The Post-American Future

Forum for general discussion of Peak Oil / Oil depletion; also covering related subjects

Moderator: Peak Moderation

Post Reply
User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

The Post-American Future

Post by Lord Beria3 »

http://www.energybulletin.net/news/2012 ... can-future
What does a post-American future look like? To begin with, here in America, it’s a future in which the vast majority of us will be much less wealthy than we are today. The American standard of living has been propped up since 1945 by the systemic imbalances that gave a quarter of the world’s energy resources and a third of its raw materials and industrial product to the five per cent of humanity that lives in the United States. Everything we consider normal in American life today is a function of that flow of imperial tribute, and as that goes away, most of what we consider normal in American life is going to change. The economic troubles that have been ongoing since 2008 are the foreshocks of that seismic shift, which will see most American incomes drop to Third World levels.

Those of my readers who are incensed by the extreme disparity in wealth between the rich and the rest in this country should remember that most of that disparity consists of paper wealth, much of it of very questionable value. Trillions of dollars worth of dubious derivatives, asset-backed securities backed by wholly insecure assets, loans that will never be paid back, and equally hallucinatory stores of wealth currently pad the notional net worth of America’s rich; in any imaginable post-American future, all that will be reassessed at its real value, which in most cases amounts to zero. Just as the Great Depression saw huge income and net worth disparities in American society drop like a rock as vast amounts of paper wealth turned into mere paper, the Greater Depression that will follow the end of American empire will almost certainly see the same phenomenon on an even larger scale. One moral to this story is that any of my readers who have their wealth tied up in paper assets of any kind might be wise to think, hard, about how long they want to leave it there.

Outside the United States, circumstances will no doubt vary. Those nations that have linked their welfare or their survival too closely to American empire will be dragged down in their turn; those who align themselves with one or another contender for America’s replacement will rise or fall with their choice, while those that have the good sense to step back into neutrality until the smoke clears, and then make arrangements with the new hegemon, will doubtless do well. I suspect, though, that Japan and western Europe in particular will be in for a rough awakening. For decades now, they’ve reaped the benefits of having their national defense backstopped by gargantuan US defense budgets, and the end of that cozy arrangement will force them to choose between spending a great deal more money on their own militaries, accepting a new overlord who may be a good deal less congenial than the one they have now, or accepting a position of extreme vulnerability in an epoch where that may turn out to be an exceptionally risky thing to do.

Still, all these concerns are secondary to the most crucial factor, which is that the post-American future will still have to deal with the head-on collision between a global economic system that requires perpetual growth, on the one hand, and hard planetary limits on the other. The end of America’s empire does not mean the end of industrial civilization; nor, for that matter, will it solve the twin problems sketched out decades ago in the prescient and thus profoundly unfashionable pages of The Limits to Growth: the exhaustion of necessary but nonrenewable resources, particularly fossil fuels, and the buildup in the biosphere of ecologically and economically damaging pollutants, particularly carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Those forces are still the dominant fact of our time, and the end of America’s empire—traumatic as it may well be, and not only for Americans—is simply one more roadbump along the route of the Long Descent.
As always, Greer is a fascinating read.

The collapse of the American empire (this decade?) will surely be a great moment but industrial civilisation itself will carry on for decades to come.

Can't help but think the UK will be stuffed to a certain extent but maybe it will be a blessing in disguise. The sooner our ruling class realise that they can't afford military adventures the better.

Neutrality and relative isolationism will be a smarter move in the future.
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
Little John

Re: The Post-American Future

Post by Little John »

Lord Beria3 wrote:http://www.energybulletin.net/news/2012 ... can-future
What does a post-American future look like? To begin with, here in America, it’s a future in which the vast majority of us will be much less wealthy than we are today. The American standard of living has been propped up since 1945 by the systemic imbalances that gave a quarter of the world’s energy resources and a third of its raw materials and industrial product to the five per cent of humanity that lives in the United States. Everything we consider normal in American life today is a function of that flow of imperial tribute, and as that goes away, most of what we consider normal in American life is going to change. The economic troubles that have been ongoing since 2008 are the foreshocks of that seismic shift, which will see most American incomes drop to Third World levels.

Those of my readers who are incensed by the extreme disparity in wealth between the rich and the rest in this country should remember that most of that disparity consists of paper wealth, much of it of very questionable value. Trillions of dollars worth of dubious derivatives, asset-backed securities backed by wholly insecure assets, loans that will never be paid back, and equally hallucinatory stores of wealth currently pad the notional net worth of America’s rich; in any imaginable post-American future, all that will be reassessed at its real value, which in most cases amounts to zero. Just as the Great Depression saw huge income and net worth disparities in American society drop like a rock as vast amounts of paper wealth turned into mere paper, the Greater Depression that will follow the end of American empire will almost certainly see the same phenomenon on an even larger scale. One moral to this story is that any of my readers who have their wealth tied up in paper assets of any kind might be wise to think, hard, about how long they want to leave it there.

