US Nationalism and Peak Oil

[Surlethe]

A lot has been made recently of US nationalism and growing militaristic culture. It seems that the overpatriotism in the US may help tide the US through the economic crisis after peak oil, or at least prepare the way for a military government that could exercise dictatorial power to restructure the economy.

Thoughts? Is US nationalistic fervor something that people feel only when they're fat and healthy, or is it something that could actually help the US stick through peak oil as a unit instead of splintering under the economic strain?

[K. A. Pital]

Heh. Never underestimate the economic malaise. Militaristic? Powerful? Check Russian Empire. Or German Empire. Both collapsed in a short while under economic strain. Both were more nationalistic than the currently existing governments. The economic strain was not connected to a physical lack of fuel resource for the industry.

The US is a highly industrialized country with a militaristic population, but even if it would take on dictatorship, it would hardly allow nationalization. Clans and oligarchy ahoy! Besides, the crisis would be a lot more permanent than the before-existing ones in other countries, since fuel will not be back.

[Edi]

The nationalism isn't going to get you anywhere since it would actually require most your population to sacrifice a lot of their current luxury o get anything done and as soon as the government tries to make any moves like that, it'll get ugly. So you'll muddle along until you fall off the cliff. The same will happen to most other Western nations, by the way, but I expect the US will be hardest hit due to the way your infrastructure is set up.

[Broomstick]

A lot has been made recently of US nationalism and growing militaristic culture. It seems that the overpatriotism in the US may help tide the US through the economic crisis after peak oil, or at least prepare the way for a military government that could exercise dictatorial power to restructure the economy.

Thoughts? Is US nationalistic fervor something that people feel only when they're fat and healthy, or is it something that could actually help the US stick through peak oil as a unit instead of splintering under the economic strain?

First of all, those who speak of "military government" I think overestimate the enthusiasm of the general public for the military. The current "support the troops" delirium is due in part to lingering guilt over how returning troops from Viet Nam were treated, and also because those of us who do not support the war but don't have the power to end it are trying to mitigate the suffering and burden on those of our citizens who bear the brunt of the burden - the military and their families.

Patrotism, to the extent it sees us as one group rather than splintered factions, acts as a social bond and will enable one part of the country to give to another without a strict quid pro quo or resettle large numbers of people. You saw that post-Katrina - the long-term bungling and corruption does not erase the fact that initially people from across the US, even as far as Alaska and Hawaii, donated time, money, good, and effort. The survivors were not exclusively herded into camps but the vast majority went elsewhere and resettled, blending into the populations of the areas they moved to. (The current group of people stuck in FEMA locations are those who have the least resources - the elderly, the disabled, the poorest of the poor. They don't fit in well with the Repulican ideal of working 80 hour weeks and burning capital to get started again since many are incapable of working even part time, and have no resources to draw upon)

The other problem with the idea of a military dictatorship is that it stands in contradiction to the US Constitution. Granted, that could be overturned, but it's worshipped in much the same way as the flag is.

In WWII patriotism was used to get people to go along with food rationing, gas rationing (even though we loved our cars then, too), and various other sorts of impositions. So there is precedent for the use of patriotism to weather a crisis. But you have to convince the vast majority there is a real, direct threat to be combatted by such sacrifice.

[Knife]

The nationalism isn't going to get you anywhere since it would actually require most your population to sacrifice a lot of their current luxury o get anything done and as soon as the government tries to make any moves like that, it'll get ugly. So you'll muddle along until you fall off the cliff. The same will happen to most other Western nations, by the way, but I expect the US will be hardest hit due to the way your infrastructure is set up.

I think that's pretty close to the mark. Militaristic culture has been tossed about lately, but really it's a arm chair general type. Recruiters are hardly overflowed with potential recruits, even with all the nationalistic rah-rah military type fevor.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The proper evaluation is that the people will offer no effectual resistance, which is quite different from saying they'll actually support what's going on. Once upon a time I fancied this was not the case, but it's become clear that the average American is far to lazy and enamoured of their luxuries to suffer.

At any rate, the reason for a military government is hardly altruistic or something of that sort. Rather it is to prevent communist revolution.

It seems that I'm the only person who has carefully thought through the full implications of peak oil, namely, that the assets and incomes of the middle class and the working class in America will actually be declining in real terms. Now, you see, that will be the first time that has ever happened in a modern industrial society, and it is in fact the Marxian immersization theory come to life.

