06-06-2005, 01:02 AM
I. Introduction
Every generation asks, 'are my children going to be better off than I am?â, but how might that question be answered today?
Western societies, the first world nations in North America and Europe that cater to the American ideals of New Capitalism, are at a turning point in history. While the previous generations found their fortunes in the mines and factories, keeping our society furnished with luxuries and necessities, western economies move towards primarily exporting managers and money holders. Today, the cheapest labour available produces our goods, from markets whose corrupt governments have left their people so impoverished that the money earned by an average Westerner could easily pay for ten, or one-hundred cheap foreigners.
Meanwhile, jobs involving skilled labour in Canada, the US, and elsewhere are disappearing, being re-designed to require no skill. New Hires are unskilled non-unionized labourers, in jobs that once required skilled, unionized labour. These workers are from the lowest rungs of the social hierarchy. Many employers force them to work under illegal, dangerous conditions, never knowing their rights.
Pervasive corporate culture is expediting this process by teaching children early that they should not have ambition, that fighting for the future is wrong, or silly. This has bred a complacent generation whose members will live long, difficult lives working for low-wage jobs, squandering their meagre fortunes on the opiates sold through advertising.
To answer the question posed at the beginning, members of Generation Y are worse off than their parents were a generation ago. We have the internet and other new opiates, we have new medicines, but we have diseases that are rotting away the flesh of our entire society. This is the face of the new banana republic, countries whose only export is people who tell people who do things what to do, supported by a lower class of completely de-skilled drones.
The following sections will prove each of these problems exists, detail the creation and maintenance of these situations, theorize as to possible consequences, and most importantly, tie them into ethics as a body of knowledge. Specifically, we will show that their actions demonstrate hypocrisy â calling for sustainable development as a plan for the future, while systematically trying to drain any resource without a care for our ecological, social, or economic future.
II. China syndrome
We can liken resource extraction, manufacturing, and retail/services, in economic terms, to the trophic system of nature. Resource extraction, such as mining, power generation, logging, or farming can be thought of to be an analogue to chlorophyll, where raw materials(and therefore raw wealth) are brought into the ecosystem, or in this case, the economy. Manufacturing is like the plant, taking that raw material wealth and turning it into something the rest of the trophic system can utilize. Retail, and the services which come afterwards, are like secondary and tertiary consumers. This process divides raw wealth; it creates no new wealth on itâs own. Likewise, services, where people will do something for a fee, cannot create wealth by itself. For this reason, compare any economy whose primary GDP producer is services to an ecosystem whose primary biomass is secondary or tertiary consumers. While piles of resources manage to push each other around very efficiently in such a system, it creates no new wealth, in spite of the appearance of economic or ecological diversity. This strikes to the heart of the new banana republic, because the people believe differently â that our society will only flourish if we are the secondary and tertiary consumers. These people become marketers, retailers, and managers, all taking their cut of a product made by hand in a country in destitution.
The United States produces an estimated 79.4% of their GDP through services. In comparison to other western countries, Canada has an estimated 71.3%, The United Kingdom is at 72.7%, and Germany has 68%. In comparison, among nations with a stronger industrial and agricultural sectors, South Korea has 56.3%, India, has 48%, and China has only 33.3% of its GDP produced through services. Why are these statistics relevant? Services simply do not result in the creation of new wealth, only the spreading around of wealth created elsewhere. As a result, western society has become a strange banana republic; we export managers and salespersons to the world, and for the most part, import anything of value. [6]
Trade gaps in the worldâs largest economy, the United States illustrate this point. In 2004, imports from China to The United States alone were valued at $196 Billion USD. In contrast, exports to china were valued at $34 Billion USD. Imports from China have doubled since 2000, tripled since 1996, and increased a whopping 50 times since 1985 with growth led by electrical machinery, toys, clothing, and shoes. [1]
Analysts point out flaws in the United Statesâ methodology could lead to discrepancies as great as 10% when making direct comparisons. In addition, much of Chinas growth is manufacturing moved from other Asian countries. Regardless, total imports to the United States in 2004 made up an estimated $1.476 trillion -- almost double the $795 billion in imports. China was the United Statesâ second largest importer, making up an estimated 12.5% of trade in 2004. Canada, the largest importer, makes up 17.4% [3] [4]
Canada, by comparison, certainly looks much better at first glance. As a whole, Canada exported an estimated $315.6 billion, and imported $256, its largest trading partner is by far was the United States, who supplied a massive 60.6% of our imported goods in 2004. As the worldâs ninth largest producer of Crude Oil, we produce more than we consume. This setup allowed Canada to fare much better in the 2001 recession, experiencing real GDP growth over the year, where other economies suffered recession. [3] [4] [8]
Unfortunately, such optimistic comparisons fail to note the power of the US culture and economy in shaping our own. Chinese-made goods move to the US, and then into Canada, which distorts the true nature of our imports. Moreover, the service culture has a tremendous impact on attitudes and philosophies about the nature of success in North America, so the apparent growth caused by moving goods from place to place becomes a desirable condition.
