Intellectual Starvation and Ziegler's new Book.

Freedom in Western society was essential for allowing a huge advance in technology. In addition to some support by the government, technology is driven by the pressures of competition. This allowed the achievement of very high productivity in the modern societies and with it, a high standard of living. However, this happened only in the Western countries and Japan.  In most other countries and also in parts of the West, people still live in very poor circumstances. For various reasons, practical and idealistic, the world ought to be interested in a tolerably equitable distribution of incomes which, given our productivity, should be possible in the West without major problems. But to recognize the problem, we need undisturbed vision -  whereas the struggles of the various interest groups in their blind drive to obtain political advantages over the rest of society are a great hindrance. Furthermore, we have a struggle for influence in the intellectual domain, between the basic world views of right and left, and the role of the religions, all of which proceeds more from ignorance and ego mania than from real problems.

All this, while the cultural situation has become very critical with the arrival of a fanatical Islam in the Western world. Now, the problems generated go well beyond the common shortcomings of individuals. It seems hopeless to expect a more productive style in politics unless the general education can be improved so that the basic facts of economics and politics become more widely known. As long as a blind struggle for power is the main political force in a free state, the price will be an unnecessary reduction of the social product; it makes most social improvements very difficult, and increases the danger to the state itself. As always, the intelligentsia is to provide the intellectual climate in the culture, but they are seriously weakening their influence by exhausting their resources in partisan politics.

A major factor is also the now endemic failure of modern intellectuals to think in sufficiently clear terms, as Descartes has urged us to do at the dawn of modern times. Truly independent thinkers are rare and group think predominates. The ideological confusion on the “Left” is perhaps deeper than a confusion on the “Right”, because the Left by using the obsolete Marxism as their main tool to understand the events, prides itself to be so "scientific". I find an instructive example in the work of the noted Swiss politician, special Rapporteur of the UN., professor of Sociology in Geneva and Paris-Sorbonne, and author of best selling books, Jean Ziegler. At first sight, Prof. Ziegler seems to be without doubt one of the best qualified social observers. However, reading his latest book makes it clear that he is totally blinded by his ideology. His Imperium der Schande (L'Empire de la honte; The Empire of Shame), is a source of important data which would be educational, but his interpretation suffers from grave errors.

We read right at the very top on the inside flyer the astonishing claim that the Declaration of Independence states as a universal human right a “right to individual human happiness”!  The Declaration, in fact, says wisely that “freedom to pursue happiness” is one of the human rights - an essential difference! Ziegler's version would put the responsibility on the government to provide happiness, instead of allowing its pursuit. This illuminates the confusion and explains some of the utopian flavor of what is being debated with much fervor in this book. 

Ziegler quotes the correct wording of the Declaration
later in the book, buried in the inside, but his book is an example for how much intelligent thinking can still be permeated by the typically leftist idea that the Governments are responsible for the happiness of their people. However, attempts to make the people happy through government action has always made them most unhappy because happiness is an eminently personal achievement which can be made easier or impossible by the environment, but not produced. Another fixed ideas of the author is that “poverty” is caused by economic conditions, period. This misconception grounded in superficial thinking, perhaps self delusion, brings Ziegler to claim, that the global Capitalism prospers because of hunger and debt (p. 231). This ridiculous nonsense is repeated by many writers in spite of all evidence to the contrary. Western medicine and food was given to many of these poor countries for decades. More than a trillion dollars have been used in the "war against poverty". And what happened? It effectively helped to increase the population of the poorest countries to numbers which seem totally unmanageable. Now, they are even more desperately poor than before and have become dependent.  To be as clear as possible:  They are poor because they do not produce enough to sustain their growing population.  The advanced countries are rich because they produce a wealth of goods and have stabilized their population. Unless we examine the reasons for this, we understand nothing.

