Food
production forces property relations on the species, because it is based on
resource utilization of longer duration than human lifespans, while
simultaneously providing advantage to larger local property-owning groups. In
evolutionary terms these bedrock correlates of food production are a constant
basis for inequality within and between polities. Unequal access to resources
is therefore an unalterable and inevitable accompaniment of mankind’s
adaptation to food production, especially agriculture.
Ronald Cohen
There
seems to be no objection to the view that one of the characteristics of the
state—and perhaps the most important one—is the existence of classes.
Henri
Claessen and Peter Skalnik
The state can wait. Never were truer words
spoken. Yet never were those true words more conditional than now.
The state is very old. We can trace its
ancestry over perhaps five millennia, though its current national form (western
version) is a mere baby, clocking in at around one hundred years old (depending
on whom you ask). The ‘well-trained’ (indoctrinated) modern western mind
reflexively thinks of The State (in contradistinction to “the state” of this
article) in terms of taxation, welfare and democracy, but these are merely its
latest fashion accessories and have altered next to nothing of its core
extractive dynamic (more on which below). The state has only recently been able
to afford these Luxuries of the People thanks to two things; cheap oil and
modern technology. As cheap oil dwindles,
and as Economic Growth and debt-money evaporate in front of our media’s mostly blinkered
eyes, so the ‘real’ state increasingly reveals its spots. First casualties of
this latest financial debacle are, or course, democracy, education and health
care, peripheral elements. Protected at all costs are the core elements;
money-system control, debt obligations to the owners of capital, and state
force (armies and police). In other words, the tools that sustain elitism.
(By the way, when I say “the state”, I refer
to that dynamic concealed behind the
infamous The State vs. The Market Show most left/right wing loyalists and
ideologues get so hot and bothered about. I think of that dynamic as elitist
exploitation of the majority, as hinted at above.)
The state can wait, yes indeed. It controls
both money and force and has exquisite propaganda and monitoring technologies
at its disposal. It has guaranteed our meek conformity through its money and
mind-numbing education systems, alongside a few carefully nurtured legacy
religious platitudes (work before pleasure, work is not fun). It is prepared to
torture and kill, lie, cheat and steal to stay alive and kicking. It will take
your property from you, impoverish and imprison you, rob you and throw you in
jail for the crime of being robbed, and keep on doing so for as long as it takes.
The state can wait. While we protest and
chat, bicker and squabble, strike, foment and pontificate, the state just
waits. It knows full well hippies become dentists, radicals die off, that
fringe thinkers are ignored. The state grinds on.
But it cannot be forever. The state is
mortal, is subject to change, just as is the sun.
Firstly, dearest ladies and gentlemen, we
are it. We daily co-create the state through our interwoven interbeing.
State arises from us like heat from fire. It is made of us, we of it. We
are the state prisons of our minds. Therefore, when we change, so too must the
state, but the change must be profound and broad indeed for the state’s
fundamental elitist dynamic to change. This simple truth is both a liberating
and bitterly sobering reality, for until we want deep change and know how to effect it, we cannot
help but perpetuate the very dynamic which is killing us.
And besides the state’s all-too-human fabric
and its subjectivity to change, there are the not inconsiderable matters of the
perverse fantasy of Perpetual Growth, and the game-changing issue of
technological unemployment. The state cannot wisely and humanely deal with
these because it is (we are) too elitist, too hierarchical to react
intelligently, wisely. This rigid hierarchical structure means state needs (we
need), by definition, a large pool of
poorly paid grunts to exploit, to ride atop, to do better than, to donate
clothes to, to rape, belittle and abuse over time. And the inverse; leaders to look up to, to be guided and instructed by. From rigid, class-based
elitism only this structure, this dynamic can emerge. A fundamentally elitist
dynamic can give rise to society of no other shape.
And we have to Grow, forever transform ‘idle’
resources into all important Money and Jobs, more and more, faster and faster!
