Pessimism and Idiocracy Walk Hand in Hand

As the dysgenic Idiocracy settles over the global landscape, an almost universal cultural pessimism accompanies the progressive dumbing down of Europe, the Anglosphere, and the rest of the advanced world. Fertility rates decline with the general outlook.


It seems reasonable for intelligent people to be pessimistic when observing the rapid growth of stupidity in the world, and the many stupid and counter-productive things their own governments are doing.

But persons who are both intelligent and wise will find ways to get past the easy cynicism and plot out a wide range of possible strategies to create a more expansive and abundant world of wide open possibilities. Even if it seems that the entire world is against you.

We live in an age of all-pervasive cultural pessimism. In one sense, this is understandable. The 18th century, the Age of Enlightenment, produced an explosion of scientific discovery as men’s minds escaped from the shackles of subservience to authority, both political and ecclesiastical. The 19th century was the great age of optimism, as technological development exploited the achievements of science, bringing inventions like the locomotive, the electric light and the telephone.

That optimism dissipated in the 20th century, when two disastrous world wars exposed the dark side of mankind. Far from recovering a sense of hopefulness during the relative peace of the 21st century, gloominess has become the default position of the intellectual classes in the Western world. __ Nigel Lawson via WSJ

This pessimism is far more than skin deep. It is propagated by academics, journalists, politicians, and virtually all other cultural institutions — including most religions. Pessimism has become popular because it is so easy to just give in to it, without thought or reason. Join the groupthink echo-choir, and exercise the circular jerkular with the rest of the clones.

On the other hand, a countervailing optimism is fighting back, swimming against the ugly tide of doom. Ronald Bailey‘s recent book, “The End of Doom,” typifies this strain of contrarian optimism, struggling against the tsunamis of groupthink coming from virtually every direction.

Among the scares examined by Mr. Bailey in “The End of Doom: Environmental Renewal in the Twenty-First Century” are overpopulation, the exhaustion of natural resources (particularly oil), the perils of biotechnology and genetic modification, and global warming.

Mr. Bailey has little difficulty demonstrating that, despite an explosion in world population greater than Thomas Malthus could possibly have envisaged in the 18th century, global living standards are higher than ever. “Food,” he writes, citing statistics from the World Bank and other organizations, “is more abundant today than ever before in history.” In the past 50 years alone, global food production has more than tripled __ Nigel Lawson _ WSJ

Although doomers have been predicting catastrophe from famine, pollution, energy scarcity, climate catastrophe, and apocalypse of every type, Ronald Bailey’s book reveals that they have been wrong on every count for several decades running.

Below are clips from reviews of Bailey’s book by three very sharp cookies: Rupert Darwall, Gregg Easterbrook, and Roger Pielke Jr. Following those three review excerpts is an excerpt from Bailey’s response to the three.

One after another, Bailey neatly picks off each “peak everything” fear. Even though commodity prices are now coming off the top of a super-cycle, since 1871, the Economist industrial commodity price index has sunk to around half its value. Thanks to improved energy productivity, in 2007, the U.S. consumed half the energy it would have if energy productivity had remained at its 1970 level. Technology will continue to make more efficient use of resources. 3D printing could reduce materials needs and cost by up to 90 percent.

Bailey makes the crucial distinction between scarcity and shortage. Scarcity exists because human wants are boundless while the resources to satisfy them are limited. Shortages arise when something is not available at any price and when governments intervene to stop markets working properly. According to a survey on water access in major cities in the developing world, poor people pay a multiple of what those connected to the water mains do. How to improve water access for the world’s poor? Privatization. __ Rupert Darwall

Outside your window, living standards are rising, crime is declining, pollution is down, and longevity is increasing. But in pop culture, we’re all doomed. The Hunger Games films have been box-office titans, joined by World War Z, Interstellar, The Book of Eli, Divergent, The Road, and other big-budget Hollywood fare depicting various judgment days. Over in primetime, the world is ending on The Walking Dead, The Last Ship, The 100, and Under the Dome.