What is so frequently misunderstood is the work of Thomas Robert Malthus (Malthus). Ziegler must know it, but forgets to take it into account. If helping the poor with money is a bad deed because it produces more poor and much more suffering in the future, then the West can be blamed for having been stupid and used the wrong medicine against poverty; we should not do it again. However now, Ziegler blames the industrialized nations with their well working industries for the mass poverty itself. Well, in the sense just discussed, this is a gross distortion; the West does not profit from the poverty. It profits from its own high productivity.

People are poor because for various reasons, they are not productive. Raw muscle power is all that they have to offer, and muscle power has been largely replaced by machines. Other problems, especially cultural limitations must also be taken up in some detail if we really want to understand poverty. But Ziegler confuses the important points which are the basis of his book. It is interesting in details and the data certainly salutary to read, but the book as a whole is pure Marxist propaganda. Of course, we should know by now that this thinking is a terrible medicine for poverty. It has been demonstrated at extremely high cost of lives in dozens of countries in the 20th century. It makes the people so unhappy that they try to flee if they can, and they must be kept behind walls. The result is completely contrary to Ziegler's noble goal, which all of us ought to share: A fundamental improvement of the human life.

Poverty can only be attacked by producing more in the society and for this we need a change in some habits. It will not be cured by damaging those who produce most of the modern wealth because if we do, we will end by having everybody poor.
People have never achieved happiness by revolting, or with new administrative structures staffed with politically selected incompetents. For real social advance, the only effective way to combat poverty is to support early education with substantial and deep conditioning for a life in freedom  (e.g., in training centers under well selected leadership to get the youngsters out from their environment and break bad habits). Of course, stimulation of the social production (including services) with incentives to counteract an excessive distortion of the income scales must be a social goal. Of course, resistance to an excessive concentration of power is also necessary and has, even before Barry Goldwater (who argued strongly against it), been recognized as an essential idea. To take up all of these problems requires a tremendous program with educated leadership at all levels which presently does not exist but must be developed. As members of the intelligentsia we, the intellectuals, must do the easy part first, develop ourselves and drop this obsolete reliance on Marxism as the only source of social thought!

Superior leaders who want to reduce poverty must do more than dole out welfare which can only distribute what others have produced. Ken Auletter (The Underclass), who has studied the problem extensively, makes the point that poverty even in America involves much more than an income shortfall. The group he considers primarily (the underclass) does not coincide with the Working Poor, even though, there is some overlap. His group needs individual attention because they have a variety of different needs. But most of all, they need to learn discipline and acquire better habits. As an example, in poorer areas in our own country, many young people (white and black) take opportunities for work, but work only until they get some money. When they are out of money, they look again for work. We can only conclude that it is a great injustice to use earnings of productively working people to subsidize those who seem perfectly happy with their less productive life because they are putting more children into their world of poverty without the least compunction. The last word is, again, that a radical change in the education policies and culture is needed for human advance. We can believe, it is even necessary for survival.

What people need very much I have not found discussed in writings of the Left such as Ziegler's. People need  instruction and incentives to learn and work. Gifts, even loans, after short transient benefits, have in the long run the opposite effect.  Ziegler, a professor of Sociology, does not seem to know the real cause of widespread and increasing poverty on our globe: it is the overpopulation in a culture that is totally inadequate for modern times. A population will become poorer if its productivity growth is left behind its population increase. Of course, severe cultural problems can oppose effective cures of poverty and nations are free to remain in their state of natural subsistence if they so wish in order to keep their traditional ways. Nobody is forced to come into the modern world. But if they decide not to participate, they cannot expect that the rest of the world can give them a free ride indefinitely to allow them to increase ever more their numbers - which is what debt cancellation and more credits really mean.