Therefore democracy will end and the military will gain power not because the military will be recognized as being better for dealing with the ramifications of the situation or because of popular support for it as such, but rather because of a broad-based fear in the conservative elements of society about the rapidly growing prospects for a general strike and communist revolution.

Once a military government is in power it will have the ability to force recovery measures on society, and one could argue that it will start doing so as a matter of course, because industry is so crucial to the modern military. In short, the recovery measures will not be taken to make life better for the average person, but rather to preserve the military-industrial complex. This is why widespread extreme suffering is highly probable even with considerable government action devoted to recovery; it's unlikely that the government will be working on recovery measures to give you all back your pleasures. They'll be doing it to maintain state power.

[TC Pilot]

Anyone who thinks the United States is on the verge of transforming into a military dictatorship or endure any other kind of revolution because of economic strain has absolutely no understanding of American history and very little grasp of the present.

[TC Pilot]

[EDIT] - I probably overgeneralized again.

A collapse in oil production would probably not be the complete disaster that would be a catalyst for revolution or coup as, presumably, some alternative fuels are implimented as supplements or replacements for oil.

The US has been hit pretty hard by economic woes before, and nothing revolutionary came out of it. And it would take something very close to a worst-case scenario, like in Russia or Germany of 1918 or France in 1789, to bring something like a military dictatorship about.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

This is going to be potentially as bad for the USA as WW1 - Spanish Flu - Russian Civil War - Early communist famines combined were for Russia, so, your "exception" is in fact an accurate description of how bad things will be, explaining why we are talking like this.

[The Spartan]

*snip* But you have to convince the vast majority there is a real, direct threat to be combatted by such sacrifice.

That, I fear, is the catch. It may be that I'm living in Texas surrounded by too many jingoistic, fundy morons but my impression is that Americans are more likely to blame someone else for the problem (like them "dirty, overcharging a-rabs") rather than admit that maybe, just maybe, we are going to have to change our lifestyles.

[K. A. Pital]

WW1 - Spanish Flu - Russian Civil War - Early communist famines combined were for Russia

You've got precursor reasons and consequences lumped together. Civil War is a consequence of the fall of the Russian Empire. Famines of 1917-1922 are the consequence of Civil War. WWI, massive spread of diseases, pauperisation of the populace and Russian famines 1895-1917 are the initial reasons for the fall of the Russian Empire.

Note that you don't really need all of them combined to make a government fall today. The fact is that several key government structures that were always more or less under governmental control, such as telecommunications, food supplies and power supplies, in the course of the XX century have rapidly left the government control area. Due to this, a far milder crisis can throw a government off-balance.

Taking note that this is the United States, apparently the most powerful single-government entity in the world, it would take a large crisis to take that down, but such a crisis is not impossible given certain scenario pre-requisites, some of which are already in place.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

You've got precursor reasons and consequences lumped together. Civil War is a consequence of the fall of the Russian Empire. Famines of 1917-1922 are the consequence of Civil War. WWI, massive spread of diseases, pauperisation of the populace and Russian famines 1895-1917 are the initial reasons for the fall of the Russian Empire.

Note that you don't really need all of them combined to make a government fall today. The fact is that several key government structures that were always more or less under governmental control, such as telecommunications, food supplies and power supplies, in the course of the XX century have rapidly left the government control area. Due to this, a far milder crisis can throw a government off-balance.

Taking note that this is the United States, apparently the most powerful single-government entity in the world, it would take a large crisis to take that down, but such a crisis is not impossible given certain scenario pre-requisites, some of which are already in place.

I'm talking about in terms of level of suffering for the common individuals in the society, Stas.

You do agree that much suffering would make people turn to communism, yes? Which even if there was never enough support for a revolution, would nonetheless spark sundry elements in society to move to institute military control for security purposes.

[K. A. Pital]

You do agree that much suffering would make people turn to communism, yes?

Correct. The fact that communism was victorious in economic hardship is a byproduct of the objective economic forces - when little resource is left, an ideology that promises to save this resource, centralize it and use for the good of the whole population wins the minds of the people. It can be not exactly communism, but any brand of socialism that would promise that would have support in times of hardship.

Which even if there was never enough support for a revolution, would nonetheless spark sundry elements in society to move to institute military control for security purposes.