Outside the United States, circumstances will no doubt vary. Those nations that have linked their welfare or their survival too closely to American empire will be dragged down in their turn; those who align themselves with one or another contender for America’s replacement will rise or fall with their choice, while those that have the good sense to step back into neutrality until the smoke clears, and then make arrangements with the new hegemon, will doubtless do well. I suspect, though, that Japan and western Europe in particular will be in for a rough awakening. For decades now, they’ve reaped the benefits of having their national defense backstopped by gargantuan US defense budgets, and the end of that cozy arrangement will force them to choose between spending a great deal more money on their own militaries, accepting a new overlord who may be a good deal less congenial than the one they have now, or accepting a position of extreme vulnerability in an epoch where that may turn out to be an exceptionally risky thing to do.

Still, all these concerns are secondary to the most crucial factor, which is that the post-American future will still have to deal with the head-on collision between a global economic system that requires perpetual growth, on the one hand, and hard planetary limits on the other. The end of America’s empire does not mean the end of industrial civilization; nor, for that matter, will it solve the twin problems sketched out decades ago in the prescient and thus profoundly unfashionable pages of The Limits to Growth: the exhaustion of necessary but nonrenewable resources, particularly fossil fuels, and the buildup in the biosphere of ecologically and economically damaging pollutants, particularly carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Those forces are still the dominant fact of our time, and the end of America’s empire—traumatic as it may well be, and not only for Americans—is simply one more roadbump along the route of the Long Descent.
As always, Greer is a fascinating read.

The collapse of the American empire (this decade?) will surely be a great moment but industrial civilisation itself will carry on for decades to come.

Can't help but think the UK will be stuffed to a certain extent but maybe it will be a blessing in disguise. The sooner our ruling class realise that they can't afford military adventures the better.

Neutrality and relative isolationism will be a smarter move in the future.
Interesting article. Thanks LB.
extractorfan
Posts: 988
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Ricky
Contact:

Post by extractorfan »

Yes, good article.

Due to the sheer scale and power of the US military machine, their willingness to bomb places that step out of line and their statement (via former presidnet GWB) that you're either with us or with the "terrorists", means I can't see their cultural or military hegemony collapsing this decade or even next. There's too much momentum and unspent power left. I could of course, be wrong.

Europe on the other hand has always been a trading centre and should continue to be well off relative to the rest of the world, not so much on the outskirts like the UK, but generally. I can easily see Europe coming under the cultural influence of China or Russia, but there will still be relative wealth here, making it a desirable place for conquest...again.

Perhaps the stage for WWIII.
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 10576
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Contact:

Post by clv101 »

extractorfan wrote:Due to the sheer scale and power of the US military machine...
But how robust? The Soviet military machine was just as big (relatively bigger than the US by the late 1980s) but crumbled away within just a few years as the economy fell away from under it.
extractorfan
Posts: 988
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Ricky
Contact:

Post by extractorfan »

but the soviets didn't control the worlds reserve currency which for some time will prevent economic collapse. I think economic stagnation is more likely than full on collapse.
Little John

Post by Little John »

extractorfan wrote:but the soviets didn't control the worlds reserve currency which for some time will prevent economic collapse. I think economic stagnation is more likely than full on collapse.
Yes, but that position as the world's reserve currency is only there because of the guns that stand behind it. Without those guns, the dollar would have to compete with the rest of the world for the position of global reserve currency. In others words, if the military and raw economic power falls away, the dollar would follow in short order afterwards in a self-reinforcing spiral.

I can see a scenario where the US gets involved in some conflict over the coming years that goes badly for it such that it becomes clear to one and all that America is no longer able to simply stamp its authority with impunity on the world any more. When that happens, the dollar will lose its position as global reserve currency overnight.

And for all of America's much vaunted sense of nationhood, I believe that, in truth, it is only held together by the dollar. There are serious cultural, racial and political schisms already existing in the US. Consequently, I could easily see it breaking up into at least two countries when the slide starts proper.
ceti331
Posts: 310
Joined: 27 Aug 2011, 12:56

Post by ceti331 »

stevecook172001 wrote:
extractorfan wrote:Consequently, I could easily see it breaking up into at least two countries when the slide starts proper.
interesting. i always found these sorts of scenarios intersting in alternate history/sci-fis ... and reality is basically an ongoing crystalization of dystopian scifi ...
"The stone age didn't end for a lack of stones"... correct, we'll be right back there.
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 10576
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Contact:

Post by clv101 »

stevecook172001 wrote:Consequently, I could easily see it breaking up into at least two countries when the slide starts proper.
Someone pointed out a problem with this scenario... it would enable the GOP to actually be in charge of something again!
User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

Post by Lord Beria3 »

http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-does- ... de/5311904

Fascinating. I actually predicted this just before the election that the Republican/Tea Party types will realise that demographics mean they can't get the presidency back so will try to secede along the Confederate states (who voted Republican in 2012).

This goes along along with Greers article as well.
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14814
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

stevecook172001 wrote:There are serious cultural, racial and political schisms already existing in the US.
So there are. Coming to a town near you, the new normal.

Image

Isn't that just an inspiring image?
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
Post Reply