Following his mentor Karl Marx, Ziegler fills his book with hundreds of derogatory party slogans and names: Kosmokrats, Princes, myrmidons in the White House, in the CIA, the Pentagon, etc.,  — and he creates an alarmist litany which contributes nothing to the problem except that it generates hate - and sells his books.  He complains about the profits of the large companies, which he finds shameful in respect to the sufferings of millions of poor people. Well, looking only on this single aspect and ignoring the important rest, one has to agree. They are not as such equitable. However, the question is what can be done about it. While the world is full with real misdeeds of some in the influential circles, “elites”, “princes”, and
"myrmidons", have been arbitrary and have committed misdeeds more extensively in the socialist countries with their nationalized industries. It was much worse and created a near slavery of whole populations (Solzhenitsyn's Gulag) because of the absence of competition, the dogmatic blindness, and the greater centralization in the socialized industries.  Most sobering for Ziegler, of course, would be the realization that any system he would want, after he nationalizes Nestlé and the other large companies, would still have to be peopled by the Kosmokrats, Princes, myrmidons from the White House, the CIA, the Pentagon, because these have come from the general population and Ziegler does not understand that it is there where we have a problem.

The problem is universal and primarily an ethical one because I believe that man has not advanced in his ethics, while he advanced tremendously in his material power. Moreover, as Ziegler describes industrial misdeeds, these have been made easier by an excessive concentration of everything, and it would be made worse by more centralization. Relief through diversification is difficult because of existing structures, laws, licenses, and frames of thinking. Many of these have been adopted in the futile attempt to avoid industrial exploitation. But more centralization or nationalization would make things worse, not better. Then how can we obtain real improvements? Nationalization has failed, in Communism and in the cases of over bureaucratization. The present state is clearly also unsatisfactory, although it is vastly better, more civilized and much more productive than anything that the fully socialized countries have achieved. The modern industrialized nations enjoy a wealth that is breathtaking for anyone who can compare it with the 19th century. Any corrective measures to be considered must not endanger modern productivity, otherwise we impoverish everybody. It could even lead to a global starvation.  What is needed to increase the income of the working poor are a climate and incentives to create more jobs. This will increase automtically the wages of those who toil for low wages because their work is not very much needed.  If the governments collect too much taxes for their mega projects, they reduce the money that is available for low wage jobs.

Ziegler wants to go after the profits, but without maximizing productivity, we would have no medicines, no enlarged global food production, no labor saving devices such as the computer. In 1900, the world had little more than 1 billion people, and it could barely feed them. Today, with 6.5 billion, we have the potential to feed twice as many (as suggested in Ziegler's book, but I doubt this) and we have still poverty in vast areas of the globe. It is unclear why the Left and Ziegler are so opposed to the new development of bio generated foods if they can produce more food than the original varieties. We have more and more people who would not even be here without the advance of agricultural technology. Beyond arguing against the profits, the author mentions nothing (except an implied avoidance of monopolies) about what to do for a real improvement in our societies, given the weak character of man in the face of great temptations.

It is here, of course, where the real problem is and it is not limited to the chief executives, the “princes” of the large companies. Every poor person who puts additional people into his world of poverty without the means to educate this new person acts irresponsibly - and they do it by the billions. The culprits for the mass suffering in our world are everywhere. Most people suffer from the blind belief that, in spite of all experience, one can improve things radically with organizational, or political  means. It is easy to forget that even the best system must deal with the population growth and must still be staffed by the same weak persons who make these irresponsible decisions today, and they would have even more power (without competition)  in what Ziegler seems to envision as a better arrangement.  Of course, with absolute power in the hands of government, very effective measures can be taken, as demonstrated by modern China which stopped by draconic means the disastrous population growth of the early 20th century. But again, the price is loss of freedom.

We have forgotten that the world is a struggle for survival with pain, hunger, and death as the natural consequence. Only a well working society can lessen the strain on the individual. The West made the fatal "mistake" to reduce mortality while it could not advance the poor nations culturally. Now they are poorer than before. In nature, we have no rights, not even a right to survive. These are ideas that could arise only in productive free societies. Only a well working community can support us, but of course, it can do it only if we as individuals support society first because without its people, “Society” is nothing. Civic duties are the condition for, and must come before, any rights that go beyond the right to be free. It follows from all this that mankind has no hope to change its fate in any substantial manner, unless we condition the young more effectively for life in freedom than it is being done up to now. Civilization has arrived too fast and we all are biologically still cave men.  But we have the choice: either forcing and porhibiting under penalty of law, or real education of the yound.  Man is a brute, but he can learn and develop good habits.

