The Drums of War
By George Monbiot
The combination of automation, complexity and climate change
is dangerous in ways we haven’t even begun to grasp.
Wave the magic wand and the problem goes away. Those pesky
pollution laws, carbon caps and clean power plans: swish them away and the
golden age of blue-collar employment will return. This is Donald Trump’s
promise, in his video message on Monday, in which he claimed that unleashing
coal and fracking will create “many millions of high-paid jobs”. He will tear
down everything to make it come true.
But it won’t come true. Even if we ripped the world to
pieces in the search for full employment, leaving no mountain unturned, we
would not find it. Instead, we would merely jeopardise the prosperity – and the
lives – of people everywhere. However slavishly governments grovel to corporate
Luddism, they will not bring the smog economy back.
No one can deny the problem Trump claims to be addressing.
The old mining and industrial areas are in crisis throughout the rich world.
And we have seen nothing yet.
I have just re-read the study published by the Oxford Martin
School in 2013 on the impacts of computerisation. What jumps out today, to put
it crudely, is that jobs in the rustbelts and rural towns that voted for Trump are
at high risk of automation; while the professions of many Clinton supporters
are at low risk.
The jobs most likely to be destroyed are in mining, raw
materials, manufacturing, transport and logistics, cargo handling, warehousing
and retailing, construction (pre-fabricated buildings will be assembled by
robots in factories), office support, administration and telemarketing. So
what, in the counties that voted for Trump, will be left?
Farm jobs have mostly gone already. Service and care work,
where hope for some appeared to lie, will be threatened by a further wave of
automation, as service robots – commercial and domestic – take over. Yes, there
will be jobs in the green economy, more and better than any that could be
revived in the fossil economy. But they won’t be enough to fill the gaps, and
many will be in the wrong places.
At lower risk is work that requires negotiation, persuasion,
originality and creativity. The management and business jobs that demand these
skills are comparatively safe from automation; so are lawyers, teachers,
researchers, doctors, journalists, actors and artists. The jobs that demand the
highest educational attainment are the least susceptible to computerisation.
The divisions tearing America apart will only widen.
Even this bleak analysis does not capture in full the
underlying reasons why good, abundant jobs will not return to the places that
need them most. As Paul Mason argues in Postcapitalism, the impacts of
information technology go way beyond simple automation: it is likely to destroy
the very basis of the market economy and the relationship between work and
wages.
And, as the independent thinker Paul Arbair notes in the
most interesting essay I have read this year, beyond a certain level of
complexity, economies become harder to sustain. There’s a point at which
further complexity delivers diminishing returns; society is then overwhelmed by
its demands and breaks down. He argues that the political crisis in Western
countries suggests we may have reached this point.
In the same video address on Monday, Trump announced that he
will withdraw America from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). He is right to
do so, for the wrong reasons. Like TTIP and CETA, the TPP is a fake trade
treaty, whose primary impact is to extend corporate property rights at the
expense of both competition and democracy. But withdrawal will not, as he
claims, “bring jobs and industry back to American shores”. The work in Mexico
and China that Trump wants to reclaim will evaporate long before it can be repatriated.
As for the high-quality, high-waged working class jobs he
promised, these are never handed down from on high. They are secured through
the organisation of labour. But the unions were smashed by Ronald Reagan, and
collective bargaining has been suppressed ever since by casualisation and
fragmentation. So how is this going to happen? Out of the kindness of Trump’s
heart? Kindness, Trump, heart?
But it’s not just Trump. Clinton and Sanders also made
impossible promises to bring back jobs. Half the platform of both parties was
based on a delusion. The social, environmental and economic crises we face
require a complete reappraisal of the way we live and work. The failure by
mainstream political parties to produce a new and persuasive economic narrative,
that does not rely on sustaining impossible levels of growth and generating
illusory jobs, provides a marvellous opening for demagogues everywhere.
Governments across the world are making promises they cannot
keep. In the absence of a new vision, their failure to materialise will mean
only one thing: something or someone must be found to blame. As people become
angrier and more alienated; as the complexity and connectivity of global
systems becomes ever harder to manage; as institutions like the European Union
collapse and as climate change renders parts of the world uninhabitable,
forcing hundreds of millions of people from their homes, the net of blame will
be cast ever wider.
Eventually the anger that cannot be assuaged through policy
will be turned outwards, towards other nations. Faced with a choice of hard
truths or easy lies, politicians and their supporters in the media will
discover that foreign aggression is among the few options for political
survival. I now believe that we will see war between the major powers within my
lifetime. Which ones it will involve, and on what apparent cause, remains far
from clear. But something that once seemed remote now looks probable to me.
A complete reframing of economic life is needed not “just”
to suppress the existential risk that climate change presents (a risk marked by
a 20°C anomaly reported in the Arctic Ocean while I was writing this article),
but other existential threats as well – including war. Today’s governments,
whether they are run by Trump or Obama or May or Merkel, lack the courage and
imagination even to open this conversation. It is left to others to conceive of
a more plausible vision than trying to magic back the good old days. The task
for all those who love this world and fear for our children is to imagine a
different future, rather than another past.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave a comment.