That I agree with. A larger part of American citizenry can never be convinced to turn to anything resembling socialism or communism. They'd more likely take fascism from the power and be fine about it.

[Broomstick]

The proper evaluation is that the people will offer no effectual resistance, which is quite different from saying they'll actually support what's going on. Once upon a time I fancied this was not the case, but it's become clear that the average American is far to lazy and enamoured of their luxuries to suffer.

Yeah, but if their luxuries were no longer obtainable - in other words, we don't get them either way - then sacrifice and the social good may reassert itself in American society. Or may not. Or it may vary by region.

At any rate, the reason for a military government is hardly altruistic or something of that sort. Rather it is to prevent communist revolution.

Given that even the ignorant average American has some notion of how shitty communist regimes turned out during the 20th Century, it may not require government suppression to prevent a mass uprising.

I mean - look at the opposition to something like universal health care! If people are that scared communism might gain a toehold in the US they'll let people suffer and die because they can't access medical care do you really think gas at $5 or $10 a gallon would suddenly make them change their minds?

It seems that I'm the only person who has carefully thought through the full implications of peak oil, namely, that the assets and incomes of the middle class and the working class in America will actually be declining in real terms.

Oh, please - we've thought it through. We've just come to a different conclusion than you have.

Now, you see, that will be the first time that has ever happened in a modern industrial society

The first it will have happened in the United States - and that only if you discount the Great Depression.

That scenario happend in Germany between WWI and WWII and you didn't get Communism, you got Nazis.

Therefore democracy will end and the military will gain power not because the military will be recognized as being better for dealing with the ramifications of the situation or because of popular support for it as such, but rather because of a broad-based fear in the conservative elements of society about the rapidly growing prospects for a general strike and communist revolution.

General strike /= communist revolution.

In any case - the rich oligarchs are always terrified because the peasents outnumber them. The trick is to make sure the peasents don't catch on to that.

This is why widespread extreme suffering is highly probable even with considerable government action devoted to recovery

I think you may be over-estimating the capabilities of the current regime.

[K. A. Pital]

That scenario happend in Germany between WWI and WWII and you didn't get Communism, you got Nazis.

Actually if you read Duchess' scenario, she proposes fascists to take control over society because of the fears of a revolution/general fear of communism.

Remember that Germany has had a socialist revolution attempt in 1918, that got stomped, but socialists and communists had significant parliamentary power and the German fascists rose to power on nationalism and traditionalism combined with anticommunism.

Thus I fail to see how the example of postwar Germany is in any contradiction to this most highly possible scenario.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The central thesis if marxism is entirely dependent on the workers getting poorer and poorer as time goes on. That hasn't happened in a sustained fashion; there have been abrupt shocks, but most of these brought no small considerable socialist correction with them. That is, however, what we're looking at now. Marxism as an economic theory has only been definitely and laughably invalid because the preconditions have never been met--and yet it appears that the preconditions may indeed soon be met.

At any rate, the other factor to consider are the works of the Syndicalist political writer Georges Sorel in the late 19th century. More to the point he essentially proposed that an "energizing myth" would move to the working class to the action of a general strike (with the goal of revolution), regardless of the actual facts on the ground, and that such a voluntarist marxism was appropriate to the social circumstances of the period. Therefore the real threat is not from the actual conditions of marxism becoming true but rather a belief that they are becoming true gripping the broader population. And if belief alone, irrationally and emotionally held, can spur people to action (as the example of Islamism obviously provides us and shows us to be true) toward revolution, it can also inspire people against revolution; i.e., a dictatorship to guard against communist revolution could be formed if enough people believe that a communist revolution is likely under those circumstances, even if that belief has no bearing on reality.

[TC Pilot]

I think what it all comes down to is how governments handle the hypothetical energy crisis before it happens. A country that has taken the steps neccesary to maintain a modern society will obviously suffer the least. It may still be a crisis, but not on the apocalyptic proportions some are indicating it will be.

If a society gets hit full-force, anything could happen. It won't be a Second Dark Age, but it won't be pretty.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I think what it all comes down to is how governments handle the hypothetical energy crisis before it happens. A country that has taken the steps neccesary to maintain a modern society will obviously suffer the least. It may still be a crisis, but not on the apocalyptic proportions some are indicating it will be.

If a society gets hit full-force, anything could happen. It won't be a Second Dark Age, but it won't be pretty.

Nothing substantial will happen until the population is already suffering, that's the bloody problem.

