[Sixstrings]

This thread is a chance for folks to play devil's advocate with their own opinions / choices in life. A chance to admit you do see that other side of an argument that you usually rail against.

For me, the big one is globalism, offshoring, immigration, etc. I rant about it all the time on this forum, and i really do believe the US is going down the tubes because of it.

However.. I can't deny that globalism has done great things for all of us. Something as simple as a cell phone; if we'd always been a protectionist country, with everyone making great union wages, then we might today in 2010 still be stuck with Ma Bell -- paying long distance just to call one county over.

But because of globalism, with all that cheap labor and innovative forces, you can buy a cell phone without a contract at Target for $20. They're now common in the poorest of nations, places that never had landlines in the first place.

Another self-contradiction would be as much as I go on about globalism, I'm actually very interested in other cultures. I come on here and talk about "buying American," and yet I mostly watch foreign films. Been getting into Chinese movies lately; without globalism, that country would still be a communist backwater and never produce anything worth watching.

So in many different ways globalism has made my life more interesting and enjoyable, I can't deny that, so therein lies the contradiction with my political views.

I guess what it comes down to is that globalism is great for everyone but those who lose their livelihood and can't find another. The truth is, it's a very thorny issue -- yes, we want a strong country here at home but is it morally right for our success to be at the expense of the third world having a chance to fully develop and make their contributions to the world?

So that's my self-contradiction, what's yours?

[Keith_McClary]

The truth is, it's a very thorny issue -- yes, we want a strong country here at home but is it morally right for our success to be at the expense of the third world having a chance to fully develop and make their contributions to the world?

So that's my self-contradiction, what's yours?

But as you noted above, if you had protectionism you'd be paying several times more than the rest of the world for US made cellphones, etc. You wouldn't be exporting much at those prices. How would you afford oil imports?

You seem to think the US is doing the world a favor by globalism, but without you there would be a lot more oil and other resources to go around and hence, lower prices, faster growth for the rest.

Off topic already.

[Sixstrings]

But as you noted above, if you had protectionism you'd be paying several times more than the rest of the world for US made cellphones, etc. You wouldn't be exporting much at those prices. How would you afford oil imports?

I'm going further than that and admitting that without the cheap labor and rapid innovation that globalism has enabled, we wouldn't even have the phones we do now. Cheaper and cheaper led to mass market consumption which made increasing leaps of innovation cost effective. But anyway, please don't make me argue pro-globalism too much.

You seem to think the US is doing the world a favor by globalism, but without you there would be a lot more oil and other resources to go around and hence, lower prices, faster growth for the rest.

Well, Nixon did go to China did he not? The US was the only industrial power left standing after WWII. We didn't have to reconstruct Europe with the Marshall Plan. We didn't have to rebuild Japan. And Nixon didn't have to go to China. And we didn't have to lend a hand to post-Soviet Russia; we COULD have capitalized on being the lone remaining superpower. All these things could have turned out differently. I'm surprised how America's historical benevolence has been so totally forgotten.

And while we're at it, why does everyone keep blaming the US for everything when they themselves are sitting comfortable in a first world nation? Maybe Australia and Canada use a bit less energy than we do per capita, but I'm sure it's still a disproportionate share compared to the billions of people not lucky enough to be in the first world.

So that's something that would be nice to see, a bit less US-bashing and some more recognition that these are FIRST WORLD issues, not just limited to the US. Isn't that what all the austerity in Europe is about?

Off topic already.

Well that's ok, just opening up with globalism was bound to invite discussion of it. So do you have any doubts in your opinions, are there any shades of gray or is everything black and white to you?

[Ludi]

Recognizing that civilization isn't the greatest way to live but I depend on it. I've posted a bunch about this over the years so I won't go into details here.

[Pops]

I preach preemptive frugality, learning to enjoy a lower-energy life with less stuff - yet I'm a covetous fool; I gather stuff around me like a stonefly nymph! Tools are my main weakness; wood working tools especially but any tool really; from kitchen appliances to software. I don't think I'm a "hoarder" - I don't have stacks of empty tuna cans anyway, but I do have a stack of used window sash, some rolls of old barbed wire, lots of lumber and a veritable hardware store in my shop... you get the idea.

I guess in the same vein, or not, I'm quite the Luddite - yet I'm an early adopter of tech! I admire and respect people with manual skills and I've never trusted the great interdependent web of modernity but I paid $650 for my first CD player at a time when I had to explain to my friends what "digital" recording even meant; my first cell phone was the size of a carry-on suitcase; I started doing print graphics on a computer back when the nearest service bureau (where, in the day, digital files were "imaged" onto photographic film to be used in the traditional offset printing process) was in San Francisco, 100 miles away from my home - oh yea, that was before Fed Ex - I drove it many times

[efarmer]

I grew up applying microprocessors from the first humble units in middle 1970's and would like a world that is high tech and humble village tech as a hybrid around myself.