The same outlook obtains in nonfiction literature. Books that foresee doomsday— Collapse by Jared Diamond, The End of Nature by Bill McKibben, The Coming Plague by Laurie Garrett among them—win praise from commentators and sell briskly. Books contending that things basically are fine don’t do as well. One might think that optimism would be marketable to contemporary book-buyers, who live very well by historical standards, but it doesn’t seem to work that way. Readers prefer material that depicts them dwelling in the final generation. Perhaps declining religious belief in Armageddon has been replaced by an expectation of some natural-world version of the event. ___ Gregg Easterbrook

Disappontingly, Roger Pielke Jr., son of the better scholar Roger Pielke Sr., tries to make himself appear worldly wise and above it all, in his short review of Bailey’s book.

… Bailey accurately finds that the predictions about a “population bomb” advanced in the 1960s and 1970s were wildly wrong. Advocates like Stanford biologist Paul Ehrlich and John Holdren—currently President Obama’s science advisor—warned of a global crisis that might require draconian action such as forced sterilization. History has proved these arguments ridiculous and even unethical. Yet, as Bailey shows, latter-day Malthusians are saying the same things.

It’s easy to see the end of the world in every technological innovation. It is just as easy to look at the generally improving state of the world and conclude that things will always continue to improve, and that when problems do arise, they will be easily solved.

Our public debates over economics, technology, and political power deserve better than a tired rehashing of Neo-Malthusianism v. cornucopianism. And yet, these polarities remain appealing to many. Bailey recounts a conversation he had with his editor back in 1992, when he brought an earlier version of these arguments to him. His editor said that he’d publish the book, but “if you’d brought me a book predicting the end of the world, I could have made you a rich man.” __ Roger Pielke Jr.

Bailey responds to Pielke:

For the most part, Pielke agrees with me, admitting that he is “quite sympathetic to critiques of apocalypse around the corner.” He is impatient with my chronicling of environmentalist doomsaying over the past several decades, but he should remember that the more than 200 million of his fellow citizens who are younger than he is (46) do not know the sorry ideological history of Neo-Malthusianism. As philosopher George Santayana reminded us, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” By reminding readers of the past, I hope to spare future generations from being duped by doom dogmas. I suspect that even Pielke would agree that that is a worthy aim.

Pielke further objects that I give Norman Borlaug and the Green Revolution too much credit for forestalling the world-spanning famines widely predicted to occur in the 1970s. It bears noting that in 1970, the chairman of the Nobel committee explained why it had chosen Mr. Borlaug for its Peace Prize in this way: “More than any other single person of this age, [he] has helped to provide bread for a hungry world…”

… I certainly agree with Pielke that securing a “bright future for people and the planet” is “by no means simple or guaranteed.” I do explain in some detail how the technological progress and wealth generated by democratic free-market capitalism makes environmental renewal in this century possible. While Pielke strikes a world-weary pose of intellectual ennui over a supposedly “stale” debate, he oddly fails to mention that there is between me and the Neo-Malthusians one big difference: My predictions have consistently proven right and theirs wrong. ___ Ronald Bailey

More praise for The End of Doom:

“Ronald Bailey sets out factually and simply the unassailable, if inconvenient, truth: that if you care for this planet, technological progress and economic enterprise are the best means of saving it.”
-Matt Ridley, bestselling author of The Rational Optimist

“Bold, opinionated, and unapologetic. Everyone, right and left, should read this book. It doesn’t blur partisan divides on the environment and growth-it obliterates them.”
-Ramez Naam, author of The Infinite Resource: The Power of Ideas on a Finite Planet

“Bailey’s thoughtful, evidence-based new book is about more than the end of environmental doom––it’s also about the beginning of hope. While conservatives and liberals will never agree on everything when it comes to the environment, they might increasingly agree that the keys to saving nature in the twenty-first century are cities, agricultural intensification, and technological innovation.”
-Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger, co-authors of An Ecomodernist Manifesto and Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility __ https://reason.com/eod

Optimists such as Bailey, Matt Ridley, Bjorn Lomborg, Julian Simon, and Peter Diamandis have a brighter, contrarian message that map out ways to reach a better future.

Here at Al Fin, we prefer the approach of cooking up a wiser and tougher human substrate. We call it The Dangerous Child approach. But each person must follow his own preferred path, in the quest to open the way to an expansive and abundant human future.

