Chapter 9. Materialism Is Pandora’s Box.
or
The Occurrence Equivalence of the Violations of the Moral Axioms with Materialism and with Each Other
|
Symbol |
Description |
|
M |
Materialism |
|
To |
Schoolyard bullies, children as family despots, etc. |
|
Ť1 = Ğ1 |
Excessive procreation due to narcissism or fear of infant mortality |
|
T1 = G1 |
Excessive procreation for other reasons, which are discussed elsewhere in this chapter |
|
T2 = G2 |
Cruelty to animals and wanton destruction of animals and plants |
|
T3 |
Man’s traditional domination of women |
|
T* |
Man’s domination of man and forms of tyranny other than To, Ť1, T1, T2, and T3 |
|
Go |
Inadvertent environmental damage including accidental pregnancies |
|
Ğ1 = Ť1 |
Excessive procreation due to narcissism or fear of infant mortality |
|
G1 = T1 |
Excessive procreation for other reasons |
|
G2 = T2 |
Killing animals and plants wantonly |
|
G3 |
Unnecessary industrial pollution |
|
G* |
Excessive consumption and other energetic costs of materialism |
|
Fo |
The falsely stated “I love you”, romantic flattery, etc. |
|
F1 |
Self-deception, double-think, narcissism, etc. |
|
F2 |
Superstition |
|
F3 |
Dishonesty in business |
|
F* |
“Manufacturing Consent”, false indoctrination of children, controlled media, etc. |
|
S* |
The concept that subsumes wealth, power, and negotiable fame |
Table of Contents
Occurrence Equivalence and Occurrence Implication
The Three Fundamental Problems of Mankind: Tyranny, Geophagy, and Falsity
Materialism, M, Is Occurrence Equivalent with Hierarchical Dominance, T*.
Materialism, M, Is Occurrence Equivalent with the Worst Forms of Environmental Destruction, G*
Lavish Standards of Living and Excessive Consumption
The Environmental Costs of Creating and Maintaining Inequality
The Cost of Competition for Wealth
Materialism, M, Is Occurrence Equivalent with Authoritarian Falsity, F*
Materialism would not be tolerated if most people saw the world as it actually is.
Those who benefit most from materialism must lie to themselves.
Materialism permits the accumulation of power necessary to spread falsehood widely.
Artificial economic contingency makes people vulnerable to falsity.
Falsity is inherent in improper games.
T* If and Only If F*, Hierarchical Dominance Is Occurrence Equivalent with Authoritarian Falsity
Someone must exercise power over someone else to spread falsehood.
Inculcating bad behavior requires power over the schools and/or churches.
Only tyranny prevents truth from being told.
The Cost of Manufacturing Belief in the Two-Party System
The Cost of the Corporate Media
Occurrence Equivalence of F* with To, Ť1 = Ğ1, T2 = G2, Go, Fo, F1, and F2
Schoolyard Bullies and Family Tyrants, To
Narcissism and Other Self-Deceptions, F1
Excessive Procreation out of Ignorance, Ť1 and Ğ1
Wanton Killing of Plants and Animals, T2 = G2
Accidental Environmental Destruction, Go
Less than Scrupulous Honesty in Erotic Relationships, Fo
Socrates and Six Degrees of Separation, S6
M Is Occurrence Equivalent to G1 ( = T1), G3, and F3
Excessive Procreation for Materialistic Reasons, T1 and G1
Industrial Pollution in a Materialistic Society, G3
Traditional Male Dominance, T3
Introduction
The Purpose of this Chapter
In this chapter, I will identify the evidence for the proposition that the violations of the three moral axioms are occurrence equivalent with materialism and with each other. In Appendix II, I have presented a long list of social problems that are occurrence equivalent to materialism and to violations of the three moral axioms. It is difficult to think of a social problem that is not on this list. Thus, nearly all human social problems can be linked to materialism. Materialism is Pandora’s Box. The meaning of this is clear: The preservation of our species and other species endangered by the unreformed behavior of human society as it is presently constituted depends not on many things but on one thing only, namely, an end to materialism.
Previously I have identified these arguments as proofs, with the qualification that the propositions are proved as rigorously as propositions concerning society are ever proved, granting that they are never proved so rigorously as mathematical propositions are proved. Perhaps it would be more honest to say that the arguments put forth are closer to those put forth to win a debate than they are to the arguments put forth in the construction of a mathematical proof; but, in many ways, the arguments used in constructing a mathematical proof are no better than what is necessary to convince a mathematician that the proposition is true. We have heard it said that a good proof is an argument that convinces us that a given proposition is true. That is what I have tried to provide in this chapter.
