Article

The Delusion Revolution

The future we have been dreaming of is not based on reality.

Robert Jensen
|
15 Jul 2009
|
75 comments

economics

Mike Mills, Let’s Be Human Beings, 2003, Photo: Todd Cole

THE CREATIVE DESTRUCTION OF NEOCLASSICAL ECONOMICS

Deep in a recession and with scary ecological scenarios looming, now may be the ripest moment we’ll ever have to power-shift global capitalism onto a new path. Adbusters #85 asks economics students around the world to join the fight to revamp Econ 101 curriculums and challenge the endemic myopia of their tenured neoclassical profs. Go to KICKITOVER.ORG, read a few texts, download the Kick it Over Manifesto (and other posters) and whack them up in the corridors of your campus. Make sure your university is at the forefront of the paradigm shift from neoclassical to ecological economics now underway. If you’re an economics student, email kevin@adbusters.org to receive a half price copy of Adbusters #85.

Imagine you are riding comfortably on a sleek train. You look out the window and see that the tracks end abruptly not too far ahead … The train will derail if it continues. You suggest the train stop immediately and the passengers go forward on foot. This will require a major shift in everyone’s way of traveling, of course, but you see it as the only realistic option. To continue barreling forward is to court catastrophic consequences. But when you propose this course of action, others – who have grown comfortable riding on the train – say, “We like the train, and arguing that we should get off is not realistic.”

In the contemporary United States, we are trapped in a similar delusion. We are told that it is “realistic” to yield to the absurd idea that the systems we live in are the only systems possible or acceptable based on the fact that some people like them and wish them to continue. But what if our current level of first world consumption is exhausting the ecological basis for life? Too bad. The only “realistic” options are those that view this lifestyle as nonnegotiable. What if real democracy is not possible in a nation-state with 300 million people? Too bad. The only “realistic” options are those that view this way of organizing a polity as immutable. What if the hierarchies our lives are based on are producing extreme material deprivation for the oppressed and dull misery among the privileged? Too bad. The only “realistic” options are those that view hierarchy as inevitable.

Let me offer a different view of reality:

(1) We live in a system that, taken as a whole, is unsustainable – not only over the long haul but in the short term.

(2) Unsustainable systems cannot be sustained.

How’s that for a profound theoretical insight? Unsustainable systems can’t be sustained. It’s hard to argue with that. The important question is whether or not we live in a system that is truly unsustainable. There’s no way to definitively prove such a sweeping statement, but look around at what we’ve built and ask yourself whether you really believe this world can go forward indefinitely … or even for more than a few decades. Take a minute to ponder the end of cheap fossil energy, the lack of viable large-scale replacements for that energy and the ecological consequences of burning what remains of it. Consider the indicators of the health of the planet: groundwater contamination, topsoil loss, levels of toxicity. Factor in the widening inequality in the world, the intensity of the violence and the desperation that so many feel at every level of society.

Based on what you know about these trends, do you think this is a sustainable system? If you were to let go of your attachment to this world, is there any way to imagine this as a sustainable system? Considering all the ways you understand the world, is there anything in your field of perception that tells you we’re on the right track?

The important question is whether or not we live in a system that is truly unsustainable.

To be radically realistic in the face of all this is to recognize the failure of basic systems and to abandon the notion that all we need to do is recalibrate the institutions that structure our lives. The old future – the way we thought things would work out – truly is gone. The nation-state and capitalism are at the core of this unsustainable system, giving rise to the high-energy/mass-consumption configuration of privileged societies that has left us saddled with what James Howard Kunstler calls “a living arrangement with no future.” The future we have been dreaming of is not based on reality. Most of the world’s population – who don’t live with our privilege – has no choice but to face this reality. It’s time for us to come to terms with it.

Robert Jensen is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin. He is the author of Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity and All My Bones Shake: Seeking a Progressive Path to the Prophetic Voice.

Support + Share

Help us spread the word. Share it online with your friends or subscribe to the print edition.

