Prometheus Speaks: War And A Piece (Of The Action) (originally published 09/24/93)
So here's my advice for the day: read a newspaper. No doubt you'll
be completely unsurprised at the amount of violence and general nastiness
that comes up in the pages. I'd like to think that a good chunk of those
problems are caused by really poor communication skills... but sometimes
my pessimistic side blames it on human nature; a not entirely fair assumption,
to be sure. After all, who can analyze human nature objectively? Think about
that one...
Back to the point I was going to make. Violence and competition are
inescapable components of life; or at least it certainly seems that way.
Capitalism is taking root in the world at large, and the old ways are rapidly
falling prey to the new, as it should be. It's an easy thing to attribute
this sort of thing to a general abstract concept like "human nature",
especially when it happens on such a large scale. There is, however, a vital
distinction that must be made before one can make such a generalization - this
being of course, the difference between the purpose and the means.
War is, of course, the means. It's not exactly proper to say that
man has a "warlike" nature, though the competetive element is still there.
But to say that war is a part of human nature is to blur the line between
what man does and why he does it. War is only a method by which we settle
our differences, albeit violently. Settling conflict can be, and is, done in
much easier ways, although most often and most unfortunately, violence is the
quickest route to getting things done. The important thing to note here is
that I merely said quickest - I did not say most efficient, or most moral,
or anything else. A favorite quote of mine from the late Isaac Asimov claims,
"Violence is the last resort of the incompetent." When he was asked then
why there was so much violence in the world, he simply replied "Because there
is so much incompetence."
A very cool guy. He is sorely missed.
At any rate, this is meant to be a forward looking article, so I'm
done being reflective. I envision lots of interesting things happening in
the not-so-distant future. In this past decade, we've seen more revolutionary
political change than we ever have before - the Soviet Union, Germany
reunifying, and now peace in the Middle East. Why is this happening? What
events are occurring in the world to force these people to change their ways?
Easily the most prominent of these changes is the economic situation of
the world; the shift towards a global economy is a hard one to make cleanly.
Agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and other
changes in trade status are causing major shifts in the precarious balance
of economic power; though to call it a balance doesn't accurately reflect
the American domination of the world market - even though the United States
is not the fastest growing economy in the world (I think China is now), it
is still the richest and most influential.
So economy is one of, if not the biggest factor in this increasing
social change. Another good one is the increasing pace of technology. When
the coup was occurring in Russia, the most important task was to keep
information circulating, to prevent the usurping heads of state from clamping
down on the press and controlling all sources of information. Literally, the
battle was lost to the instigators of the coup because of the fax machine.
A country liberated itself because of a _fax machine_. That's a statement to
be reckoned with.
The realization to be made from all this is a fairly obvious one. What
is the most powerful driving force in the world today? Who is responsible for
all this societal change? Why is all this happening? The answer is simple.
The most influential force in the world, as it has been for some time now, is
the consumer. Yes, the consumer. What the consumer does determines the fate
of the world. No kidding. Capitalism, the winning ideology, says that the
market is moved by the consumer, and competition is the only way to woo him.
If you don't believe me, pick up any macroeconomic text and look up the
percent of national income consumer spending take up - if I recall properly,
it's something like 60% to 70%. Really.
The role of the consumer shifts dramatically in a world economy - as
new markets open up overseas, opportunities arise for all classes in every
country. China appears to be the most promising of these unexplored economic
territories - over a billion new consumers just waiting to spend their cash
on foreign goods. The importance of this fundamental shift is not being lost
on our world leaders. Well... most of them anyway. No economic package
is going to get our country back on its feet again - at least not until
we recognize that we aren't the only economy out there. Perhaps NAFTA will
change that, perhaps it won't. But one can definitely emphasize the importance
of it, no matter where one thinks it may go.
I envision this fundamental shift manifesting in a very unorthodox
way. The nations are already beginning to exhibit signs of it - we're moving
away from using "war" to settle our differences. As I said before, the reasons
are two: technology has advanced to the point where we can easily conduct a
war from our living room - there's President Clinton who's so fond of using
remote Tomohawk missles to bomb selective targets. War is becoming remote,
but not only that; it's becoming impractical. Why waste the resources? The
other reason is economic; we can now conduct our settling business in the
marketplace - the conflict is moving from the battlefield to the mall. Red
China is building a _mall_ on the spot where Mao Tse Tung hid during their
war years. If that's not a sign of the future, I don't know what is.
Back To Top
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.