If, instead of trying to link all of our social problems to materialism, I had attempted to link all of our social problems to American-style capitalism, which, if it is not Capitalism in the pure form, is the manifestation of materialism that is destroying the world and extinguishing species (including ours) currently, my task would have been much easier, and I could have used arguments that have a much more direct and visceral impact when used by others; e.g., Chomsky. Unfortunately, this leaves the door open for yet another reform that doesn’t work or, worse yet, has unpleasant side effects, since there are many social systems that avoid the most spectacular failures of capitalism but that eventually will lead to all, or nearly all, of the same social evils, in particular Communism (even decentralized communism) with a strong leader whom power will corrupt – in short, any sort of communism without a decent admixture of anarchy. To avoid this mistake, I must work harder and my arguments will be less compelling. Finally, the reader must read more carefully to find the inevitable holes in my argument. I am not likely to think of everything. Hopefully, the generous and sincere reader will complete my arguments and determine faithfully whether or not the fundamental conclusions are affected by my mistakes. Not every mistake is fatal.
Occurrence Equivalence and Occurrence Implication
Occurrence equivalence, as expressed by a statement such as A if and only if B (abbreviated A iff B), means that if there is A there is B or there soon will be B after a negligible grace period, and if there is B there is A or there soon will be A after a grace period that is negligibly short from the viewpoint of this theory. If we neglect short time lags, we may say of A and B that either both are present or neither are present. It follows, then, that A implies B means that the occurrence of A is contingent upon the occurrence of B or that there can be no A without B or without B there is no A. It may not be the case that A is the cause of B. Nor is it necessarily true that B is causing A (unless it be the sole cause of A); but, rather, in the absence of B, A will be prevented from occurring. Moreover, unless something is done to prevent it, A, which is undesirable, is likely to occur. Thus, the presence of A is a good sign that B is occurring. (This argument will be applied to F* below.) Also, we shall use the expression A implies B when the occurrence of A leads to the occurrence of B; or, whenever A occurs, eventually we will have B; or (the occurrence of) A implies (the occurrence of) B. Despite the very bad reputation of cause and effect in the wake of Quantum Mechanics, under the circumstances that obtain in the settings considered in this essay, namely W', W", and W*, A may be taken to be the cause of the effect B. Thus, we say A causes B without putting the word cause in quotes, even. Finally, we may make use of any of the well-known surrogates for ‘A implies B’ in logical parlance, namely, ‘if A then B’, ‘A only if B’, ‘A is a sufficient condition for B’, ‘B is a necessary condition for A’, ‘if not-B then not-A’, etc.
The Three Fundamental Problems of Mankind: Tyranny, Geophagy, and Falsity
In this section, for the convenience of the reader, I have copied the definitions of tyranny, geophagy, and (ordinary) falsity from Chapters 6, 7, and 8.
Tyranny
Violations of the Freedom Axiom are termed simply tyranny. Even excessive procreation, i.e., more than one child per person, is taken to be a form of tyranny (T) because in Chapter 3 we proved that usurping an unfair share of the carrying capacity of the earth with one’s own progeny imposes upon the freedom of human social links that do not increase the population unfairly; but the term is supposed to refer primarily to man's domination of man.
Five motives for excessive procreation are (i) narcissism, (ii) fear that not all will live, (iii) cheap labor to promote family wealth, (iv) hope for support in old age, and (v) to spread rapidly a racial plurality, a religion, ideology, culture, or general system of “family values”, often superstitions and myths, to which the violator of the Token Theorem is committed, dedicated, or enthralled – or at least wishes others to be committed, dedicated, or enthralled. Accidental pregnancies will be treated as though they were simply another form of inadvertent environmental destruction. Presumably, inadvertent pregnancies can be eliminated by a combination of education, indoctrination, and science all unfettered by superstition. [Note. When a beloved child dies the parent’s grief is not diminished by the survival of another child, therefore the motive for having more children to ensure against such a tragedy may be assumed to be narcissistic.]
A good case can be made that multiple pregnancies in women can be traced to the traditional domination of women by men that gave rise to the Feminist Movement. This is precisely the sort of domination that would not have arisen in a non-materialistic world, however many people will claim that materialism follows from competition for desirable sex partners rather than the reverse. Even though women very recently began to play more prominent roles in the societies of “developed” countries, this should not be construed as the triumph of Feminism in its earlier manifestations. It is easy to see that the roles played by dominant women nowadays are indicative of exactly the same trends toward materialism that (true) Feminism opposed. Likewise, many of the excess pregnancies, including accidental pregnancies, identified as geophagy and tyranny above may still be laid at the feet of man’s traditional domination of women and, in turn, materialism. Although, in some cases, women themselves may be convinced of the advisability of multiple pregnancies, the incentive to so convince them against their best interests could not exist and be effective outside of a materialistic setting. This can be discussed on a case-by-case basis. The relationships between M, T3, T*, F*, and multiple pregnancies are somewhat complicated.