The entire universe is a mere sector of the economy, it says so in state-sanctioned economics
text books. Only now there are too few idle resources to exploit, and there
appears to be no new economic domain left to expand into. We are learning
(state is learning) resources are not truly idle, that forests do useful things
like provide oxygen and process our waste, that fish feed us, that soil
fertility must be protected and nourished, and so on.
And do we (The People, the state) truly want
absolutely everything we do to be governed by the economic domain, by market
forces? Absolutely everything? If economic growth is not allowed to stop, will
we one day pay cash for every breath we take? Every friend we make? Our very
biology makes wanting this bizarre outcome impossible, ladies and gentlemen,
for, more than we need iPods and
sneakers, we need friendship, trust, community, love and respect to
be real. Paid for, they can
only be cheap imitations of their real selves. Seen from this perspective, we
see that money impoverishes. Economics must be released from modern money’s
grip, challenged to rethink it.
So let’s step back a little and look at how
we got here, short form. It all ‘starts’ before the state, which means before the
beginnings of the institutionalised hierarchical management of society and
economic production. Following Charles Eisenstein’s analysis (which I find very
sound), humans got the hierarchical ball rolling by acting on the idea of
causing to grow in their preferred local vicinity the fruit and veg they liked,
and domesticating animals most useful to them (a.k.a. farming). This sets up
the ‘controlled’ home domain which must then be protected from the ravages of
the ‘wild’. It brings into being the data and technology needed to begin to perceive
ourselves as ‘masters of nature’, to control variables, to encourage the wanted
and discourage the unwanted (progress). This is the ‘origin’ of the split of
Universe into clearly demarcated Good and Evil, Us and Them domains. From this
co-created situation, the fiercely egalitarian mode of the hunter gatherer
steadily diminishes in efficacy. Instead of storing our meat in the bellies of
our brothers (sharing), we hoard (in ‘defiance’ of nature’s rhythms) in clay
pots, barns, salt, store rooms, fridges, made by our own hand or purchased with
money we earned. Instead of being jacks-of-all-trades, specialisation starts to
make more sense, and out of this new soil, this new social weave, enabled and
freed up by the new circumstances, alpha-male types now find lasting purchase
and become chieftains, fighter-types become specialised soldiers dependent on
the chief for their special positions. That is, where before too egotistical an
attitude could get you killed for putting yourself before the group, it is now
a ticket to ‘riches’ in the new social arrangement. Animist ‘superstition’
becomes religion, religion becomes specialised, produces its own hierarchies of
priestly classes, which join forces with the military hierarchies, and thus
emerges the early state.
What earlier was unquestioning faith in nature’s
bounty (and capriciousness, to stretch the metaphor to breaking), morphs into
‘state’ manipulated dogma which must be adhered to. The pyramidal structure
stratifies into classes, with power and control increasingly concentrated to
the upper class, the elite. The state takes centuries to find its feet, but its
groping experimentation is always about improving control and effectively
controlling needed expansion, since ‘out there’ are weird enemies who will kill
us and take our stuff if we don’t get them first. And because population
control is not something humans do willingly, and because the founding paradigm
is increasingly competent technological ‘mastery’ of nature, as population
grows, so the expanse of the state’s domain must grow to please that
population, keep them healthy enough to provide the soldiers, farmers,
scientists and artists the elite exploit in the name of the state. Hence wars
of conquest and expansion. Hence perpetual growth as a necessary function, an
inescapable emergent property of the dynamic of ‘mastering nature’ via farming
and property as they give rise to specialisation and state.
The money system currently dominant across
the planet is a growth-backed money system, which is hardly surprising given
the above analysis, since it serves the state’s dynamic so neatly. To create
money ‘from nothing’ as an interest bearing loan (P < P+I – or, Principle is
less than Principle+Interest) is to set up the dynamic of a Ponzi scheme, a money-growth whirlwind which collapses if it is not growing. When
there are too few people willing to co-create new money (with the banks) by
going into debt, which new money can then pay off the interest owed on existing debts after filtering
through the economy as wages and purchasing power, then the ongoing repayment
of old debts becomes the too-quick shrinking of the money supply. If not
checked, this initiates a positive feedback loop of fear and hoarding, fearful
sentiment spreads and the problem gets worse, as taking on debt (money
creation) is taking on risk. Debt-repayment is money destruction, as it is
designed to be: the loaned principle is fully expunged upon repayment, and only the
interest ‘earned’ by the lender remains in circulation. Thus only a small
fraction of the loaned (created) money remains, i.e., a shrinking money supply.
