home  |  book  |  blogs  |   RSS  |  contact  |
  An American Manifesto
Friday May 25, 2012 
by Christopher Chantrill Follow chrischantrill on Twitter

TOP NAV

Home

Blogs

Opeds

Articles

Bio

Contact

BOOK

Manifesto

Sample

Faith

Education

Mutual aid

Law

Books

BLOGS 12

May 2012

Apr 2012

Mar 2012

Feb 2012

Jan 2012

BLOGS 11

Dec 2011

Nov 2011

Oct 2011

Sep 2011

Aug 2011

Jul 2011

Jun 2011

May 2011

Apr 2011

Mar 2011

Feb 2011

Jan 2011

BLOGS 10

Dec 2010

Nov 2010

Oct 2010

Sep 2010

Aug 2010

Jul 2010

Jun 2010

May 2010

Apr 2010

Mar 2010

Feb 2010

Jan 2010

BLOGS 09

Dec 2009

Nov 2009

Oct 2009

Sep 2009

Aug 2009

Jul 2009

Jun 2009

May 2009

Apr 2009

Mar 2009

Feb 2009

Jan 2009

BLOGS 08

Dec 2008

Nov 2008

Oct 2008

Sep 2008

Aug 2008

Jul 2008

Jun 2008

May 2008

Apr 2008

Mar 2008

Feb 2008

Jan 2008

BLOGS 07

Dec 2007

Nov 2007

Oct 2007

Sep 2007

Aug 2007

Jul 2007

Jun 2007

May 2007

Apr 2007

Mar 2007

Feb 2007

Jan 2007

BLOGS 06

Dec 2006

Nov 2006

Oct 2006

Sep 2006

Aug 2006

Jul 2006

Jun 2006

May 2006

Apr 2006

Mar 2006

Feb 2006

Jan 2006

BLOGS 05

Dec 2005

Nov 2005

Oct 2005

Sep 2005

Aug 2005

Jul 2005

Jun 2005

May 2005

Apr 2005

Mar 2005

Feb 2005

Jan 2005

BLOGS 04

Dec 2004

Capitalism in Crisis? Surely You Jest! Whither the White Working Class

print view

The Great Recession is now the Great Restructuring

by Christopher Chantrill
November 19, 2011 at 2:35 pm

|

IT'S NO longer just the Great Recession. Now the experts are talking about the "Great Restructuring" of the economy. Here's how the narrative goes.

Back in the Great Depression, the big problem was not just the depression; it was a Great Transition over a twenty-year period from 1930 to 1950. Arnold Kling:

Demand fell for human effort such as lifting, squeezing, and hammering. Demand increased for workers who could read and follow directions. The evolutionary process eventually changed us from a nation of laborers to a nation of clerks.

The economy of clerks lasted for about half a century. But now the economy needs more than clerks who can follow orders. "If a job can be characterized by a precise set of instructions, then that job is a candidate to be automated or outsourced to modestly educated workers in developing countries." The result is the "squeezed middle." There is still a need for low skills, and high-skilled people are in high demand. But people with limited skills get squeezed: what are all the clerks going to do now?

Kling sees three future scenarios. In the optimistic one, "the supply of workers adapts to changes in technology," but more likely, the future depends on how "institutions serve to ameliorate problems created by disparities in ability." In a world "where rewards are concentrated among those who are disciplined, self-directed learners with creative gifts," institutions may possibly develop "humane, rational approaches" for assisting the less creative. More likely, the elites will compete for resources as they "claim to be fighting on behalf of the disadvantaged."

This sort of top-down social mechanics is exactly what ails the modern world, and you can see it right there in Kling's reduction of resourceful humans into an abstract "supply of workers." It is an attitude that willfully misunderstands the whole story of the last half-millennium. Humans are not passive, mind-numbed robots sitting in a supply warehouse waiting to be organized into productivity by a brilliant overclass. Nowhere in Kling's analysis is the simple Hayekian understanding that millions of individual Americans right now are making decisions as consumers and producers, not to mention students and educators, that will inaugurate the future of the new America, with or without the participation of the overclass.

