More Than a Crisis of Credit, a Crisis of Conscience

This little video helps explain the credit crisis in terms easy to understand and cool to watch. In fact, this project was completed as part of the author's PhD thesis in visual art, but that doesn't in any way detract from the message or distract the viewer. If anything, the awesome graphics make learning about the credit crisis, well, kinda fun! How whacked out is that?!?
Here's to simple ways of raising consciousness.
Enjoy,
O.M.

The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.

The Best Is Yet To Come

I keep hearing the following phrase, "America's best days lie ahead." President Obama has said as much, and today Warren Buffet, America’s most beloved investor and resident financial genius, said precisely that in his annual letter to the shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway. In an introduction to his report that can only be referred to as a polemic, Buffet railed against ill-conceived business practices, foolish federal regulators and the twin pups of industry and state government who are now suckling their federal mommy dry. Buffet did all this in less than a page and with what seems to be a comfortable, well-worn sense of humor. It is precisely his demeanor, exuding experience and common sense, that lends credibility to his comment. Even if I wanted to I couldn't really sit here and pretend that I am capable of arguing with Warren Buffet over whether or not the American financial system will rebound or reach new heights. What I can comment on is, should it?

Before you close your browser and delete my email from your address book, let me explain what I mean. In my last post I shared my thoughts on the Story of Stuff, a short video on how much Americans consume, communicated in a way that is neither patronizing nor insulting. For those who didn’t read the post or watch the video (family members I’m looking at you!), Story of Stuff narrator Annie Leonard explains how and why we produce and consume at the exorbitant rates that we do. My point, the one that’s got you debating my sanity and/or allegiance to the US, is that perhaps returning America to its economic dominance is not what’s best for Americans or anybody else. Our high rates of production are causing severe environmental degradation, increases in worldwide poverty, and will continue to cause civil strife and conflict, likely at steadily increasing rates. When viewed through that prism, perhaps a resurgent American economy isn’t such a great thing after all. That is, of course, unless it can be modified so as to be less destructive and meet people’s needs in a more sustainable fashion. But let’s just assume for a moment that such a modification isn’t likely to occur. Now here’s where things get interesting. What if America’s best days aren’t spent as the world’s only superpower? What if America is in the throes of transition out of its hegemonic role?

That’s right; I said it, American transition. Let’s face facts you can’t stay on top forever. Didn’t work for the Romans, Brits or even the Beatles, and it won’t for the USA. From a purely historical perspective, dominant world powers (some might call them empires) eventually fall from their perch. This doesn’t mean that they all go the way of the Romans, however. In fact, more recent examples of empires which have transitioned and maintained a position of relative dominance include the British and French, and it is these cases that may serve as a model for an eventual American transition. But there is a problem with such a change, and this is the troubling thought I can’t seem to shake. History has witnessed world powers voluntarily pull-the-plug on their empires, but never in a unipolar world and never by a state with a military comparable in size and sophistication to that of the United States. This is uncharted territory people. How does a state with the world’s largest nuclear arsenal and most advanced military force transition from a leader of nations to a leader among nations?

If conflict can’t bring it about (see comment on size of US’ nuclear arsenal) and economic conditions are only likely to exacerbate conflict (WWII for example), then only voluntary action, a conscious choice, can make it so. Judging by the United States recent and abysmal track record of yielding sovereignty (over any issue) what is the likelihood for such a monumental shift in its global position? Maybe Mr. Buffet is right, perhaps America can look forward to a bright and not-so-distant future. The more important point, however, is whether what we are reaching for is really what we need.

~ O.M.

My Kingdom for Some Stuff

A friend of mine recently sent around the following link: http://www.storyofstuff.com/. This short movie, complete with some awesome animation that helps illustrate the creator's points, transforms any laymen (or women) into a relatively knowledgeable person - at least as far as our consumption patterns are concerned - in about 20 minutes. That's less than one episode of 30 Rock (my favorite TV show)! Not much time at all and there are even cartoons. So, really, what do you have to lose?

