Thread: Decline of the West

I went with 'other'. I've seen this before, more than once. The west was said to be in decline in the '70s and in the late '80s early '90s. During the Reagan years things picked up substantially after a slow start. Same with the Clinton years. There are so many variables world wide that appearances taken in the moment can be deceiving. So it looks like it but as Casey Stengal, or maybe it was Yogi Berra said, "Predictions are hard, especially the future."

An editor of The Economist has written a "special" report, huh? I look forward to reading the next time I buy a volume of The Economist. Oh, and let's not forget the "Big Time" historian in the article. No "little time" historians for us, thanks very much! But oh, wait....is that a book I see being flogged at the end of the article? Surely not!!

I think the better question with regards these two sources of "information" is "How well does peddling fear and uncertainty sell books and "reports" about "then end" of our way of life?" And the answer seems to be "pretty well, thanks. Now shut up while we count our money."

But to answer the question, I suspect we are seeing how Capitalism might fail. Whether that means the "West" will decline as a result, to me is a matter for conjecture, as I think it will depend on whether societies are willing to adapt and change - so far it doesn't look good in that department: human beings have a tendency to become more conservative in tough times and cling to what they have.

Just one last point - the final choice in the poll speaks volumes to me. All I'd like to say is that there are better and more reliable sources of information on many things than the Media. The Media is political and rife with financial and other conflicts of interest as a general rule. Moreover, nowadays it seems to be less news, more editorialising. Less facts, more pundits telling us what they "reckon" about pretty much anything, regardless of their actual area of expertise. The Media chase ratings (read money), which takes me back to my initial point in this post: fear and uncertainty shift units.

Here endeth my rant...

James.

earcutter:
Talk about a loaded question! It's analysis time:
1. Define "the West." West what? West of what?
2. Define "decline." Geologically? Tectonically? Hockey-ically?

Originally Posted by mapleleafalumnus

earcutter:
Talk about a loaded question! Thanks man lol! It's analysis time:
1. Define "the West." West what? West of what? You know - America, Europe.. Oh and you know Canada etc : )
2. Define "decline." Geologically? Tectonically? Hockey-ically?

Don't get me started on Hockey!! Those Russians... : ) With respect to # 2 - Economically.

Originally Posted by earcutter

Don't get me started on Hockey!! Those Russians... : ) With respect to # 2 - Economically.

OH, puh-LEASE! I'd LOVE to hear the highly-experienced and nigh-omnipotent opinion of a Kansas hockey player -- wait, isn't that an oxymoron?

Economically, yes, the West is currently in decline. However, that falls within the parameters of the "normal" economic fluctuations I learned about in college. There are peaks, and there are valleys. Boom and bust. Bear and bull (but no Colt .45 commercials, please!).
With that in mind, one must consider the impact of goveurnmental interference on economic systems. Adam Smith wrote that the economic format which functions best is one in which goveurnment interferes least. I don't know if his opinion is in fact correct, and as far as I'm concerned, neither does anyone else. However, Socialist policies (U.K., France, Canada, etc.) seem to limit economic expansion. The U.S.A.'s policies of "adjusting for inflation" and apparent (over)regulation may well hamper economic development. I don't know. This is not to say that those policies do not address legitimate concerns. Laissez-faire just does not appear to be in ANY goveurnment's self-interest. Perhaps there is a fear of needing another bailout from a contemporary J.P. Morgan.

In the early '70s I remember an ironworker down the union hall, who had been a professional mercenary, saying that Rhodesia would never give up apartheid. Hitler thought the third reich was going to reign for a thousand years and in the 1930's it looked pretty bleak for the rest of the world. If you are old enough to remember the fall of the soviet union you'll know how incomprehensible that was to those of us raised during the post WWII years. I remember when Khrushchev said of the West, "We will bury you." If the end of the world was going to come it was probably going to be by nuclear warheads between us and them. Who would have thought that the USSR would be no more and we would be in hock up to our eyebrows to their biggest rival, a Communist country that allows slave labor ?

In the USA there have been economic upheavals a few decades apart over the course of our nations history. The tech boom of the '90s was one of the longest runs of prosperity of my lifetime. If you really look at it, the so called American "middle class" is a phenomenon that only existed for a twenty to thirty year period in the mid twentieth century. The early years of the industrial revolution were no picnic. We've had tougher times in the past and I wouldn't count us out yet. We are a resilient people who have bounced back before and believe we will again. My long winded point is that there are a lot of variables and unknowns. We have the ancient Chinese curse, we live in 'interesting times.'

Originally Posted by mapleleafalumnus

earcutter:
Talk about a loaded question! It's analysis time:
1. Define "the West." West what? West of what?
2. Define "decline." Geologically? Tectonically? Hockey-ically?

This....China is the West from America....America is the West from Europe....and Europe is the West from China.....seems to me everyone must be the West. Guess we must all be in "decline".