Let us not deny that we have a problem. But ever since the start of the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century, humans have been voting with their feet and migrating in their tens of millions to the industrial cities, and adapting themselves to the demands of the market system. Why not? Adapting, according to the evolutionists, is what humans do.

It's natural for people at the top to think that the only way you can run a massive industrial system is by rigid discipline dispensed by a wise and educated overclass. That is what the textile magnates thought when they adapted the discipline of the slave labor plantation to the manufactory. That is what the leaders of armies thought too when they invented Prussian discipline. But it has turned out that rigid discipline is not just evil; it is ineffective, and it is obvious why. Humans are inventive, adaptive, social creatures, and they thrive best when innovating, adapting, and socializing. That's why in the 1920s, the German Gen. von Seeckt abandoned Prussian discipline and decided that the German army needed soldiers to be "self-reliant, self-confident, dedicated, and joyful in taking responsibility."

The modern German economy is built on the same principle. Almost 80 percent of German workers are employed in the "Mittelstand" of small, family-owned, specialized businesses that work at being the best-in-class in some high-value global niche. Not much room for clerks in the Mittelstand -- not since World War II.

Even Walmart is dedicated to the principle of giving its lower-level workers the power to make significant decisions. So when well-intentioned educationists start to think about saving the poor "workers whose skills are limited to following directions in well-defined jobs," you start to worry. Is it possible that the people that brought us crony green capitalism, failed stimuli, bankrupt Fannies and Freddies, and government high schools from which 50 percent of the graduates need remedial help at college have anything to teach us on how to restructure the economy?

Elites have a role to play in modern society, and they can help with the Great Restructuring. But the path forward will be cleared by millions of ordinary Hayekian strivers and the innovation of a few unheralded geniuses, not by the credentialed great and good. The best thing our intelligent elite can do is go to Hippocratic reeducation camp and resolve to "do no harm."

God may not play dice, but He certainly likes a good laugh. Today, in America, the people that profess the religion of creativity and free expression are the very people who insist upon forcing everyone into rigid, one-size-fits-all plans for government restructuring. What a joke.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com.  His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

 

 TAGS


Chappies

“But I saw a man yesterday who knows a fellow who had it from a chappie that said that Urquhart had been dipping himself a bit recklessly off the deep end.”  —Freddy Arbuthnot
Dorothy L. Sayers, Strong Poison


Civil Society

“Civil Society”—a complex welter of intermediate institutions, including businesses, voluntary associations, educational institutions, clubs, unions, media, charities, and churches—builds, in turn, on the family, the primary instrument by which people are socialized into their culture and given the skills that allow them to live in broader society and through which the values and knowledge of that society are transmitted across the generations.
Francis Fukuyama, Trust


Hugo on Genius

“Tear down theory, poetic systems… No more rules, no more models… Genius conjures up rather than learns… ” —Victor Hugo
César Graña, Bohemian versus Bourgeois


Education

“We have met with families in which for weeks together, not an article of sustenance but potatoes had been used; yet for every child the hard-earned sum was provided to send them to school.”
E. G. West, Education and the State


Faith & Purpose

“When we began first to preach these things, the people appeared as awakened from the sleep of ages—they seemed to see for the first time that they were responsible beings...”
Finke, Stark, The Churching of America, 1776-1990


Conversion

“When we received Christ,” Phil added, “all of a sudden we now had a rule book to go by, and when we had problems the preacher was right there to give us the answers.”
James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh


Postmodernism

A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ’merely relative’, is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy


Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006


China and Christianity

At first, we thought [the power of the West] was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity.
David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing


Religion, Property, and Family

But the only religions that have survived are those which support property and the family. Thus the outlook for communism, which is both anti-property and anti-family, (and also anti-religion), is not promising.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit


Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity


US Life in 1842

Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism


mysql close

 

©2007 Christopher Chantrill