It is obvious why companies have abandoned local labour. Per Capita GDP in China is $5,600, compared to $31,500 in Canada. Though they are not absolute indicators, they give a certain indication of the difference in wages between the two nations. [9]
From the point of view of sustainable development, this dependence upon china to cut costs to achieve higher growth suggests that not only is sustained growth not possible, but current growth is reaching itâs limits, necessitating the use of morally ambiguous cheap labour. Furthermore, human poverty and suffering can be considered to be an important ingredient of the current growth, that without it, there are poor prospects for businesses, and therefore, economic growth will not by itself alleviate poverty and suffering for future generations. The idea of sending all that activity somewhere else does not seem like a bad idea in the new banana republic â who would not want to be a middle manager?
III. Yearning for the unskilled wanderer.
The publication of The Jungle, a book that described untold horrors within meatpacking plants, shocked the world in 1906; severe injuries happening on a daily basis, from amputations and lacerations to one instance where a man fell into a vat and was turned into lard. Human beings were âCogs in the great packing machine,â disposable. For thirty years, unions fought to gain representation in the meatpacking plants. The companies used spies, blacklists, and strikebreakers to fight their introduction, but somehow the meatpackers managed to get representation. The workers were highly skilled, and while the work was dangerous and difficult, it paid well and promised long-term stability. [11]
Around the same era, the job of short order cook was a respected trade. Well Paid, in demand, the restaurants of the western world had life good. Knowledgeable short order cooks were and still are skilled workers. [11]
Both of these came to a crashing end around the same time, with the founding on McDonalds and Iowa Beef Packers, or IBP. McDonalds systematically removed the need for skilled chefs in the fast food industry by turning the job into a series of idiot proof processes which could be done by an âassembly lineâ of workers, none of whom needed to know how to do anything but their own simple job. IBP similarly introduced a system where skilled meatpackers were no longer required; workers repeat simple tasks, thousands of times in a day. Employers fired unionized butchers and all across the industry as the new way of doing things caught on. Both companies revolutionized their respective industries, and both started a larger revolution. Employers replaced skilled workers with unskilled workers, replacing unionized labour with the lowest common denominator, in the US, usually recent immigrants â often, illegal ones. [11]
With workers de-skilled, turnover was no longer a liability, but an asset â short term workers donât need to be insured, donât need a reason to be fired without notice, and most importantly, they donât tend to unionize. Arden Walker, head of labour relations at IBO, spelled it out during a federal hearing in the 1980s; âWe found very little correlation between turnover and profitability⦠For instance, insurance, as you know, is very costly. Insurance is not available to new employees until theyâve worked there fore a period of one year, or, in some cases, six months. Vacations donât accrue until the second year. There are some economies, frankly, which result from hiring new employeesâ [Schlosser, 151] [11]
Economic distributive justice through âtrickle downâ economics cannot exist in a system designed specifically to disallow capital from âtrickling down.â Furthermore, utilizing human resources in a fashion, which attempts to avoid developing human resources, and demanding a high turnover rate promote a lower middle class that has no opportunity beyond the next hire. Businesspeople will use a relativistic view of the world to justify such policies. If it were not for someone hiring these people, they would never have jobs, so because they pay people they can do no wrong, or so the reasoning goes. Beyond a superficial view of the world, however, such nihilistic attitudes toward workers betray their true purpose â to make money, regardless of whom or what get in the way. The pursuit of profit is the golden idol of the new banana republic. They âmakeâ money by skimming a share off the sale of an actual resource, nothing more.
