Thursday, December 1, 2016

Blog Stage 7: How diversity will lead to the collapse of civilization: U.S. Version




Economy is the centerpiece of society.  A successful economy results in a prosperous nation and a happy population. Because of this, it is obvious that most countries of the world will strive to achieve this economic success. However, this would mean expansion on a global scale, competition, and ideological clashes. All countries of the world have created conflict over this economic race, but in this argument, we are only focusing on the U.S.

Natural resources, which play a powerful role in any economy, create desire. Like moths drawn to light, countries scramble for it. In the Middle East, oil is the crown jewel of the garden. Amidst all the wars that have occurred here, diverse groups of people from around the world have integrated themselves behind the scenes. The U.S. have often given support to whichever group would economically benefit them the most by sending things like weapons and training. The Iraq War for example, despite being named the war on terror, was also a means of securing oil at the cost of many innocent lives. What I am trying to say is there is always some alternative reasoning for being involved. It is possible that the current U.S. support for rebels in the Syrian Crisis was also driven by some sort of economic reasoning. Look at the consequences, refugees, loss of innocent lives, creation of terror groups. These things only escalate the situation. Powerful sophisticated weaponry would mean the loss of more lives and the wars are effectively prolonged. Because of these senseless acts of nationalism, the desire of a successful economy has created a conscious support for violence and war. If nations are willing to risk the lives of soldiers and civilians in order to power factories, then what would they do in the future when the supply of resources inevitably diminish?

            The race for an economic paradise has also given rise to new domestic concerns. In the United States for example, there is an issue of unequal wealth distribution between the rich and everyone else. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.  The article It’s theInequality, Stupid, written by Dave Gilson and Carolyn Perot, points out that in the United States, the “richest 10% controls 2/3 of American’s net worth” (sec. 1). It also states the top 10% experiences significant gains in average annual income while the rest have an average annual loss of “$3,733 [to] $5,623” (sec. 6). The rich are isolating themselves by expanding their businesses to make more money, while the middle and lower classes are being left out to dry. This kind of “nationalism” exists within the class systems everywhere. Money has allowed many to reach a godlike ascension; it has become an unstoppable force. The biggest businesses control nearly every aspect of life. Things like technology, jobs, and even the so-called “unbiased” media are stewards to these businesses. The affluent elite influences even governments, often taking position or giving massive donations and endorsing officials who would work in their favor. In 2009, the "10 richest members of congress have a combined net worth of 2.9 billion dollars" (sec. 4). Because the rich make up a small portion of any country’s population, this would mean poor representation of the masses, causing them to suffer. Although there have been no major outbreaks of violence within the U.S. over this discrepancy of capital, it is not to say the issue has gone unnoticed. Riots and civil wars are born from these disparities. The famed Occupy Wall Street movement that originated in 2011 is a great example that shows how everyday citizens are well aware of their financial standings, and are more than willing to raise objection. The fact that first world countries can still be so adversely divided shows how imperfections exist on the smoothest of surfaces. If the gap between the rich and the lower classes continue to expand as it is now, protests will turn into riots, and riots will turn into civil war. The peace that currently exists is a ticking time bomb, and in the future very likely to explode into an ungainly beast of chaos and violence.

2 comments:

  1. I am a bit confused as to why you used the word diversity in your title. Diversity is largely defined as a range of different things, the amount of variation. I believe you meant inequality -- how the unequal distribution of wealth will one day lead to the collapse of society. Besides the title, your blog was perfectly written, engaging and stayed true to your point. I could not agree more. The immense power that these wealthy companies and individuals have on our society is uneasy to take in. Their involvement in our government directly reflects the corruption they add to the swamp. Additionally, I too agree that our nation has made selfish decisions that costed the lives of many. It is seen throughout our history, from unnecessary wars to supporting countries on selfish intentions. Our country has fought its way to the top of the ladder through selfish desires and has paved this path for others to follow. I too see your vision that one day people will realize that enough is enough. If that day comes, I hope that the masses of left out individuals will overpower the top 1 percenters. Furthermore, I hope that the devastations from the chaos and violence will be worth it in the end and bring change for the better.

    ReplyDelete
  2. My first impression of the title of this article was more of sociology / philosophy concept of arguments but when I finished reading it, I found myself puzzled; the piece was about economy so I read it again and still in my opinion the title doesn’t really represent the body because it’s mostly about “Capitalism” and “economic inequality” rather than “economic diversity". Beside the title and concept of this article there are some statements made by Stone that I would like to address:

    1. The article starts as: “Economy is the centerpiece of society” which I believe otherwise. A society, most commonly, known as: “a group of people with common territory, interaction, and culture”. The role of the economy is to establish formal relationships among people as their daily business of living.
    2. Natural Resources: Natural resources undoubtedly play an important role in the economy of many countries but it doesn’t guaranty the economic prosperity because depending on its easy revenue takes away motivations to develop other areas of economy and can cause corruption or conflicts. While some of the richest countries in natural resources remain undeveloped there are countries like Japan, South Korea or Switzerland who thrived to become world major exporters with no natural resources.
    3. I don’t deny that some of the wars are motivated by economic interest, however some others have geopolitical importance such as civil war in Syria which is the war between two global-regional rivals, Russia - Iran on one side and United States - Israel on the other side. Syria by itself does not carry any economical importance.
    4. Wealth inequality: The graph bellow (you can find the graph on my blog: Daily Polity Talk) is based on some of the facts from “Why Nations Fail” book written by Acemoglu and Robinson, and it demonstrates the growth of wealth inequality in some of countries from 1985 to 2012, however as it appears some countries have been able to slower it by offering a better social services to their citizens and more effective tax policies.

    I believe that wealth inequality will always remain as part of our society and technically it would be justifiable to some extend, however I am not as pessimistic as stone and trust that our society smartly will be adjusted and corrected accordingly in the process of evolving and progress.

    ReplyDelete