Remember the end of cynicism:

Cynicism grows and grows until finally, it becomes cynical of itself. That is one step toward wisdom.

__ Attributed to Al Fin

More:

Cultural Pessimism and Therapy

The Future and its Enemies

Peak Oil catastrophism is largely a manifestation of our primary cultural myth: that all things end with suffering, death, and then resurrection. Belief in apocalypse is programmed into western civilization. Given our heritage, “the end is nigh” is the nearly unavoidable personal and collective response to times of uncertainty and rapid change.

Apocalypticism is at the core of the Judeo-Christian social mythology, and it influences our beliefs far more than we are conscious of. I can hear the objections: “I’m not religious—I’ve never even been to church.” But that’s like saying, “I never studied Greece, so ancient Greek culture hasn’t influenced me in any way.” Cultural beliefs are in the air we breathe. We are programmed by our knowledge of mortality and of the natural world, as well as by millennia of myth-telling, to believe that all things, from organisms to businesses to civilizations, progress from birth to a shuddering death … ___ http://www.patternliteracy.com/130-the-origins-of-peak-oil-doomerism

It’s not always easy, but wise and intelligent people need to get past these doomer myths of culture, these apocalyptic memes, and their own inbred cynicism — and start scheming various approaches to a better world for their progeny.

Your ancestors — both human and pre-human — went through a lot of shite to make sure you were born. Don’t you squander it all on a mindless cultural defeatism.

More on the dysgenic creep in Europe

The coddling of the American western mind

A hysterical world is incapable of logical thought

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Demographics, Doom, Dysgenics, Green Quagmire, Groupthink, Idiocracy and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Pessimism and Idiocracy Walk Hand in Hand

  1. Laurence Bergin says:

    Reblogged this on Agent 006.

  2. Friedrich says:

    You seem lump together pessimism, cynicism, defeatism and philosophical pessimism. Philosophical pessimism has been with us since the greeks, nay, the indians, as evidenced by the upanishads. It had its prime with the great german philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer and later Oswald Spengler, two giants that the world never saw before nor after. It should be noted that Schopenhauer was one of the greatest stylists; Borges learnt german not to read Goethe (another giant), but Schopenhauer.

    Especially today in Europe, where we’re confronted with the possibility of a european caliphat there seems little reason to be optimistic. The low fertility rate of white europeans, the insane mass immigration of muslims and other third worlders coupled with Islam and a democratic system that will allow for extremists (islamists) to flourish, there is little hope and reason to believe that one’s children would be better off born — in fact they might get killed brutally or used as slaves, there will be harsh discrimnation against whites with a muslim majority, as evidenced by the high occurrence of the MAOA gene in arabs (about 15% as opposed to 0.2/0.3% in europeans [see Andreas Vonderach].) .

    I certainly see no reason to bring children into such a world, a world where the greatest civilization is destroyed and replaced by a mixture of americanism and islamisation, coupled with a low IQ third world population (turks have a mean IQ of 84 here in Germany) which will drag down the living standard. With a third wolrd population you get third world circumstances, and it does not seem like Europe is waking up — quite the contrary, Germany is drowning in refugees and muslims.

    Iff. of course, we started to kick out muslims and stopped taking in refugees of Asia and Africa (they expect a growth in population, not a drop), then things might look different. But for now, I side with Richard Millet.

    • alfin2101 says:

      You make some interesting points. The situation for Europeans at this point in history is indeed daunting. What would be the best response to a daunting situation for individuals, for families, for small groups, for communities, for regions, for nations, for civilisations? The answer may be different for each scale of operation.

      Some people promote optimism as a cure-all for everything. . To be fair, the linked article on optimism provides a few ways of developing optimism. But it isn’t that easy for many people, in many situations.

      This short article provides a few more helpful hints, and links the ideas of optimism and purpose.

      A sense of purpose goes hand in hand with optimism. Optimism itself is closely related to “optimise” etymologically. In order to optimise one’s life or one’s world, one must have worked out a sequence of goals of different time range — short, medium, and long.