IV. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!
Christina Hoff Sommers discovered the tip of a massive iceberg while researching her book, âOne Nation under Therapy.â She discovered a culture in modern schools that attacked the idea of achievement, and attempted to play mind games such as marking with purple or blue ink instead of red ink to reduce worries in children about achievement. In the name of anti-bully curriculum, the game of tag had been banned in some schools, replaced by âCircle of friends,â a game in which it was impossible to be âout.â [12]
Emphasis on âon-time graduation ratesâ, including stating goals like âby the year 2000 the high school graduation rate will increase to at least 90 percentâ[Miao & Haney, 7] has helped send the value of a high school diploma to nearly nothing for civilians. A survey done in 2000 shows that 87% of Americans believe that âA college education has become as important as a high school diploma used to beâ [Miao & Haney, 3]
Both governments and corporations now directly manipulate news media. âVideo News Releasesâ â advertisements created by government agencies and public relations firms that are played as actual news items during the evening news, are their weapon. Manipulated to look exactly like independent news, Video News Releases are posted by cash-strapped stations that fill airtime using them inexpensively, without having to do any reporting of their own. Their message is loud and clear â Do not pay any attention to the man behind the curtain, everything is fine, go back to watching Fox. [14]
Modern opiates, such as the internet or the 24-hour entertainment/news hybrid, have popped up to lure people away from real trouble in the world. The appalling conditions, which shocked America in 1906 with the release of The Jungle, exist today to an even more shocking degree. Several meatpacking companies, including Monfort, are brought to court on a regular basis, the people suing telling stories which would turn a mans soul to ice, like the story of Kenny Dobbins, whose body was completely destroyed through the companies wilful negligence and even malice. The new banana republic has entire systems in place meant to ensure you will not hear about his story. Nor the stories about American companies ties to Nazi Germany before WWII. Enron Executives escaped charges for the most part, despite a massive deception and disinformation campaign from the heart of the organization, and people will never hear about it. [11] [15]
Today, the final frontier of unfiltered information is under attack. Nearly every major news outlet has aired commentary at some point attacking bloggers, writers on the internet who write on on-line journals called âblogs.â [16]
The most important thing the news media has done in this generation compared to previous generations is learn how to keep on yelling even when there is no news. You will hear the pundits making vague generalizations and threats in the good times; you will hear it in the bad times. Just like the concept of keeping people scared all the time, by keeping people angry all the time, many lose the ability to feel outrage at things which are really worth being angry about. Gay marriage, stem cell research, and even wars in foreign countries become tools to provide background noise. Put simply, they want you to be mad. They want you to fight back. They want you to do it on their terms, so you ignore the man behind the curtain. Unlike the mass protests of the 70s, they want you to protest â especially if it is not against them.
This attack is the most blatant example of the hypocrisy modern business has, trying to call for sustainable development while moving towards a world where any resource, even peoples hearts, are resources to be tapped. This is the final result of the New Banana Republic, where our largest export is people whose job is only to alter opinions.
V. Conclusion
The western world is at a crossroad. The direction we have started towards, the direction which hypocritically calls for âsustainable developmentâ while systematically trying to suck every ounce of profit from the world, is the direction of the new banana republic, where weâre all just leeching off someone else, hoping to get our cut of the wealth.
By understanding how our world is produced by being a part of it, we can begin to curb the rampant consumer culture and replace it with a respect for how much work goes into creating a computer, a chair, a toy, or a piece of meat. We can fight against the fuzzy mathematics and fuzzier ideals of the new banana republic and humanity can regain something it has lost for a generation â a simple, unsponsored, unadvised thought.
Nevertheless, such ideas could be wrong. After all, this essay is just such a thought.