Adbusters #85 Sep/Oct 2009

Thought Control in Economics

October
22, 2009
10:31 pm
Link

Alan Watt has answers for this.

— Anonymous

October
12, 2009
06:53 pm
Link

Thinking about the chart on population expansion in the print, I can't help but sense the train wreck looming ahead of us as the greatest sacrifice of life, human and/or otherwise ever. OK so we're on track for the #6 spot but since when will 'merika stand for being the sixth best at anything without rallying the troops to at least try for #1? I agree that after this singular event, (the manifestation of peak everything?) it will be notable if anyone still adheres to the left/right dichotomy or if anyone remembers the architects of this disaster (e.g the politicians, economists, the pop stars who distract us &/ make us feel satiated that we've watched the right movies/read the right books or captains of industry). Can't help but think again to the call of the survivalist wilds. I usually discount population arguements in favor of class based consumption arguements, but it's coming, the track is running out and all of our petty squabbling over semantics isn't going to mean shit(at least no one will have the luxury to get so petty over it). Just remember the humans defending the train, egging the conductor to full speed, at some deep subconscious level are doing their best to bring the moment of reason to bear as quickly as possible and as efficiently as possible. Typical misguided type-A personalities I guess... Can't tell them anything.

— spatterprint

October
01, 2009
08:30 am
Link

I think as long as we have this left, right, liberal, communist hooblah we'll get no where. does it matter what we class ourselfs as? i mean is there even such thing as liberal? communist? i don't know, and i'll never know. neither will anyone wasting there time talking about it. screw where your from, or what side you place yourself at. find a solution as people, nothing more. if you put trust in history you'll see history is history beucase it's GONE, just like we will be if we continue caring about the wrong thing. false belief can drag you down, self examination is key. i don't know what the answer is, and who is anyone saying they do? we should spend more time showing youth the truth, i myself am 18 and i feel like everything i read, am told, or hear about is total bullshit. you want change? progress? give me and other youth an education that will show me the real world. i'm ranting aren't i? haha god damn youngsters!! bahaha
ll

— Brandon, Canada

September
19, 2009
06:05 pm
Link

is coming to a theater near you...
greed, adictions, delusions, hallucinations, greed, greed, glutony, uy, sounds like one of those sins. extreme capitalism is sucking people out, people that thought they had something to live off. like a rice farmer in india who suddenly cannot compete with the major corps. forget ipod, berries, think soil, seeds, waiting for the rains.
next time you visit a shop place a sticker on crap "do you really need this?" and make the consumer think about it. attacks aren't worth it, defense systems are the rule of the day. it's what made rumsfeld. weapon makers exists on the premise of defense. who are the major weapon makers? usa, russia, uk, germany - it begins there, catch 22.

— Anonymous

September
19, 2009
06:03 pm
Link

— Anonymous

September
18, 2009
05:03 am
Link

It is right that to change the status quo one must suggest an alternative rather than complain.

Surely the trick is to find a way of valuing the things that are valuable, and let the free market do the rest?

It's not a political debate really, its more a debate about values. The gap between rich and poor is ever widening, that's the only fact that matters in the end.

Values have value so a complementary system is needed to support the dollar based one.

here in the UK we spend more time acting than ranting about communism and nazism. It's all very well for you guys squaring up to each other in the pub car park, but if you aren't careful us Brits will be waltzing off with the prize you are both fighting over: the solution.

Manchester was the birth place of the industrial revolution, the co-operative society, northern soul and the Stone Roses. We have attitude and we have ideas, and we know what 2.0 means now thanks to you yanks that gave us t'internet.

For that we're grateful. But its our turn now.

you keep squabbling, we'll keep working on the answer. And when it comes, tell your friends that it was born in Wigan, "the heart of the soul of the north (of England)".