So when no one is borrowing in an interest-bearing debt-money system, the
economy stops functioning as the (credit) money supply starts shrinking. Economic
growth is thus the very air of our money system, its gold. If it is not growing, it is collapsing.
But we have to grow. We don’t want to die. We
don’t want to decay. We want to win, control all variables, stay forever young,
do more and more faster and faster, never grow old, never give in, never
surrender. So we want the state. We are the state. We fear loss of control, are
now stiff with fear, pyramids of calcified fear unable to let go and accept our mortality.
In our paralysis we can imagine no other way; growth or death.
The state cannot wait. It has to grow and
grow and grow, it may not sit idly and enjoy the view…
But into which new space can it grow, what
energy and resources should it manufacture into More State, and inspired by
what vision? What is your vision of a happy/healthy/good-enough life? Bigger
Better Faster 4Ever? Or something less frantic? What would your answer have
been ten years ago?
The state can envision only increasing
control and expansion, since that is its core operating dynamic. It fears loss
of control, fears anarchy (its shadow-self), fears ‘the wild’, demonises weeds,
sloth, the ‘unearned’ and ‘simple’ pleasure of just being. Were it possible for
the state project to ‘succeed’ as it envisages, it would produce the nightmare
of an even more atomised society in which each atom-citizen can take no step,
draw no breath, make no friend without first filling out a form and then
parting with money for the privilege of living. Dystopia is State-Money-Economics
everywhere, as far as the eye can see. Cynicism, suspicion, and fear fill every
heart.
If the wasteland of total state victory I sketch, if the prospect of fascism or some other dread dictatorship crushes your hope,
this is proof of the state’s necessary transformation, since you and I are the
state. It is proof we the state want change, deep and broad. The right
questions will put us on our preferred path,
the right perspective of what we are and what makes us healthy will generate
change. The right questions will reveal to us the possible imminence of a new
way forward, a new way of (inter)being society, of co-creating a sustainable
domain as a dynamic and emergent partnership between all social and
environmental forces (which must include friction for there to be creation, but
more sensibly and maturely than our current state of affairs).
That said, I ought to point out that some
remnant of the state will always be with us, some set of institutions and
mechanisms for managing the commons, though we might choose to call that
Democracy or something else when the time comes. However, in some fashion,
state-like apparatuses will always exist. Just as there is nothing ‘wrong’ with
anarchy, so there is nothing ‘wrong’ with hierarchy. New perspectives of each
are emerging simply because change is the only constant, but the global
paradigm change currently being born through us is unprecedentedly difficult
and will be very rocky indeed. So I would say we are going through the pain of
birthing some new hybrid, not a return to some romantically imagined idyll. It
will help to remember that our only enemy is our very human tendency not to see
when we are projecting unresolved internal immaturities ‘out’ onto ‘alien’
others (onto the ‘elite’ for example).
So, because you despair and fear state
dystopia, there is hope. Darkness engenders light engenders dark. Horribly,
many are suffering and can see no way out. Horribly, there is much tragedy and
destruction to come. Because we are the state, we think in state terms, imagine
in its language and imagery, are afraid of the dark spaces we do not quite know
how to light up (e.g. anarchy and direct democracy, peer-to-peer networks, flat power distribution, local currencies, the ‘poverty’ of
steady-state and de-growth economics), so must be awoken and driven to new
creativity and experimentation by deep shock. That shock is happening now, rapidly in historical
terms, though in modern media terms almost imperceptibly, in that the state/money
system itself is not questioned, and radical ideas are given no space in its
outlets (though even this is changing, as we change and want to learn). The
state is/we are in fact unravelling very rapidly, and newly rich soil is being
created by that ‘decay’. From it we will emerge into and become The New.