Geophagy
I have chosen the term geophagy to represent all types of environmental destruction, including the depletion of our natural resources, especially our reserves of high-grade available energy – or simply availability, as defined in Chapter 2 and Appendix I. Geophagy (G) is a real word that means, literally, earth eating, which is imagined to be a psychiatric disorder unless the earth eater is starving to death and hopes to extract nutrition from chalk or clay, for example. This psychiatric connotation appeals to me, since, if anything is madness, the destruction of our environment is. Geophagy denotes any violation of the Environmental Axiom. Clearly, excessive procreation is a form of geophagy as well as a form of tyranny. Also, the reader will kindly permit the author to stretch a point slightly in terming cruelty to animals “geophagy”. Since cruelty to animals imposes upon the freedom of animal lovers to enjoy the privilege of cohabiting the Earth with species other than man whether they be necessary for man’s continued existence on the planet or no, we consider cruelty to animals, and a fortiori the wanton destruction of plants and animals, G2, to be a form of tyranny denoted T2. In fact, every form of geophagy imposes upon someone, therefore geophagy is tyranny. That is why the Environmental Axiom (Axiom 2 of Chapter 3) can be derived from the Freedom Axiom (Axiom 1 of Chapter 3). Nevertheless, we shall continue to treat geophagy and tyranny independently.
Falsity
I have elected to term harmful violations of the Truth Axiom ordinary falsity (F). A rather complete taxonomy of generalized statements is given at the beginning of Chapter 8 including exempt falsity, petty falsity, and justifiable falsity, as distinguished from ordinary falsity, referred to as falsity without a modifier. It is understood, then, that, in the rest of this book, whenever I write falsity (F) without a modifier, I mean ordinary falsity. In Chapter 8, I further divided falsity into (1) materialistic falsity (FM), which was associated with (1a) “manufacturing consent”, (1b) repressing dissent, (1c) inculcating materialistic notions in children, (1d) miseducating children and adults, (1e) disseminating materialistic propaganda, (1f) competing for wealth and other forms of S* as defined in Chapter 3, and (2) developmental falsity (FD), which includes (2a) superstition, (2b) narcissism and other forms of self-deception, and (2c) the falsely stated “I love you” among other lies of the sexual arena. Certainly, FM will disappear when materialism does, whereas it is an open question, which I have answered (for myself) in the affirmative, whether or not FD will disappear when FM does. Ordinary falsity F, then consists of FM and FD. Finally, let us represent the type of materialistic falsity associated with competing for (i) wealth, (ii) power (and negotiable influence), and (iii) negotiable fame, namely 1f above, by the symbol F3 whilst the other types of materialistic falsity (1a-1e) are denoted F*, which we shall call mass deception or materialistic propaganda. If we wish to retain the word falsity in its name, we will call F* authoritarian falsity. (My critics claim that egalitarians might employ coercive methods to enforce equality. This would be anti-egalitarian as we are fallibilists who recognize that we may be wrong. Therefore we take pains to encourage dissent and protect dissenters, perhaps even sociopaths, from retribution.)
The Commutative Triangles
Hypothesis. The fundamental problems (evils) in human society are tyranny (T), geophagy (G), and falsity (F), respectively, which correspond to violations of the Freedom Axiom, the Environmental Axiom, and the Truth Axiom, respectively. In Appendix II and elsewhere we show that every major problem of the human race can be traced to violations of these moral axioms or to materialism directly.
Theorem 1. Given that the hypothesis is true, tyranny, geophagy, and falsity are occurrence equivalent with materialism; and, with certain possible trivial exceptions, they are occurrence equivalent with each other. Moreover, every major problem of humanity will be solved if materialism is abandoned. By a natural extension this will solve the problem of extinction for most species. [Thus, every important problem of humanity, as enumerated in Appendix II, is occurrence equivalent with materialism. Clearly, this theorem is the central point of this essay. I regret only that it has taken so long to get to it. Critics of dissent push the dissenter to make his point early in the argument, but without lengthy preparation the point is not understood.]
Figure 9-1. Occurrence Equivalence of Social Evils
I hope to establish the occurrence equivalences diagrammed in Figure 9-1, which is composed of commutative triangles (and, for that matter, commutative quadrilaterals in case four conditions are to be linked by relations that go in both directions – hence ‘commutative’). Although materialism is just one thing that is either absent or present, falsity, geophagy, and tyranny have a number of manifestations. We must be careful to choose the cases so as to cover completely each of the three violations of the moral axioms. The subcategories have been listed in the Glossary of Symbols (above). We would like to be able to say that every instance of every social evil is either absent or present if materialism is absent or present. This is true absolutely of the principal social evils, however a few residual instances of minor social evils can occur even in a natural (nonmaterialistic) society due to a few diminished persons, incorrigibles, or unregenerate criminals. My claim continues to be that crime and perversity are the natural consequences of materialism and would not arise without it. In America, capitalism drives people crazy.
Methodology
In this chapter, we begin by proving that T*, G*, and F* are occurrence equivalent to materialism, M. Domination and hierarchy are two terms for the same state of affairs, namely, T*. Also, manufacturing consent, F*, as discussed by Herman and Chomsky [1], is achieved by corrupting society in a variety of ways; however, its relationship to materialism is univalent. G* is a little different; it has a number of aspects that I have elected to relate to materialism separately.