— Mikeriddell62

August
21, 2009
02:42 am
Link

Ayn Rand, the guru of libertarians, believed firmly that a capitalist elite needed to run the world. — Anonymous

August
06, 2009
03:06 pm
Link

I completely agree with you,thanks Tropical fish — marinefish

August
06, 2009
03:36 pm
Link

hahaha spam ads on adbuster. priceless. — Anonymous

July
30, 2009
11:23 am
Link

Why does this convo in the comments not surprise me?

What free-market libertarian types don’t understand is that their perfect pre- or post-historical free markets don’t exist anywhere, and can’t, just as there is no noble savage ‘state of nature’ that pre-historical humans existed in or will exist in again. “Free Market” is a convenient fiction. All markets, like all other human behaviors, are situated in a specific socio-historical context, all markets consist of interactions between nonrational actors with incomplete information and outside interventions. Neoclassical economics is like formal logic and Newtonian physics: elegant, sometimes quite useful, but necessarily abstracted from reality and potentially dangerous whan taken as some platonic superreal form.

This is a white swan argument, so it should be easy, guys: show me a pure Austrian-wet-dream laissez-faire free market, anywhere, at any point in history, and I’ll change my mind. — Anonymous

July
30, 2009
08:45 pm
Link

I don’t remember referencing any “perfect” system - so thanks for the condescension but it’s really not necessary. I do understand. Every system (whether political, cultural or economic) exists on a scale from optimal/perfect to destructive/abhorrent. You are correct that a pure, theoretical free market doesn’t exist and never will…in the same sense that a pure socialist system has never existed (somehow the leader and his cabal always end up being “more equal” than the other comrades). It’s a question of choice as well as results. At the most basic level the human spirit cannot be constrained or kept to the lowest common demoninator - we will always rise above. Humans will always strive for “more.” That’s why a system based on the antithesis to human behaviour will always fail. That’s why socialism (as opposed to it’s opposite, the free market) can only exist as a system of intimidation, violence, secret police and party members reporting on everybody’s behaviour to ensure it’s “correctness.” It’s why free communication is the enemy of the socialist regime. It’s why most of our inalienable rights are the enemy of the socialist regime. It comes down to the ability to chose your destiny which is so prized in the “free market.” Sure it’s not an even playing field with perfect information, but it doesn’t have to be. What you call a convenient fiction is what has driven the advancement of civilization nigh these hundreds of years and its what attracts immigrants by the droves to our shores. The same cannot be said of the opposite side of the coin. We have never witnessed a non-capitalist state that attracts people with the hope of a better life and very few allow comrades free travel beyond the “curtain.” So we agree - capitalism needs to be regulated to avoid it’s pitfalls. Monopolies (government or private) should be prevented. Oligopolies should also be prevented from negatively impacting the populace (where is the CRTC on that one?): these are outside interventions that are necessary. Where we likely disagree is that I believe the “most perfect” system is a regulated “free” market (with the minimum amount of regulation possible) and a government that keeps the hell out of people’s lives. The only good government is a small government that realizes it shouldn’t try to legislate every little bit of unpleasantness out of life, because therein lies the slippery slope of losing each of our prized freedoms…one by one. Only the most basic services should be supplied through government monopoly and let the market do what it does best - allocate resources efficiently. Tax dollars should be treated as sacrosanct - which would allow plenty of room to look after the disaffected and disadvantaged and still allow me to keep more than 40-50% of the fruits of my labours. — Anonymous

August
18, 2009
11:39 am
Link

It seems that people here are talking past each other. What we have seen the last 30+ years is an attack on democracy by corporations. Most of the People feel disaffected by corporate rule of government. Government should be one counterbalance to corporate externalities rather than a force against the People. That’s why we have an EPA, SEC, OSHA, etc. Certainly you cannot be in favor of the diection we are going. — Anonymous

September
21, 2009
12:53 am
Link

Brilliantly put!