Every generation asks, 'are my children going to be better off than I am?â, but how might that question be answered today?
Western societies, the first world nations in North America and Europe that cater to the American ideals of New Capitalism, are at a turning point in history. While the previous generations found their fortunes in the mines and factories, keeping our society furnished with luxuries and necessities, western economies move towards primarily exporting managers and money holders. Today, the cheapest labour available produces our goods, from markets whose corrupt governments have left their people so impoverished that the money earned by an average Westerner could easily pay for ten, or one-hundred cheap foreigners.
Meanwhile, jobs involving skilled labour in Canada, the US, and elsewhere are disappearing, being re-designed to require no skill. New Hires are unskilled non-unionized labourers, in jobs that once required skilled, unionized labour. These workers are from the lowest rungs of the social hierarchy. Many employers force them to work under illegal, dangerous conditions, never knowing their rights.
Pervasive corporate culture is expediting this process by teaching children early that they should not have ambition, that fighting for the future is wrong, or silly. This has bred a complacent generation whose members will live long, difficult lives working for low-wage jobs, squandering their meagre fortunes on the opiates sold through advertising.
To answer the question posed at the beginning, members of Generation Y are worse off than their parents were a generation ago. We have the internet and other new opiates, we have new medicines, but we have diseases that are rotting away the flesh of our entire society. This is the face of the new banana republic, countries whose only export is people who tell people who do things what to do, supported by a lower class of completely de-skilled drones.
The following sections will prove each of these problems exists, detail the creation and maintenance of these situations, theorize as to possible consequences, and most importantly, tie them into ethics as a body of knowledge. Specifically, we will show that their actions demonstrate hypocrisy â calling for sustainable development as a plan for the future, while systematically trying to drain any resource without a care for our ecological, social, or economic future.
II. China syndrome
We can liken resource extraction, manufacturing, and retail/services, in economic terms, to the trophic system of nature. Resource extraction, such as mining, power generation, logging, or farming can be thought of to be an analogue to chlorophyll, where raw materials(and therefore raw wealth) are brought into the ecosystem, or in this case, the economy. Manufacturing is like the plant, taking that raw material wealth and turning it into something the rest of the trophic system can utilize. Retail, and the services which come afterwards, are like secondary and tertiary consumers. This process divides raw wealth; it creates no new wealth on itâs own. Likewise, services, where people will do something for a fee, cannot create wealth by itself. For this reason, compare any economy whose primary GDP producer is services to an ecosystem whose primary biomass is secondary or tertiary consumers. While piles of resources manage to push each other around very efficiently in such a system, it creates no new wealth, in spite of the appearance of economic or ecological diversity. This strikes to the heart of the new banana republic, because the people believe differently â that our society will only flourish if we are the secondary and tertiary consumers. These people become marketers, retailers, and managers, all taking their cut of a product made by hand in a country in destitution.
The United States produces an estimated 79.4% of their GDP through services. In comparison to other western countries, Canada has an estimated 71.3%, The United Kingdom is at 72.7%, and Germany has 68%. In comparison, among nations with a stronger industrial and agricultural sectors, South Korea has 56.3%, India, has 48%, and China has only 33.3% of its GDP produced through services. Why are these statistics relevant? Services simply do not result in the creation of new wealth, only the spreading around of wealth created elsewhere. As a result, western society has become a strange banana republic; we export managers and salespersons to the world, and for the most part, import anything of value. [6]
Trade gaps in the worldâs largest economy, the United States illustrate this point. In 2004, imports from China to The United States alone were valued at $196 Billion USD. In contrast, exports to china were valued at $34 Billion USD. Imports from China have doubled since 2000, tripled since 1996, and increased a whopping 50 times since 1985 with growth led by electrical machinery, toys, clothing, and shoes. [1]
Analysts point out flaws in the United Statesâ methodology could lead to discrepancies as great as 10% when making direct comparisons. In addition, much of Chinas growth is manufacturing moved from other Asian countries. Regardless, total imports to the United States in 2004 made up an estimated $1.476 trillion -- almost double the $795 billion in imports. China was the United Statesâ second largest importer, making up an estimated 12.5% of trade in 2004. Canada, the largest importer, makes up 17.4% [3] [4]
Canada, by comparison, certainly looks much better at first glance. As a whole, Canada exported an estimated $315.6 billion, and imported $256, its largest trading partner is by far was the United States, who supplied a massive 60.6% of our imported goods in 2004. As the worldâs ninth largest producer of Crude Oil, we produce more than we consume. This setup allowed Canada to fare much better in the 2001 recession, experiencing real GDP growth over the year, where other economies suffered recession. [3] [4] [8]
Unfortunately, such optimistic comparisons fail to note the power of the US culture and economy in shaping our own. Chinese-made goods move to the US, and then into Canada, which distorts the true nature of our imports. Moreover, the service culture has a tremendous impact on attitudes and philosophies about the nature of success in North America, so the apparent growth caused by moving goods from place to place becomes a desirable condition.