[Gil Hamilton]

I think it's that even the people who call themselves "Communists" are really shitty Communists, let alone the people who are called "communists" by the Right. The last Communist I met had a goddamn iPod and Nike shoes to go with his Che Guevara T-shirt.

The only sort of Communist Revolution that would happen is one that your Fascists would be make up. Of course, that would be time honored, since Communists/Trade Unionists are part of top four Scapegoats of the 19th/20th century, the other three being Jews, Foriegners, and Protestants/Catholics (depending on whether or not the country is majority Protestant or Catholic). And frankly, I don't think that enough people are going to swallow the "Communists!" line. You'd have a much easier time in America blaming homosexuals, athiests, and non-Christians for America's Woes, since conservatives actually believe those ones. Look at all the people who are willing to buy that gay folks cause hurricanes.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Support for the Republican party in the base only collapsed the moment Bush started ramming through pro-immigration legislation, however.

[Lisa]

Well given the USA's standing on the second amendment and how the thought of communism makes 99% of americans freak out, I don't see the united states turning to communism or becoming a military dictatorship. more likely to see them split up into smaller regions, with some of the smaller regions banding together to make little countries and some states like texas, california and hawaii becoming countries on their own. economically i don't believe it's possible for the usa to maintain as a country. Things in the mid west will go back to how they were on the frontier (sans indians).
There will be a lot of anarchy and fundies.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Well given the USA's standing on the second amendment and how the thought of communism makes 99% of americans freak out, I don't see the united states turning to communism or becoming a military dictatorship. more likely to see them split up into smaller regions, with some of the smaller regions banding together to make little countries and some states like texas, california and hawaii becoming countries on their own. economically i don't believe it's possible for the usa to maintain as a country. Things in the mid west will go back to how they were on the frontier (sans indians).
There will be a lot of anarchy and fundies.

Railroads prevent that from ever happening, quite simply. They make mass transportation to easy, and therefore, extend state power by definition.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I suspect that the U.S. will just slide further into illiberal democracy, at least in the reasonably predictable future. The quality of education and social services for the working and middle class will gradually decline, and their desperation and sinking quality of education will result in a dysfunctional electorate which will be lied to by shrewd elites or flock to demagogues. There will be a lot of nationalization and government intrusion into the economy (absolutely necessary). I suspect it won't go all-out commie, with remaining oligarchs from the rump of the top 5% of the U.S. population that accumulated the scraps and prepared/horded in preparation or at least early in the aftermath of the oil crunch.

The massive aged class of non-productive, incapable of physical labor elderly now saddling the social system will be subject to declining life expectancy and declining quality and availability of health care, and retirement will go out the window. The 50% of American students now not graduating from high school with a diploma will be part of a poorly compensated physical labor force that will be forced to work very long, very hard hours to rebuild a sustainable infrastructure. I suspect that immigrants and visible minorities and percieved political radicals will be subject to increased informal public persecution and ostracization, and depending on the extent of their interference, possible prosecution and imprisonment.

Who wins? Well people smart enough to take out fixed-interest loans before the ridiculous modern credit regime collapses in order to invest in arable rural property, shares in coal and uranium mines, and precious metals necessary to restore stability to the currency will win. As will those who invest first in minimalist, efficienct housing close to rail lines of transit and a secure place of work and capable of raising private gardens and orchards, as well as those who invest in personal renewable energy sources such as the Sterling generators Duchess described, photovolatic cells, underground heat sinks for efficient cooling/heating, and wind turbines. All these people will possess very valuable assets in the form of partial food self-sufficiency, energy exporting opportunity, and minimizing energy use. The value of gold will skyrocket as the just about every asset in the stock market collapses. Also having a farm outside of town in the same extended family unit that hopefully can be accessed by cheap transit would be beneficial. I'd own some rifles to protect your property and assets as your bankrupting neighbors in their decaying McMansions (exurban wood-frame houses of this type will literally be worth less than the land they sit in alone, which stripped of the extraneous and wasteful house and its materials recycled, may be redeveloped into farms) will contrive some excuse to riot on occasion in the next couple decades.