The short is a pretty concise explanation of where our stuff comes from and where it goes, but, more importantly, why so much comes and goes and so quickly. These latter two points are the most important of all. For some time now, whenever I have to replace something I think to myself, "With all of the technological innovation this world has produced, how come I can't find a pair of jeans that will last more than a year or two? You'd think that the people who produced the space shuttle, pacemaker, and bionic leg could figure out how to create a pair of pants that can withstand the awesome force of my washing machine." The Story of Stuff answers precisely that question.

We don't really like to hear that we use too much stuff or that stuff is running out. That's understandable, such concepts take aim right at the very core of our lifestyle – that which many of us have come to identify as our very purpose for being. What makes less sense is why we use as much as we do. Could there be another way? Sure, just ask your parents or grandparents. They’ll tell you that things used to last longer and when they broke down people’s first instinct would be to fix them not replace them. The most important point that this little film addresses is the most absurd fact about our consumption patterns, whether or not it is actually making us any happier. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I'll bet you know the answer...no, it isn’t. In fact, the more we have consumed over the past fifty years, the less happier we have been. Now if that doesn’t make you take pause the next time you’re strolling through the mall, I don’t know what will.

Check it out.
I’m gonna go find some pants.

Till next time.

O.M.

In response to a pretty sober view of the future of the US and, by extension, the world

Based on this article by James Kunstler (http://www.whiskeyandgunpowder.com/debt-drought-kills-consumerism/) a response:

I happen to agree with this Mr. Kunstler. I don’t believe we can “go home again” (hence the title of this blog). If history has taught us anything, and regardless of whether or not we are willing to learn from it, it is that society – like everything else – is constantly changing and evolving. Just like the natural resources on this planet, which are finite and are drying up, so will our ability to live on borrowed money, borrowed space or borrowed time. The belief, especially in Washington, that the US can return to it’s “good ole’” self is evident in the percentage of tax breaks that comprise the recently approved stimulus package. The future is forward. If we are to avoid a deep and lasting depression with the potential to set off a war (or wars) for control of natural resources, we must accept that reality and crack on.

I believe that our best hope is in increased collectivity among states. The financial crisis revealed just how disastrous the effects independently operated systems of rules governing financial markets/institutions can be. More than efficiency and profitability, it has been crisis that has driven countries closer together and made them more cooperative in their dealings. And it is obvious that we are faced with global challenges (or rather threats) to our collective existence. The state of our ecological system, our atmosphere, the planet itself is at risk and we are all responsible, to varying degrees. Whether or not we believe it to be fair, we must work together if we are to stem the tide of this natural decline. This is the primary challenge for one very simple reason, economic conditions, in-and-of-themselves, are meaningless. Underlying those conditions, however, are the basic needs of the human (as well as animal and plant) populations of this planet. Whether people are out of work is not a material (no pun intended) concern, it is whether they are able to feed, clothe and house themselves that are of principal importance. One need only review Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs to understand that an individual’s physiological requirements must first be satiated before any other needs are addressed.

Though it may not happen overnight, I believe that our global society is on a path toward a rediscovery of essential needs and that our societies will adapt to that reality or die out. Unfortunately the past sixty years, – the era of relative peace and significant prosperity for some, economic liberalization (for better or worse) for the others – with its focus on material gain, has not aided society in developing theories of the future stages of our social evolution. Instead, with the fall of the Soviet Union and Communism, quite a few “intellectuals” began to declare that we were at the “end of history”. A naïve concept, even if only used as a prism through which to view global economic systems. Especially given the ideological struggle that framed the Cold War and the post-World War II international order, such a declaration of victory is understandable. Yet, it is wholly inadequate as an explanation of social existence for the simple fact that it ignores the most consistent pattern of history – change. It is not, however, an exceptionally odd occurrence. Thoughts of socio-political transformation are forged in the fire of crisis, struggle, or great cataclysmic events.

This generation (X or Y or whatever) of bourgeois/middle class (the historical agent for change) has frequently been accused of being apathetic as a result of their relatively “easy” way of life. That, in the absence of a great challenge, they have failed (are failing) to have made a great contribution to the development of their society. And so here it is, a crisis point in which our global society will make critical choices that will impact the future of our existence and that of our co-inhabitants. Perhaps our generation will be part of the solution.

- O.M.