Also, I am one of the world's largest midgets and at the same time one of the world's smallest giants.

I like getting eggs out of Ludi's chicken coop but at the same time it wracks me with guilt for stealing.

[Ludi]

Also, I am one of the world's largest midgets and at the same time one of the world's smallest giants.

This is what enables you to be such a stupendous presence in our lives while at the same time being almost imperceptible.

[Keith_McClary]

And we didn't have to lend a hand to post-Soviet Russia

I thought they got robbed blind by capitalist carpetbaggers, they are just now recovering.

So that's something that would be nice to see, a bit less US-bashing and some more recognition that these are FIRST WORLD issues, not just limited to the US. Isn't that what all the austerity in Europe is about?

You usually take a US PoV.

I don't think all FIRST WORLD countries have these issues. Some do a much better job of assimilating immigrants and some don't allow jobs to be exported so easily.

PS: Here's some from John Michael Greer on the main page:

AA: As I came from Europe, do you have any idea why in America everything is bigger? Bigger cars, bigger buildings, everything is bigger…

JMG: Oh yeah, the reason is very simple. Because the United States has a global empire right now. We have garrisons of troops in one hundred forty countries right now. That maintains a state of affairs in which roughly 25 % of all the world’s energy and about 33 % of all of its industrial products come here. That does not happen because the people in other parts of the world do not want them, it happens because we have an empire and because we have slanted the economic playfield. One hundred years ago when Britain had the global empire, London was the place that had the gargantuan this and that.

AA: It was a centre.

JMG: Exactly. It just so happens that now it is America and hundred years from now it will be somewhere else.

AA: Maybe China?

JMG: Probably China. The Chinese are playing their cards very well. They have experience with empires. They have done the thing several times. And we are playing ours very badly.

[Sixstrings]

I don't think all FIRST WORLD countries have these issues.

The issue is disproportionate use of world resources. I guess someone would have to dig up some numbers for us to get to the bottom of this. Europe has more compact cities, much more rail dependence, smaller vehicles. That makes some difference, but every country in the EU is still a first world developed nation with all the high carbon footprint consumer conveniences that we have here in the US.

The bottom line is that while it's true the planet can't sustain Chinese and Indians living like Americans, neither can it sustain them living like Australians, Canadians, or Germans.

So explain to me again why this isn't a first world problem but all America's fault?

[Sixstrings]

..I paid $650 for my first CD player at a time when I had to explain to my friends what "digital" recording even meant; my first cell phone was the size of a carry-on suitcase; I started doing print graphics on a computer back when the nearest service bureau (where, in the day, digital files were "imaged" onto photographic film to be used in the traditional offset printing process) was in San Francisco, 100 miles away from my home - oh yea, that was before Fed Ex - I drove it many times

So one way to look at it is that in all of our lifetimes, we've only seen technology progress faster, cheaper, faster, cheaper. None of us on this forum has ever seen technological progress regress. I don't it's ever gone backward, not since the Dark Ages anyway -- and even they made a full recovery and the Renaissance pushed farther than Roman and Greek technology ever had.

So if progress is all people know their whole lives, then no wonder so many can't imagine it could all "collapse." From your own life experience of never-ending progress, do you ever doubt the Kunstler-type "world made by hand" peak oil doom scenario?

[Ibon]

You know that rather ambiguous opinion most of the world has toward America. In spite of all the flaws that come with being a global empire and in spite of how much we may be hated and despised in the end we have always also been admired for a certain spirit and optimism and ability to lead on new paths with an almost adolescent enthusiasm.

The Chinese may be more efficiently dealing with resource constraints ( a lot more practice managing 1.5 billion people). Europe is also addressing more seriously macro issues.

So it begs the question. Where is the global empires leadership? America is ailing and has lost something of its optimism. We were a can do spirit country when it came to ascending upwards with ever greater wealth and materialism.

Our adolescent enthusiasm as a nation was always based on the belief that things were just going to continue to get exponentially better and better. And now we know they wont. Intuitively we know this. And right now we are bitter.

A weird position to be the worlds richest country, the global empire still but inhabited by a fearful and bitter population. The rest of the world is seeing this less confident America.

You know what Sixstrings. A big focus has to be on America. Like it or not we have been the model. Even the Chinese for all their efficiency have no alternative vision but to bait their citizenry with a Chinese twist of the American dream of better and more gadgets and toys as the reward to hard work.