Clearly, if T*, G*, and F* are occurrence equivalent to materialism, they are occurrence equivalent to each other. Nevertheless, it is useful to explore the direct relations between each of these principal evils and the other two. Therefore, we discuss these direct relations next. In the case of the lesser evils, some of which should not be expected to disappear completely even in a non-materialistic society, it will not be necessary or, in some cases, possible to prove direct relations. It is sufficient to prove directly that To, Ť1 = Ğ1, T2 = G2, Go, Fo, F1, and F2 are occurrence equivalent with F*, which is done next.
It is easy to prove directly that G1 ( = T1), G3, and F3 are occurrence equivalent to M. Their relationships to the other social evils are evident. Finally, the slightly complicated relations between traditional male dominance F3, materialism M, authoritarian falsity F*, hierarchical domination T*, and excessive procreation G1 and Ğ1 including accidental pregnancies G0 are discussed. Regardless of any appearances to the contrary, the evils of traditional male dominance, especially general societal attitudes that were engendered by traditional male dominance, are still operative and as destructive as they have ever been – even if a woman is the president of the United States.
Materialism, M, Is Occurrence Equivalent with Hierarchical Dominance, T*.
M Implies T*
Any violation of the Freedom Axiom is termed tyranny. In this chapter, we deal separately with juvenile misbehavior and traditional power struggles within families, traditional male dominance, which subsumes the proverbial battle of the sexes, excessive procreation, and wanton damage to animals and plants. This leaves the principal types of dominance and hierarchy to be discussed. These are lumped together under the symbol T* and denoted hierarchical dominance, which makes their relationship with materialism nearly self-evident. Since I wish to establish the occurrence equivalence of tyranny with materialism, I hope that every violation of the Freedom Axiom of Chapter 3 is included in T0, T1, T2, T3, and T*. In particular, it is assumed that, other than T0, T1, T2, and T3, every form of domination of one person by another is made possible by differences in wealth, power and negotiable influence, and negotiable fame. If not, I hope that whatever I have forgotten does not damage my thesis except perhaps in an unimportant way.
In Chapter 3, we showed that differences in wealth, power, and fame (except non-negotiable fame) are occurrence equivalent and may be subsumed by differences in S*. [It seems obvious that unless there be differences in S*, the concept S* is meaningless. Thus, equality eliminates S*. Most of us do not want others to enjoy S* even if we desire it for ourselves – or our children, presumably because, no matter how much S* a child commands, the parent commands more S* as the parent is above the child.] Also, in Chapter 3, we showed that materialism implies the certainty of differences in S*, which, in turn, implies that some social link will impose upon another by virtue of such differences eventually; or, what amounts to the same thing, no person can be certain that such an imposition will not occur. Moreover, this sort of imposition cannot occur in a non-materialistic society. Corollary 2, which is discussed and proved in Chapter 3, shows that materialism implies tyranny, namely T*, as tyranny is defined to be violation of the Freedom Axiom.
Corollary 2. It is a violation of the Freedom Axiom and therefore immoral for a person to attempt to gain ascendancy or to accept a position of ascendancy over another person other than his or her own child or the children of others who voluntarily transfer ascendancy over their children, thus political power must be shared equally by all adults.
T* Implies M
It is convenient to separate economic tyranny, political tyranny, and other serious impositions upon our natural freedoms, i.e. T*, from tyranny associated with environmental destruction, including excessive procreation, from the societal effects of traditional male dominance, and from the tyranny exercised by childhood playground bullies and troublesome family members, especially infants demonstrating their atavistic animal natures, which is virtually impossible to extirpate. This last relatively unimportant tyranny, which plays a small role in our deliberations, shall be notated To. We shall discuss the relationship of To only with authoritarian falsity F*, since T0 is not a threat to the preservation of species,. Nevertheless, children should be much more reluctant to misbehave in a society based upon a rational social contract. Social contracts in the past must have given intelligent children grave doubts concerning the sanity of adults. Up to the present time one can detect an undercurrent of conflict between children and adults. During my lifetime, adults and children have been at war, as far as I have been able to understand events. I know I have considered nearly all adults, including my parents, as enemies, except at singularly rare moments of tenderness, e.g., some Christmas mornings.
Since T* implies M is the same as not-M implies not-T*, we may ask if tyranny would disappear if we abandoned competition for S*. It is difficult to imagine that no one would violate the freedom of anyone else – ever, but tyranny would not exist as an institution of society. The distinction between employee and employer would disappear and no one could be forced to do anything against his or her will because of economic considerations, since material wealth would be independent of human activity. Political power would disappear as discussed earlier. It is difficult to imagine that bullies could be at all successful in a society that had rejected institutional tyranny and where children were taught that domination of one person by another is immoral. Natural bosses might arise in families, but less frequently, and they would be easier to discourage. Probably the last form of tyranny to disappear would be the tyranny exercised by very young children over their parents.