As for education, anyone's guess is as good as mine. I'm learning economics right now so I can figure out when and how to make sound decisions regarding my finances and assets as these events come to pass but I also am thinking about returning to physics and finding a bedrock of hopefully professional employment that may remain secure and guarentee a decent standard of life for me and my close family. I'm also looking into purchasing arable land and finding a good place to live, learning about gardening and farming, getting used to riding a bike, eventually I'm going to learn to ride a horse. This may seem extreme to many of you, but this alternatives are VASTLY cheaper to continuing to rely on vehicles powered by internal combustion and eliminating or limiting the most extreme extent possible reliance upon those modes of transit is vital. Remember, these assets will shortly thereafter become of extreme value to your neighbors, who'd like to rent your horses for transit, buy from your farm, buy electricity from your wind/photovoltaic complex, and the commodities market and the banking system will thirst for your gold, while the government and whatever industrial complexes surviving to build electrical, agricultural, and transportation infrastructure will want the mines you own shares in.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I suspect that the U.S. will just slide further into illiberal democracy, at least in the reasonably predictable future. The quality of education and social services for the working and middle class will gradually decline, and their desperation and sinking quality of education will result in a dysfunctional electorate which will be lied to by shrewd elites or flock to demagogues. There will be a lot of nationalization and government intrusion into the economy (absolutely necessary). I suspect it won't go all-out commie, with remaining oligarchs from the rump of the top 5% of the U.S. population that accumulated the scraps and prepared/horded in preparation or at least early in the aftermath of the oil crunch.

The massive aged class of non-productive, incapable of physical labor elderly now saddling the social system will be subject to declining life expectancy and declining quality and availability of health care, and retirement will go out the window. The 50% of American students now not graduating from high school with a diploma will be part of a poorly compensated physical labor force that will be forced to work very long, very hard hours to rebuild a sustainable infrastructure. I suspect that immigrants and visible minorities and percieved political radicals will be subject to increased informal public persecution and ostracization, and depending on the extent of their interference, possible prosecution and imprisonment.

Who wins? Well people smart enough to take out fixed-interest loans before the ridiculous modern credit regime collapses in order to invest in arable rural property, shares in coal and uranium mines, and precious metals necessary to restore stability to the currency will win. As will those who invest first in minimalist, efficienct housing close to rail lines of transit and a secure place of work and capable of raising private gardens and orchards, as well as those who invest in personal renewable energy sources such as the Sterling generators Duchess described, photovolatic cells, underground heat sinks for efficient cooling/heating, and wind turbines. All these people will possess very valuable assets in the form of partial food self-sufficiency, energy exporting opportunity, and minimizing energy use. The value of gold will skyrocket as the just about every asset in the stock market collapses. Also having a farm outside of town in the same extended family unit that hopefully can be accessed by cheap transit would be beneficial. I'd own some rifles to protect your property and assets as your bankrupting neighbors in their decaying McMansions (exurban wood-frame houses of this type will literally be worth less than the land they sit in alone, which stripped of the extraneous and wasteful house and its materials recycled, may be redeveloped into farms) will contrive some excuse to riot on occasion in the next couple decades.

As for education, anyone's guess is as good as mine. I'm learning economics right now so I can figure out when and how to make sound decisions regarding my finances and assets as these events come to pass but I also am thinking about returning to physics and finding a bedrock of hopefully professional employment that may remain secure and guarentee a decent standard of life for me and my close family. I'm also looking into purchasing arable land and finding a good place to live, learning about gardening and farming, getting used to riding a bike, eventually I'm going to learn to ride a horse. This may seem extreme to many of you, but this alternatives are VASTLY cheaper to continuing to rely on vehicles powered by internal combustion and eliminating or limiting the most extreme extent possible reliance upon those modes of transit is vital. Remember, these assets will shortly thereafter become of extreme value to your neighbors, who'd like to rent your horses for transit, buy from your farm, buy electricity from your wind/photovoltaic complex, and the commodities market and the banking system will thirst for your gold, while the government and whatever industrial complexes surviving to build electrical, agricultural, and transportation infrastructure will want the mines you own shares in.

This is the most substantiative, informative, and grounded post on the subject of peak oil that I have yet seen on this board, and frankly, it's probably your greatest contribution to the board in the whole time you've been posting on it. It is both succinct and comprehensive, and I wish I could force everyone who posts on SD.net to read it.

[Admiral Valdemar]

The thing is, I can see IP's post's content taking place now and has been taking place for years it would seem. Whether that is down to the topic here or not is debatable, but I've not doubt PO would accelerate the trend if it exists as I believe it does.