We are not naturally good, as J. J. Rousseau and his romantic followers want us to believe. This belief is a mistake with serious consequences. Hsün-tzu (ca 250 BC), the great follower of Confucius, had a realistic concept of man and understood the situation clearly; but unfortunately, modern times followed Rousseau; his message sounded so much better, but this folly has cost humanity most dearly during the two centuries since his  time. It is one reason why so many people cannot see that the major social problem is really with the people, with ourselves, and not with the organization or in the state. We are naturally raw, and according to Ortega and others, in our true nature we are but wild beasts who come out from a thin cover of civilization as soon as the opportunity arises and our civilization has been too superficial.

We must say this because we are only the lucky survivors of the most brutal selection in a very long past and we are not naturally prepared for a life other than the life of a beast (which we actually have forgotten how to do it and need “survival” training). Therefore, we need a basic and deep conditioning before we can fit as free persons in a highly organized free modern society that requires good habits to bring high productivity, and standards of behavior from its members. Of course, we try to have a free society with laws and the police. But this is not sufficient; the police cannot improve true morality with laws. I.e., one cannot with laws make people generous, tolerant, productive, forgiving and disciplined. However, a conditioning is entirely possible, it has been understood as necessary and was proposed already by Plato. Of course, such a preparation cannot be expected to remove all bestial instincts in everybody, but it can instill habits to lead to a more productive live, and help us to recognize more clearly the need to control the bad instincts. This would be the most important goal to understand and to work out the social consequences for a general implementation.

Therefore, it would be a tremendous advance if Professor Ziegler and colleagues [1]  would stop trying to sell us a discredited Marxism as the cure for the ills of the world. We have abundant evidence that Marxism is harmful. One has only to look around: people are trying to flee their socialist heavens to come to the bad “capitalist” countries. One does not address the problem of large scale poverty, i.e., a deficiency of goods, by concentrating on excessive profits of companies such as Nestle as the major problem in our world. With today's inadequate education, not only poor productivity, but a great number of troubles is almost to be expected everywhere. On the other hand, if profits are excessive, they exist because of the absence of competition. To change this requires laws against Monopolies that must be implemented with understanding, energy and consequence, but the main task will still have to be with ourselves: that we must prepare the people for the modern civilization. Training and conditioning must accelerate the natural process of maturation that is much too slow. The fact is that for our very new and fast world, people do not think enough about their work and its consequences, especially the leaders who get into their positions under criteria that have nothing to do with their later most critical decisions (see Political Criteria . .).  It is extremely important that our intellectual leaders, such as Prof. Ziegler, would understand the problems.

The situation is aggravated by the action of the mass media. Under the pressure of their competition they fill their programs with a flood of trifles over and over again and hereby saturate the minds with intellectual garbage. This produces the equivalent of deficient nutrition because of junk food. They also create hate and fear with their alarming stories. We meet insufficient thought in our public discussions when the people need instruction. Most of all, we must improve the conditioning of the young as by far the most urgent and important problem after limiting the relentless population increase. Without doing this, our free civilization will not last.


Note:

[1]  On page 34, Ziegler claims that Microsoft keeps in its safes a treasure of 60 billion Dollars. Well, he does not understand this:  While they certainly have large reserves, it is not 60 billion dollars in a safe. They would be crazy if they did. Such confusion and ignorance in important facts makes his views totally unrealistic, and his book into a pure Marxist propaganda piece. It is not helpful for the finding of solutions to the real problem of the poor. Even worse, and  actually revolting is it to see this official UN Special Reporter implicitly condoning the mass murder of people by terrorists as a justified defense against the Western Capitalism! This is an eclipse of reason caused by clinging to an ideology that has long shown its nefarious effects.


Copyright © 2007,  Gernot M. R. Winkler      Last Correction  08/24/2009