It is obvious why companies have abandoned local labour. Per Capita GDP in China is $5,600, compared to $31,500 in Canada. Though they are not absolute indicators, they give a certain indication of the difference in wages between the two nations. [9]
From the point of view of sustainable development, this dependence upon china to cut costs to achieve higher growth suggests that not only is sustained growth not possible, but current growth is reaching itâs limits, necessitating the use of morally ambiguous cheap labour. Furthermore, human poverty and suffering can be considered to be an important ingredient of the current growth, that without it, there are poor prospects for businesses, and therefore, economic growth will not by itself alleviate poverty and suffering for future generations. The idea of sending all that activity somewhere else does not seem like a bad idea in the new banana republic â who would not want to be a middle manager?
III. Yearning for the unskilled wanderer.
The publication of The Jungle, a book that described untold horrors within meatpacking plants, shocked the world in 1906; severe injuries happening on a daily basis, from amputations and lacerations to one instance where a man fell into a vat and was turned into lard. Human beings were âCogs in the great packing machine,â disposable. For thirty years, unions fought to gain representation in the meatpacking plants. The companies used spies, blacklists, and strikebreakers to fight their introduction, but somehow the meatpackers managed to get representation. The workers were highly skilled, and while the work was dangerous and difficult, it paid well and promised long-term stability. [11]
Around the same era, the job of short order cook was a respected trade. Well Paid, in demand, the restaurants of the western world had life good. Knowledgeable short order cooks were and still are skilled workers. [11]
Both of these came to a crashing end around the same time, with the founding on McDonalds and Iowa Beef Packers, or IBP. McDonalds systematically removed the need for skilled chefs in the fast food industry by turning the job into a series of idiot proof processes which could be done by an âassembly lineâ of workers, none of whom needed to know how to do anything but their own simple job. IBP similarly introduced a system where skilled meatpackers were no longer required; workers repeat simple tasks, thousands of times in a day. Employers fired unionized butchers and all across the industry as the new way of doing things caught on. Both companies revolutionized their respective industries, and both started a larger revolution. Employers replaced skilled workers with unskilled workers, replacing unionized labour with the lowest common denominator, in the US, usually recent immigrants â often, illegal ones. [11]
With workers de-skilled, turnover was no longer a liability, but an asset â short term workers donât need to be insured, donât need a reason to be fired without notice, and most importantly, they donât tend to unionize. Arden Walker, head of labour relations at IBO, spelled it out during a federal hearing in the 1980s; âWe found very little correlation between turnover and profitability⦠For instance, insurance, as you know, is very costly. Insurance is not available to new employees until theyâve worked there fore a period of one year, or, in some cases, six months. Vacations donât accrue until the second year. There are some economies, frankly, which result from hiring new employeesâ [Schlosser, 151] [11]
Economic distributive justice through âtrickle downâ economics cannot exist in a system designed specifically to disallow capital from âtrickling down.â Furthermore, utilizing human resources in a fashion, which attempts to avoid developing human resources, and demanding a high turnover rate promote a lower middle class that has no opportunity beyond the next hire. Businesspeople will use a relativistic view of the world to justify such policies. If it were not for someone hiring these people, they would never have jobs, so because they pay people they can do no wrong, or so the reasoning goes. Beyond a superficial view of the world, however, such nihilistic attitudes toward workers betray their true purpose â to make money, regardless of whom or what get in the way. The pursuit of profit is the golden idol of the new banana republic. They âmakeâ money by skimming a share off the sale of an actual resource, nothing more.
