonomous humans, acting in what they perceive to be their own best interests,
doing things.
Things like eating steaks; electing foolish politicians;
having children; playing golf; discarding unpleasant facts; keeping a lawn;
driving an automobile; embracing supernaturalism; flying commercial; fighting
zero-sum battles for resources; backing wars; embracing nationalism. Just about
everything that we do has a consequence in environmental terms, it all has some
impact on the future.
What would it take to impose order on this chaos?
Authoritarian solutions always seem to bring their own chaos, becoming
counterproductive rather quickly. Democracy can’t do it, because it lacks the
power to accomplish anything that would be unpopular with powerful interests or
a recalcitrant general public. Enlightened rulers come along occasionally, but
they are usually treated with love but not respect by their unenlightened
subjects. Could we turn the world into one vast Denmark? Probably not, because
there would be too many competing groups that would be too suspicious of one
another.
I wonder how they did it on Star Trek. That Star Trek
universe is certainly a dream of order, until the Ferengi or the Borg show up,
anyway. Left to its own devices, the Star Trek world is a peaceful, prosperous
place. Everyone is working, and happily, too. People have children. Diversity
is embraced. There’s general health and income security. The environment seems
clean and healthy. There doesn’t seem to be much of a government at all. But
didn’t they build that world only after some vast military/environmental
catastrophe? After enormous violence and loss of life? Maybe they started an
authoritarian technocracy of philosopher-scientists. That might work in a
fictional narrative, but it wouldn’t in the real world. Absolute power really
does corrupt, absolutely. We’ve seen that happen often enough.
The only possible conclusion in all of this is darkly
pessimistic. The train is out of control, speeding up at an alarming rate, and
closing in on the final collision with the inevitable solid object. The current
plan is obviously to push the pieces forward slightly from where they were
yesterday, and I don’t think that anyone believes that that will work out well
at all.
So, pessimism then. Not a bad way to go, after all. If
anything but the worst happens, it’ll be a pleasant surprise!
No comments:
Post a Comment