Materialism, M, Is Occurrence Equivalent with the Worst Forms of Environmental Destruction, G*
Note. Both M implies G* and G* implies M are proved simultaneously since materialism is the sole cause of the violations of The Environmental Axiom listed and described briefly in this section.
All Human Activity
All human activity degrades the environment, if for no other reason, because we must degrade food energy into high-entropy junk heat. Clearly, then, excessive procreation, almost all of which can be linked to materialism, is a form of environmental destruction since every single human being destroys the environment more or less simply by being alive. The reader has gone to the trouble of reading Chapter 2 to understand this if it is not obvious from previous experience or study. The concept of emergy, as a universal measure of value, is useful to explain excessive consumption of emergy and environmental pollution. Environmental pollution can be thought of as the production of negative emergy (nemergy). All geophagy is the deficit spending of emergy. Thus, any influence that increases the amount of economic activity is, in and of itself, harmful even if some compensating benefit occurs. This principle is in contradistinction with the dogma of growth upon which every materialistic society is predicated.
Undoubtedly, many of us do the best we can to avoid air, water, and land pollution caused by everyday activities. Also, we try to minimize our use of irreplaceable underground high-grade energy reserves and aquifers. We recycle. We don’t litter or dump. We save fresh water, electricity, and gasoline by putting bricks in our toilet, turning off the lights when we leave a room, and driving a small, efficient car with the best gas mileage we can get or by walking or bicycling whenever possible. But, it is not good enough. Nor can it be expected to be good enough since, in a materialistic world, we are enmeshed in an infrastructure that guarantees over-consumption. Consider, for instance, the vast systems of roads, highways, railroads, and flight paths that separate Americans from their friends and families, their food, their jobs, and their children’s schools and that separate farms from markets.
We need to transform our society completely. The huge urban centers are infeasible. To eliminate the automobile culture, we must decentralize. To eliminate the huge energy overhead on food, we need to replace the agribusinesses with individual slow-growth “victory” gardens and small cooperative farms. To save the enormous emergy costs of doing business, we need fundamental political change. We need government to change – first by ceasing to be a handmaiden to profiteers and ultimately by ceasing to exist except in extremely limited and well-defined ways. None of these problems can be corrected without fundamental political change. In short, we need dematerialism as discussed throughout this essay but especially in Chapters 11 and 12.
Lavish Standards of Living and Excessive Consumption
In a world where people compete for material wealth, some people are certain to consume more of it than others. If we neglect the non-trivial number of people who lose their lives in this competition, the principal aspect of G* that is currently destroying our planet is the enormous amount of consumption over and above that necessary for the sustainable happiness of a normal person unencumbered with a “shop ‘til you drop” or “whoever has the most toys at the end wins” attitude. The excessively lavish standards of living of even the poor in a rich country like the United States, made possible by even greater poverty in poor countries, is a principal cause of the destruction of the planet. Even marginal excess consumption is unacceptable to a member of a non-materialistic (natural) community. Such a person consumes as little as possible so that the maximum number of people can enjoy the gift of life.
It is true that most people who acquire more than an average amount of wealth consume more emergy than their fair share in addition to preventing others from expending sufficient amounts of emergy to survive without undue misery or, for that matter, to survive at all. This would remain true even if human society spent emergy at a rate no greater than the rate at which new emergy is created by the Sun because the limits to the quantity of renewable (sustainable) energy are just as real as the limits to the quantity of fossil fuel. Under the present circumstances of deficit spending of the Sun’s and Earth’s bounty, this is catastrophically true.
Although rich people are not compelled to consume more real wealth (emergy) than is absolutely necessary to survive, they are under the same influences as everyone else in a materialistic economy including magazine ads in the New Yorker (magazine) urging them to purchase fabulous jewels and motor yachts. Recently, a newspaper article described a plutocrat who purchased a $28,000 television set that uses more energy than the heating plant in his 6500 square foot house. The Cable News Network (CNN) ran a featured story about a British billionaire named Branson who wishes to sell trips into outer space to other rich people many of whom are stupid enough to go. The environment must pay not only for the energy required to go into outer space, which is sufficiently great that it should be illegal in the United States (and even might be someday), but also for whatever it cost to get the money to pay Branson. Ironically, the very people who might contemplate escaping Earth to avoid the suffering due to environmental destruction, climate change, and resource wars are those who least deserve to escape with their lives and infect other planets with their corrupt seed.
Materialistic economies require continued expansion, therefore over-consumption is absolutely necessary to keep them going. Thus, every group of people is viewed by materialists as a market – even the poor of Third-World countries. The people of the United States, including the poor people of the United States, are viewed as potential customers by every nation that has something to sell.