      Purpose, optimism, resilience, challenge, and a sequenced plan — with allowances for contingencies — all play a part in a meaningful life. Most bright humans without an immediate challenge will tend to find one.

      If children have not been trained to love a problem or a puzzle, they may turn away from a challenge that seems too daunting. It is up to parents and connected persons to imbue the love of a difficult challenge into the child. Otherwise, entire generations can be lost, and a civilisation put in danger of extinction.

      More:
      The Europe Syndrome via original Al Fin blog

  3. Jim says:

    At present population growth rates of about 1% per year the total mass of the world’s people will exceed the mass of the Earth in about 3,000 years. Since humans left Africa the world’s population has increased at a long term average of about .02%, roughly one-fifttieth of the present rate of increase.

  4. A.B Prosper says:

    Speaking for the US here, a 50% decline in wages as percent GDP over a few decades and a population of near 50 million dependent on basically emergency government food handouts to eat is not cause for optimism.The rapid, forced cultural shits have wrecked many nations.

    This doesn’t include the vast number of prisoners, needless government employees and pensioners either, simply its a non resolvable bottleneck. An economy that provides a middle class for average folks is gone and will not be coming back

    Also while people are technically freer in some ways, I think what futurists don’t always get is it isn’t something people really want or need, especially the half rate freedom to consume that replaces the genuine freedom people do want, to be among and governed by their own kind and customs

    The “globalization” finds this anathema and has no problem simply killing until it gets what it wants which is limitless greed and people as commodities.

    Also no way is Africa going to be able to support up to three billion people nor is Asia in any better shape. Environmental degradation is a real thing and either billions die e in the largest die back in human history or invade and than wipe out Europe or possibly Asia. Tech won’t save anyone and even if it slows the decline, it will end up making things much worse in the long run. Instead of 5 billion dead, you get ten or twenty when the butchers bill comes do

    And no unless we are extraordinarily lucky and Fusion and EM drives pan out and all the other chips fall into play and somehow dying societies can scrape together trillions Space won’t be an option for most us. A handful of the elite might make it to some space station but the rest of us get a favella

    You can be the most bad-butt mo-fo dangerous child to walk Planet Earth but numbers have a quality of their own and this time its not “we have the Maxim gun and they have not.”

    So yeah, no wonder smarter people I dunno 105+ types do not want to participate. You are basically only going to be poorer chattel anyway, why bother?

    And yes there is an option beyond “Got Vault?” but it requires throwing away all the “nicer” society we have tried to build since the end of WW2 and being outright “them or us” In that case, you do have purpose and optimism of a sort but it might be “long live death” or whatever variation of Aloha Snakebite is preferred by your culture more than anything else.

    • alfin2101 says:

      A deep and doomeresque perspective indeed, AB!

      You paint a scenario — one of trillions or more possible scenarios that could be generated to describe hypothetical futures. There is nothing inherently true or inevitable about it — in fact it is certain to be wrong in many or most of its projections. That is because it is so difficult to predict anything — but especially the future.

      Doomers, somehow, believe that their dark and self-limiting dreams of the future are accurate and inevitable in every respect. Mental health professionals call such certainty “delusional.”

      Here at the Al Fin Institutes, we are far more generous, and examine doomers’ scenarios and projections objectively, combing through the claims, assumptions, interpretations of statistics, etc. etc. carefully — looking for anything plausible or useful that might be salvaged from the mess.

      All I can say in response to your comment is, keep looking with as open a mind as possible.

  5. swampie says:

    I had two of daughter’s youngest children at the playground yesterday so that they could play with other children (her two oldest were in school). The granddaughters were able to play with a 4-year-old girl and a five-year-old boy. Their two older siblings were in school. Mother couldn’t stay very long because she was two weeks away from the birth of baby #5.

    There are a lot of babies being born around here.

  6. Pingback: Outside in - Involvements with reality » Blog Archive » Chaos Patch (#75)

  7. Pingback: Chaos Patch (#75) | Neoreactive

  8. infowarrior1 says:

    One of the major causes of replacement fertility in the west:
    http://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/20/the-return-of-patriarchy/

    Quite interesting.

Comments are closed.