Old Grouch

I hope to continue writing now and then, but the pace will have to be much less. I am sure that will be a relief for all those, including many familiars, who disdain my activism, attitudes and writing. But, not too much of a relief, because the main victim of my condition is simply the energy to do what I want.

I am sorry for those who detest my beliefs and advocacy, because I haven't changed much in those departments. I persisted in my ideas and activities throughout my life despite disapproval of most of those near and far. There is an emotional burden resulting from being so disagreeable, but turning into a nebbish always seemed to me a fate "worse than death." Now, in my old age and weakness, I wish to prevent the sorts of stories which turn people's beliefs upside down and inside out, the minute they are not there to present and defend the fact of the matter. Having what I am and what I believe distorted for the benefit of my enemies is wholly unacceptable. So, here's a few unequivocal pronouncements.

First off, and most importantly, my attitudes about my views have hardened. I believe what I think is essentially correct. Those who disagree are probably just plain wrong. This does not mean I reject scientific standards, including the tentative nature of all our knowledge. It does mean I think most of what we do know is more certain than skeptics would care to admit. At a very basic level, I take scientific knowledge as the sine qua non of knowledge generally. I would like all of our knowledge to be as accurate and certain as that derived by scientific methods.

I don't believe in spirits, souls, demons, ghouls, ghosts or gods. I am not an animist or a spiritualist. I am non-religious, which means religion is not a significant issue for me. I am indifferent about religion in my personal life and really don't care to discuss it. I share with Prof. Richard Dawkins a general distaste for religion, especially organized religion, but my views are less vociferous than his. With Dawkins, I believe the influence religion in human affairs is a net negative. In that negative worldwide average, I think the influence of the Christian and Muslim religions is very negative, whereas Buddhist influences are generally neutral or sometimes slightly positive. On the other hand, I think the beliefs of many Hindus and Buddhists in reincarnation and transcendental states, as well as other forms of mysticism, is plain nonsense which is sometimes damaging to practitioners.

I don't find any comfort in immortal souls, because I want to live as I am. Ghosts cannot appreciate a fine wine or an excellent meal, nor the pleasure of a perfect day. There is the beauty of flowering plants, especially at this time of year, as well as the curious buzzing booming (thank you, ee cummings) that goes on in the garden. I am certain of my eventual death, which I do not look forward to or dwell on. As I see it, death is to be avoided as long as possible, but not if some disease makes living more horrible than dying. The one who cares most about my hide is me. I know that, along with billions of others of my fellow creatures, my demise will be largely unknown and unsung. I will be forgotten with rest, despite my best efforts to memorialize my existence. I do take comfort in the likely fact that very few of my generation will be remembered a day, a week or a year after the inevitable demise. I also take comfort in the fact that what we know about those who are remembered is very little - a bare skeleton of their living, stripped of the flesh and deprived of any sense. What do we know of Caesar but his exploits? Do we know the man?

My greatest comfort is that all of us are similarly reduced, sooner or later, at most to scribbling in dusty records. This has the important effect of erasing the evil men do, leaving us to puzzle over that little good which remains. Yes, in the long run, it is only the positive, the good which is left. We know Hammurabi for his Code, the invention of Law, even though Hammurabi's Code was, by modern standards even more cruel than Shari'a Law. Time filters everything, so that eventually we only see what was truly important, what left marks on all of us, and not the puffery, conceits and vices of our everyday selves. Thus, we keep Hitler, Stalin and Attila around, not as personalities, but as exemplars of human demons that arise among us now and then.. To know them is to strangle their likenesses in the cradle. Some wicked acts are justified.

Although most Americans do not know it, Capitalism is a recent invention and an abomination. Adam Smith was a self-styled moral philosopher who was also a sort of Panglossian: things would always work out for the best in his world conceived by the Prime Mover. His economic philosophy in The Wealth of Nations attempts to prove that selfish and greedy motives will inevitably turn into socially beneficial acts, guided by the Invisible Hand. Distilling Adam Smith's thoughts yields a strong dose of Calvinism: the successful are the chosen of God (and vice versa). I have never consented to that philosophy, because I believe experience refutes it. The successful are more often in alliance with demons who persecute the majority of men, as captured in that old remonstrance, 'Nice guys finish last.' The greedy are just greedy, not saints in disguise. To accept the Smithian philosophy not only requires having a certain religious outlook, but encourages that Conservative view of social welfare known as "trickle-down." If one can stand under an elephant without being molested, he will be showered with the elephant's generosity. Dried elephant patties are often used in heating and cooking fires.

Before Capitalism, there was Mercantilism. The basic Mercantilist idea is simple enough: buy cheap, sell dear. The European version of Mercantilism started in Great Britain, spread to the Continent, and became the dominant economic mode in Japan and China, as well as on Wall St. Mercantilism specifies buying raw materials at low prices, adding value to them, and then selling the products at a higher prices. The flaw in Mercantilism is also simple enough: no provision is made for buyers to earn the cost of added value. Thus, in practice, Mercantilism must be associated with some form of Imperialism or other asymmetrical distribution of power, because the consumer market would otherwise collapse. In other words, the point of Mercantilism was to benefit the manufacturing country that imported raw materials ("the center"). Sales of finished goods to other countries allowed the center's manufacturing workers to earn a profit on their labor over and above their cost of existence. Since sales from the center to the periphery were enforced, as in the commercial relations of colonial America to England (think about tea), the periphery subsidizes the center. If the periphery has no source of income or wealth other than sales of raw materials, its citizens are impoverished by the export of raw materials just as workers at the center are enriched. Thus, as the United States exports its technical knowledge in trade for blouses and pants, American workers become poorer.

Adam Smith supposedly solved this disparity by inventing "comparative advantage." This idea is an application of the division of labor. Country A exchanges its products, a₁, a₂ ... a_n, for Country B's stuff, b₁, b₂ ... b_n, so that there is no net transfer of wealth between A and B. Both countries are better off, because A makes its a_n products more efficiently or better than B, whereas B makes its b_n products more efficiently or better than A. Each country gets the best products at the lowest cost, so this is a win-win exchange, not win-lose as in the Mercantile system. Moreover, comparative advantage presents international trading as a voluntary activity, not compelled by a Great Power. At the time Smith invented the doctrine, international trade between approximate equals - the European Powers - might have supported the idea of comparative advantage, but the Imperial centers never allowed colonials to gain an equal footing.

So, Mercantilism and Capitalism thrived only in the Western world until recently. When the Japanese decided to emulate the West, in its Meiji Restoration, they understood the implications of  the Western model. That is why Japan decided to nibble away at China and other Asian territories. Japanese aims were stopped for a short time after World War II, but the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere has since succeeded beyond Tojo's wildest dreams under American tutelage. Now that a Chinese restoration is underway, the Chinese, too, want to "Get Rich!" according to Deng Xiaoping's dictum. In that goal, the Japanese present a barrier to Chinese dominance. So, what will it be? Who will pay for the luxuries of their betters?

But I think all of that is insanity - religion, Imperialism, Mercantilism, Capitalism - insanity that inevitably leads to war, death, disease and destruction. Our lives don't have to be what they've become: fearful and tortured. But that is what they will be if we cannot make our own decisions.

You are incredibly naive if you believe what Adam Smith instructs, that Greed is Good. If you bring greed into your life, what you will have is greed, and there will never be an end of it. It's the same with all the other evils: they do not amend themselves.

The only way to get good results is to do good. That is the right thing to do. It's that simple.