The Environmental Costs of Creating and Maintaining Inequality
All of the environmental costs of installing and maintaining inequality, and they are considerable, must be charged to materialism because materialism is the sole cause of inequality. This is trivially true as the inequality we are discussing is precisely the inequality built into the definition of materialism that has been employed in this essay. It is necessary only to list the principal types of inequality and the principal means of creating and maintaining them, e.g., building, maintaining, and employing a vast war machine, the corporate media, and even our vast system of schools and universities insofar as they inculcate materialistic values and the methods for their implementation such as the study of law, business, and, yes, computers.
Since the ultimate competition is war, it is not difficult to assign the massive environmental destruction due to war to materialism. This is not just the destruction due to war and the huge amounts of emergy consumed in waging war, but the environmental destruction associated with rebuilding, which is often passed off as a very great good when, in fact, it is a very great evil, which brings us to the next point.
The Cost of Resistance
If a war be a war against tyranny, the damage and emergy costs associated with it must be assigned to materialism without which tyranny cannot exist. Also, in a materialistic society, crime and terrorism may be interpreted as private wars against tyranny. Therefore, both the damage done by criminals and terrorists and the emergy costs of preventing, detecting, and punishing crime and terrorism must be charged to materialism.
The Cost of Competition for Wealth
The emergy consumed by competition for wealth in any society with a market economy is the principal cause of environmental destruction in that society. My essay “Energy in a Natural Economy” represents a first attempt to identify the huge proportion of energy consumption that must be charged to “dividing up the pie”, i.e., to sales, advertising, marketing, making deals, public relations, managing employees who are not partners: in short, trying to gain a larger share of the national dividend for oneself or one’s employer. It is possible to have a materialistic society without a market economy, however nothing stops people with power or negotiable influence or negotiable fame from converting some of it to wealth. At least no one can be certain that they will not do this which amounts to the same thing – as previously noted.
Materialism, M, Is Occurrence Equivalent with Authoritarian Falsity, F*
Plausibility Argument for Conjecture 1. If every manifestation of F* is occurrence equivalent with materialism, then each manifestation of F* is occurrence equivalent with every other manifestation of F*, since materialism, M, is just one thing that is either present or not present. Clearly, none of the types of F* can occur unless materialism be present as each requires someone to have and maintain power over someone else, e.g., the owner of a television station over a performer or a principal over a teacher. Thus, F* implies M. Moreover, it is unlikely that M, which is equivalent to T*, could exist unless every possible available mode of falsity were employed to promote it and sustain it as we have seen in the United States. If a new form of falsity were to be discovered, it would be employed to shore up belief in the unbelievable as the stakes are very high, and materialists will do whatever is necessary to continue to play the game of life under rules that favor themselves, i.e., as an improper game. Thus, M implies F*, and F* if and only if M, which was to be shown.
Note. Liberals make a very great mistake when they assume that some aspects of materialism can be eliminated without eliminating every aspect of materialism. If one person can acquire more wealth or power than another, eventually every evil of materialism will result. The situation will be intolerable even during the transition period immediately following liberal reforms when these evils are feared (only) rather than actualized. Materialism is indeed Pandora’s Box in that once opened it is impossible to disremember the techniques used by materialists to bring about the catastrophes of our age. Therefore, if the institutions under which materialism has been spawned are extant, every aspect of materialism will reappear.
M Implies F*
Materialism would not be tolerated if most people saw the world as it actually is.
Since materialism is not in the best interests of most people, it requires a vast campaign of propaganda, miseducation, and disinformation to support it. Thus, to perpetuate materialism, the ruling class and others who benefit from materialism must maintain a vast system of thought control. As I pointed out elsewhere, this may be done without a general conspiracy. The writers of television situation comedies do not have to conspire or be ordered to support the values of materialism, particularly consumerism. They know what to do to keep their highly paid jobs without being told. Most of them probably think of themselves in their moments of deeper reflection as little better than prostitutes (or perhaps worse), but they do not take into account the whole story. Of course, they are prostitutes for using their talents to produce trash rather than art; but, far worse, they are betraying the entire human race by spreading falsehoods that are destroying our planet as well as perpetuating the other intolerable evils of materialism.
Indeed, the entire mass media – TV, magazines, newspapers, radio – seems to be dedicated to the perpetuation of falsehood. Moreover, the schools ensure that the spread of falsehood and destructive attitudes will continue into the generation. It is difficult to make an impression on the minds of the many people who are under the spell of these contradictory and inconsistent ideas.
Those who benefit most from materialism must lie to themselves.
But materialism gives rise to falsity passively as well as actively. Those who engage in its worst institutions, namely, commerce and business, must lie to themselves as well as others. Everyone does right according to his own lights. Therefore, participants in business and commerce have to practice self-deception and doublethink to a marked degree. One can engage them in conversation and determine that, in most cases, they are well aware of the evil they do; but, somehow, they manage to tell themselves that the normal rules of decency do not apply to themselves. I know this from personal experience. One can ask a series of questions such that the average person at the end of the interview will avow that society and, in particular, the American capitalistic system are completely corrupt. If a different set of questions is asked, the same interviewee will defend the same system loyally. In particular, the interviewer must not attack America directly.