IV. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!
Christina Hoff Sommers discovered the tip of a massive iceberg while researching her book, âOne Nation under Therapy.â She discovered a culture in modern schools that attacked the idea of achievement, and attempted to play mind games such as marking with purple or blue ink instead of red ink to reduce worries in children about achievement. In the name of anti-bully curriculum, the game of tag had been banned in some schools, replaced by âCircle of friends,â a game in which it was impossible to be âout.â [12]
Emphasis on âon-time graduation ratesâ, including stating goals like âby the year 2000 the high school graduation rate will increase to at least 90 percentâ[Miao & Haney, 7] has helped send the value of a high school diploma to nearly nothing for civilians. A survey done in 2000 shows that 87% of Americans believe that âA college education has become as important as a high school diploma used to beâ [Miao & Haney, 3]
Both governments and corporations now directly manipulate news media. âVideo News Releasesâ â advertisements created by government agencies and public relations firms that are played as actual news items during the evening news, are their weapon. Manipulated to look exactly like independent news, Video News Releases are posted by cash-strapped stations that fill airtime using them inexpensively, without having to do any reporting of their own. Their message is loud and clear â Do not pay any attention to the man behind the curtain, everything is fine, go back to watching Fox. [14]
Modern opiates, such as the internet or the 24-hour entertainment/news hybrid, have popped up to lure people away from real trouble in the world. The appalling conditions, which shocked America in 1906 with the release of The Jungle, exist today to an even more shocking degree. Several meatpacking companies, including Monfort, are brought to court on a regular basis, the people suing telling stories which would turn a mans soul to ice, like the story of Kenny Dobbins, whose body was completely destroyed through the companies wilful negligence and even malice. The new banana republic has entire systems in place meant to ensure you will not hear about his story. Nor the stories about American companies ties to Nazi Germany before WWII. Enron Executives escaped charges for the most part, despite a massive deception and disinformation campaign from the heart of the organization, and people will never hear about it. [11] [15]
Today, the final frontier of unfiltered information is under attack. Nearly every major news outlet has aired commentary at some point attacking bloggers, writers on the internet who write on on-line journals called âblogs.â [16]
The most important thing the news media has done in this generation compared to previous generations is learn how to keep on yelling even when there is no news. You will hear the pundits making vague generalizations and threats in the good times; you will hear it in the bad times. Just like the concept of keeping people scared all the time, by keeping people angry all the time, many lose the ability to feel outrage at things which are really worth being angry about. Gay marriage, stem cell research, and even wars in foreign countries become tools to provide background noise. Put simply, they want you to be mad. They want you to fight back. They want you to do it on their terms, so you ignore the man behind the curtain. Unlike the mass protests of the 70s, they want you to protest â especially if it is not against them.
This attack is the most blatant example of the hypocrisy modern business has, trying to call for sustainable development while moving towards a world where any resource, even peoples hearts, are resources to be tapped. This is the final result of the New Banana Republic, where our largest export is people whose job is only to alter opinions.
V. Conclusion
The western world is at a crossroad. The direction we have started towards, the direction which hypocritically calls for âsustainable developmentâ while systematically trying to suck every ounce of profit from the world, is the direction of the new banana republic, where weâre all just leeching off someone else, hoping to get our cut of the wealth.
By understanding how our world is produced by being a part of it, we can begin to curb the rampant consumer culture and replace it with a respect for how much work goes into creating a computer, a chair, a toy, or a piece of meat. We can fight against the fuzzy mathematics and fuzzier ideals of the new banana republic and humanity can regain something it has lost for a generation â a simple, unsponsored, unadvised thought.
Nevertheless, such ideas could be wrong. After all, this essay is just such a thought.