— Anonymous

August
06, 2009
03:43 pm
Link

“What you call a convenient fiction is what has driven the advancement of civilization.” –— Advancement to what? the destruction of the biosphere and the destruction of the human species?=== “its what attracts immigrants by the droves to our shores.” –– Yeah because you destroyed their lifestyles and culture and they don’t know who they are anymore.=== “Humans will always strive for “more.”” –— More is subjective.=== — Anonymous

August
06, 2009
05:46 pm
Link

Yes you’re absolutely correct. We’ve destroyed the biosphere - and yes I hear the human species is near “destruction.” Well thought out and clearly factual. You’re logic is unassailable. You’re clearly adding a lot of “culture jamming value” to this crowd. You must be an Adbuster Grand Potentate or Fifth Degree Culture Jammer… — Anonymous

August
06, 2009
03:35 pm
Link

This is a white swan argument, so it should be easy, guys: show me a pure Austrian-wet-dream laissez-faire free market, anywhere, at any point in history, and I’ll change my mind.. Royal Pains || The Lifehack Post — mimeblogger

August
03, 2009
04:21 pm
Link

people flock to “our” shores because their countries have been systemically impoverished by the capitalist system, which requires developed and underdeveloped countries, while limiting the upward “advancement” of the latter. also, capitalist countries also have secret police etc… ie the CIA that do put down uprisings that challenge the regime of the free market, not only nationally, but internationally. socialism must not be only thought of as the USSR genre. like capitalism, socialism can be embodied in many ways. i think bolivia is a good example of a socialist system working well. and your comments on human nature are beyond cliche. the only thing humans do naturally is eating and having sex, so to say that humans are “naturally” individualists and self-interested beings is a lame excuse to justify the atrocities commited in the name of “the pursuit of happiness” under capitalist hegemony. — Anonymous

August
06, 2009
02:20 am
Link

Exactly! — Anonymous

August
04, 2009
02:49 pm
Link

I completely agree with you. — Anonymous

August
06, 2009
03:45 pm
Link

here here! — Anonymous

August
01, 2009
01:19 am
Link

Right on! — Anonymous

August
01, 2009
04:04 pm
Link

wow you boys bought all that crap? I love how you confuse socialism and russian communism, that took brilliance. Did Herman Gheoring teach you to blur reality to or was that all on your own? The free market doesn’t drive mankind, or technology would never exist. No one owns the patent to the wheel or the lever and pulley, its a benefit of society to humanity. I guess France has a regime that I wasn’t aware of either? Broaden your mind before saying such asinine comments. — Anonymous

August
06, 2009
08:06 pm
Link

I love the cognitive dissonance that runs rampant within the Adbuster ranks. There is no confusion. The ONLY moderately stable manifestation of socialism is brutal totalitarianism. If you read, you know the scores of examples other than Russian Communism, most notably the Progressivist ideals of the Nazis (as in National SOCIALIST German Workers party?). It’s the same story over and over…currently being played out by the moron Chavez. Reform constitution, undermine judiciary, take executive control over government coffers, take control of electoral agencies, take control of army, take outright control of judiciary, selectively suspend property and personal rights. FANTASTIC! If that’s the road to socialist enlightenment then please put your vote (oh right, you don’t really get one) where your mouth is and move down there? By the way I’m assuming you don’t really know who Gheoring (sic) was. He was a Nazi. He’s one of the grandfathers of your political movement. The Progressivist precursor to the Democrats were falling all over the Nazis and Mussolini - you know, until they started killing all the Jews and annexing countries at will (and actually for quite a while after that too). Why is it that you guys never see this stuff coming? Too busy “culture jamming,” I suppose. — Anonymous

August
07, 2009
06:17 am
Link

exactly!! check out this story it spells it out so event adbusters might get it http://mises.org/story/1937 — Anonymous