So, miraculously, people realize that something is wrong. However, I doubt whether very many people can say what it is exactly. The most important thing that we can do is to employ correct reasoning ourselves. Then the truth will infiltrate the collective consciousness of mankind and falsehood will no longer be sustainable. The point is that it is very difficult to obliterate the truth once it is known. This accounts for the small number of (literal) flat-earthers among us.
Materialism permits the accumulation of power necessary to spread falsehood widely.
Materialism, which permits people to accumulate sufficient excess wealth to devote part of it to scientific refinements to the art of lying, contributes to man's awesome power to brainwash. We can only speculate as to whether the desire for personal gain led to the use of speech against people or an atavistic will to power preceded it in the evolution of society. That is not a question that needs to be answered here, except to say that, whatever the case, it is unlikely that it could have affected man's genetic makeup.
Artificial economic contingency makes people vulnerable to falsity.
We must consider how artificial economic contingency, which is equivalent to materialism, makes people vulnerable to doublethink as well as how materialism gives predators the incentive as well as the wherewithal to spread falsity. As we all know, confidence men prey on the subject's greed. It is unlikely that people who are invulnerable to the lures of excess wealth would be easy to brainwash. “You can’t cheat an honest man.” “It is difficult for a man to understand something when his ability to make a living depends upon his not understanding it.”
Falsity is inherent in improper games.
In what sense is it a violation of the Truth Axiom to permit a so-called Game of Life to be played? Such a game is clearly an improper game for all of the obvious reasons, which all of the participants must know perfectly well. Yet we pretend such a thing as equal opportunity exists. Children are indoctrinated to believe that they have as good a chance as anyone else to be ‘successful’. Over and over we hear that anyone who perseveres can achieve economic success. This is one of the biggest lies of our Big Lies – comparable to the International Communist Conspiracy or the Global Economy. It must be supported by doublethink to a shocking extent because it is so obvious that most people don’t have a ghost of a chance to achieve worldly success in this world. Thus, having shown the game of life (materialism) is an improper game and observing that it is promulgated as a proper game – or what passes for a proper game without mentioning generalized game rules or the concepts of proper and improper game – we must conclude that materialism comes to us in the form of a Big Lie and the coincidence of falsity with materialism is automatic.
Materialism (life being an improper game) violates the Truth Axiom because our childhood indoctrination taught us that life would be fair. Suppose life were a proper game. That, too, would be unacceptable morally because losers would be forced to subsist on less than the average consumption of emergy, which, in a scarcity situation, would mean death. In either case (scarcity or abundance), the Freedom Axiom is violated because no one may be forced to play a game when he wishes to do otherwise. Moreover, how could it remain a proper game when one has to cheat to win. Life is not a sport!
F* Implies M
It is easy to see that when no one has anything to gain by employing insidious psychological techniques to influence people to accept falsehood, the incentive will have been withdrawn and the practice will disappear naturally. Thus, abandoning materialism will eliminate the deliberate spread of falsehood. (Not-materialism implies not-falsity is the same as falsity implies materialism.)
T* If and Only If F*, Hierarchical Dominance Is Occurrence Equivalent with Authoritarian Falsity
Clearly, the proof is complete at this point as T* and F* have been shown to be occurrence equivalent with materialism. Two things that are occurrence equivalent to the same thing are occurrence equivalent to each another. Nevertheless, it might be interesting to consider to what extent T*, F*, and G* are caused directly by each other. Unfortunately, this will lead to some repetition, however it might strengthen the arguments presented above.
T* Implies F*
Authoritarianism is the principal component of T*. That is why I find the name authoritarian falsity suggestive. In case the domination of some by others is accomplished without acceptance of authoritarianism by the victims, revolution constantly bubbles under the surface. This is the situation in Iraq at this writing. By ‘brainwashing’ the American-led coalition hopes to gain wide acceptance of tyranny in the name of democracy. Since, nowadays and perhaps always, Democracy has been the name tyrants give to governments like that of the U.S. and worse governments, perhaps we should reject Democracy as a name for a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. The mere existence of people who accept governments based upon modern representational democracy and mass-media electoral politics is proof of F*. Ask yourself, regardless of whether you approve of the war or even hoped for the war or not, how much input did you, personally, have in the decision to go to war in Iraq?
It is easy to see how devices that prevent us from thinking straight can be used to gain power over us whatever the motive of those who wish to dominate. Clearly tyrants must maintain a psychological state among their subjects that permits tyranny to endure. We have already seen how this might be done. In any case, without falsity – and falsity on a fairly grand scale – large numbers of ordinary people would overthrow tyranny. Also, tyrants must justify their own behavior in their own eyes, which can be done only by self-deception.