So the world watches. Uneasy. If America wants to be the leader it has always been it can. It really can lead again. It can lead us by being the first to fail.

I speak these words as one who is American and has lived more than half my life outside of America. I am 52 years old.

[Newfie]

For me there are plenty of self-contradictions. Upon reflection most are because what works on a macro scale does not make sense on a micro scale. What is good for humanity does not work to make my off spring part of the survivor crowd.

1. I see us polluting the world with our waste, yet I can see no way of stopping my own contribution. If we are, as I see it, beyond the tipping point then there is no going back, no saving humanity. I can only save my own and the best way to do that involves using up more than my fair share of resources.

2. I see human over population as the biggest problem we face, but I can see no viable argument to tell any one person "Don't have kids."

There are more but they don't come to mind in a cogent way at the moment.

[Sixstrings]

A weird position to be the worlds richest country, the global empire still but inhabited by a fearful and bitter population. The rest of the world is seeing this less confident America.

"World's richest country" is a bit misleading -- the country with the richest 0.1% is more accurate. And China's right behind us; I read an article the other day that said half of the world's richest self-made women are Chinese.

So yes it can seem weird to hear all this economic gloom and doom coming from folks in the "world's richest country," but fact is the AVERAGE American is less well off than the average Canadian, German, or Swede. Plus we have no universal healthcare, so if you get down on your luck in the US you're really screwed. "World's richest nation" is meaningless if you can't afford to see a doctor or get medication.

You know what Sixstrings. A big focus has to be on America. Like it or not we have been the model.

I generally agree with everything you said. My point was really just that let's not pretend resource depletion is all America's fault -- I've been to Europe, I've seen how they live, and it's a high-resource lifestyle that can only exist at the expense of billions of other people.

As for being a model.. I'm not really sure if America is all that special or if Hollywood just has everyone brainwashed.

[JJ]

Also, I am one of the world's largest midgets and at the same time one of the world's smallest giants.

This is what enables you to be such a stupendous presence in our lives while at the same time being almost imperceptible.

I wanted to use that as the quote of the day but I couldn't remember who he was....

[springcreekfarmer]

I have many contradictions but here are a few I'll mention.

I used to drive a Honda CRV, now I drive a half ton 4 x 4 pickup. I can't raid auctions and play around with homesteading and prepare for the future in a Honda even IF I use a trailer. I also drive less these days.

I used to rely solely on solar power for my day to day usage in my barns but now I've had a 100 amp grid connection installed this summer. I can't prepare for the future on solar power because the cost is still too great. I've also come to the conclusion that it is nearly impossible to be a lone survialist in my neck of the woods and I've been here all of my life so I should know. The community aspect simply isn't here. If the grid goes down...being the only person around with solar power isn't going to help me if I get robbed and murdered for what I have. I might as well put that money some where else. If we can keep the grid going, that would be a better option in my area.

I used to obsess with preparation related to peak oil fallout but now I take life a little more day to day. I have worked very hard all of my life and at 45 I have no debt, a farm and many skills as MY prep for post peak mayhem. I have a strong work ethic as my insurnace policy. I still prep but at a pace with more living involved than suffering now. If I have to, I'd prefer to suffer later. I could die tommorrow.

I don't actively try to live off the land but instead, I spend time with my 4 year old, play my guitar once in a while and keep my eyes open and my mouth shut. I have a fairly secure day job so we'll see if that pension comes or not but in any case I feel ready for what's coming down the pike. My point is, there will be nothing for me to do at that moment of mayhem but improvise anyway. Around here...if the grid goes down for any considerable length of time, we're toast anyway and I'm now settled with that reality.

I'm using the rest of my time left making sure my 4 year old son has a great childhood and yet learns all the skills necessary to live by his wits. I'm also going to enjoy my life while minimizing harm to others and the earth. Is there any more logical way, really, to trudge forward knowing what the future holds for humanity?

[ralfy]

Same as what Six Strings wrote: I am part of a global middle class that earns US$10 to 20 a day (or more) and makes up only around 15 pct of the world population (most people worldwide earn only around $2 a day). The only reason why we are able to maintain a middle class lifestyle (which includes being able to access this board) is because we rely on the same global capitalist economy that has led to peak oil.

One time, I created a thread about ecological footprints, and asked doomers to calculate such. We discovered that even a doomstead lifestyle will require up to two earths if everyone in the world lived in such a way. The implication is that even if the middle class cuts down their consumption rate by 50 to 80 pct and everyone lived such a powered-down lifestyle, we'd still be at overshoot. And the global population will increase further, not only because people want to have children but because they want to live longer, too.