July
29, 2009
11:31 pm
Link

The train analogy is correct. The only thing that will cause a change in direction is the crash itself. It’s unfortunate, but trying to convince John Q. Public of anything that might take him out of his comfort zone is a waste of time. Take gas prices. It was the emergency of high gas prices that caused people to drive less. You can tell people about the benefits of bike commuting till you’re blue in the face, and no one will change their habits. But when people can’t afford gas, they change their habits. You can talk about the health benefits of going vegetarian till you’re blue in the face. But your friend will keep eating red meat like it’s going out of style until they get colon cancer. Then in a last ditch effort to cling to life, they might just try to go veggie. Bad habits are the norm. No one gives a shit until they are hurting. It is human nature. We are all cannibals. We are animals, killing and raping to suit our immediate needs. No one thinks of the future…especially of the future of others. I just defined capitalism. We are all on track for going off the track…derailment. I am done with trying to convince others of anything. The others refuse to listen. The others don’t give a shit about anything but their own personal immediate situation. The only thing left for me is to try to figure out how I personally will survive the end-game. Hmmm, I guess I tried the righteous path….that didn’t work….I guess now I’ll be a capitalist! — Anonymous

July
27, 2009
02:56 pm
Link

The title of this article, “The Delusion Revolution”, is probably more suiting than Robert Jensen intended. Only the deluded could possibly believe in such nonesense.

The train analogy only works should the “derailment” be certain. In this case it is not. Simply stating the world is coming to an end or that our economic model is doomed to failure is not enough. Let’s see something other than “faith” based assumptions that would indicate internationally or domestically that our “system” is on its way to self destruction. The problem with “revolution” of this sort, much like global warming alarmism, is that it cannot stand up to analysis and instead relies on gimmicks, romanticism, and emotions to gain credibility among youth who are easily impressionable.

A far more realistic analogy might be:

Imagine yourself on a train that has been chugging along its route for decades when all of a sudden some lunatic on the train begins yelling about crashing and derailment. Should you rely on the lunatic’s information, or instead look to the highly trained conductor of the train who is able to see more clearly the route ahead? ReasonRebel — ReasonRebel

August
04, 2009
07:27 pm
Link

Spoken like a true mammon worshiper who thinks the status quo, capitalistic liberal economics and centralized statist euphemistic ‘democracy’ are the best of all possible worlds, and there is no other sliced bread train worth riding, thereby deriding any who dare suggest the king is unfashionably butt naked. democracynow.org/2006/4/21/overthrow_americas_century_of_regime_change , democracynow.org/2006/5/8/part_ii_overthrow_americas_century_of — Anonymous

August
06, 2009
04:02 pm
Link

I love the lack of perspective, self-awareness and balance in this crowd. We have a group of self-loathing, anti-capitalist liberals talking trash about western society in an attempt to self-flagellate themselves out from under their urban, white-burden conscience. This group is obsessed with any shortcomings of capitalism and modern democracies and attempts to use those issues as a bearing point for promoting radical, fantasy leftist agendas - as if the “worst crimes ” of both systems are in any sense equal. If the vanguard of the capitalist society leaves you behind, at worst, you can make the choice to pick yourself back up and progress. If you’re disaffected in a “socialist” state, you’re one of millions that are purged, displaced, cleansed or otherwise erased because you’re an enemy of the collective/people. So your approach is to attempt to push Western civilization as close as possible to Stalinism (which is the ONLY logical progression of socialism - both in theory and history) but back it off a bit? Tens of millions dying because they don’t agree with one guy CAN be somewhat unconscionable - even for a hardcore liberal. I discuss these issues with my wife - who is from the former USSR - and she laughs at the prospect; socialism cannot exist without suspending people’s rights. Sacrificing the individual at the altar of the collective. — Anonymous

September
17, 2009
12:49 pm
Link

We're given a wide latitude to express our opinions and beliefs in this country. But maybe we should revisit the Constitution. I'm not advocating censorship or Stalinism but the truth is, humans cannot be trusted to act rationally and logically.

— Anonymous

August
06, 2009
03:39 pm
Link

Again, it is not progressive to whine. Why not suggest something. If you are to challenge the status quo then why not make an argument rather than simply complain. — Anonymous

We are a global network of culture jammers and creatives working to change the way information flows, the way corporations wield power, and the way meaning is produced in our society.

Now 83,840 strong!

Join Us >>