Doublethink is necessary for people to believe they are free in a large republic like the United States. The Constitution Party candidate for president of the United States made my point for me yesterday, October 29, 2004, when he stated on C-Span that, according to the Constitution, the U.S. is not a democracy but rather a republic because the Founding Fathers believed in authority – the authority of God over all of humanity, the authority of the president over the people of the United States, and the authority of the propertied class over all others. Of course he is right about the Founding Fathers. What he didn’t say was that authority of some over others is inconsistent with personal liberty (freedom) for all, which shows that the Founding Fathers were irrational. He went on to speak of property rights as natural rights given by God. What he could not have said was how we would know if God gave some people the right to own property that is not used directly by the possessors but rather is needed by others to live. Thus, the tyranny of authoritarianism, which is the fundamental form of T*, requires doublethink by those who accept it. If no one accepted it, it could not exist.
F* Implies T*
Someone must exercise power over someone else to spread falsehood.
One can tell a lie without power, but to spread falsehood on a dangerous scale requires power over someone even if it be the editor of a newspaper or the operator of a radio station. Power over people is forbidden by Axiom 1 (the Freedom Axiom) and violations of Axiom 1 are tyranny by definition. This is a rigorous proof for the case of major violations of the Truth Axiom – the ones with which this essay is most concerned.
Inculcating bad behavior requires power over the schools and/or churches.
But, virtue is natural to the natural person and falsity is not a virtue. We have assumed that virtuous behavior is necessary for happiness and that people will try to be happy unless something dramatic has been done to them to pervert their natural tendencies. Although this could have occurred at home, someone at some time learned it through the schools or the church – beginning in kindergarten, Sunday school, or even in nursery school during the “dark ages” of the mind. Our indictments of the schools and churches appear elsewhere, therefore we shall take this comment on the schools and churches as proven; however, see “The Seven-Lesson Schoolteacher” by John Gatto. Falsity at the lowest level arose because someone had power over the schools and churches in violation of Axiom 1; i.e., if this violation had not occurred, powerless people would not be inclined toward falsity, which was to be shown.
Only tyranny prevents truth from being told.
Further, we might argue that, if there were no tyrants to stop us, we could dispel all of the lies easily by simple logic. We would have the same opportunity (then) to teach truth that the materialistic establishment, its educational institutions, and its media have (now) to teach lies; i.e., not-T* implies not-F*, which is the same as F* implies T*, where F* is the type of falsity that includes governmental and industrial propaganda, i.e., the type of lies that rich (and powerful) people tell to control poor people. In the previous paragraph, we showed that T* if and only if F*. Thus, authoritarian falsity (F*) is occurrence equivalent to institutionalized domination and hierarchical ascendancy of one person over another (T*).
The education of older children and, frankly, the indoctrination of small children, which is always done and must be done in every society, can be carried on in a small, personalized, practically one-on-one way in a rational anarchy with a natural economy since individual mentors would not be up against a pervasive mass attack of authoritarian propaganda. Only a plutocracy has the power and the motivation to inculcate irrational doctrines wholesale or to endow churches and private schools that inform children with wrong and harmful notions. People inculcated with rational ideas would “know” that tyranny and tyrants, even tyrannous machines, are undesirable. Later on, they would know why. Rational indoctrination is not a tainted concept. It has nothing to do with anything sinister, evil, false, or dehumanizing. When children grow up and begin to think for themselves, unlike contemporary American children, they would not run into conflicts because of the wide disparity between their early brain stuffing and plain common sense – let alone deep thought.
F* If and Only If G*
F* Implies G*
The Cost of Manufacturing Belief in the Two-Party System
In the united States both conservatives and liberals have noticed that the media is biased. Each thinks that the bias is toward the opposite side. Let me hazard a guess: This is because each knows the bias is not toward his side and both liberals and conservatives believe that there is no other side but the other side. Thus, both liberals and conservatives have fallen into the two-party trap and consent has been manufactured. This isn’t cheap. As stated repeatedly all economic activity represents a cost to the environment both on the production side and the consumption side (supply side and demand side, if I must speak in clichés). Conceivably, the entire election process, including the ubiquitous media coverage and the incredible distances traveled by armies of political participants and their observers, is no more than a vast charade designed to create the impression of a democratic process going on involving genuine popular involvement, while almost every individual knows that he or she played no role in the selection of pitifully short list of candidates for so-called primary elections sponsored by political parties in which they have no voice whatever. I know, from personal experience on the Harris County (Houston, Texas) executive committee of the Democratic Party, that I have no voice in selecting candidates and could not be a candidate myself without taking an economic risk that would have less chance of success than the purchase of a Texas State Lottery ticket. The cost to the environment of maintaining this charade must be charged to authoritarian falsity.
The Cost of the Corporate Media
If we know the constant of proportionality between energy consumption and the flow of money through the corporate media, including Hollywood-style film, we can compute the cost to the environment of this particular mode of manufacturing consent. We all know that the cost is ‘stupendous’. The constant of proportionality for a given year is approximated roughly by the total energy budget of a nation like the United States divided by the Gross Domestic Product. In essays posted on my website (as of December 21, 2004), this constant is taken to be approximately 0.3 watt-years per US dollar, which neglects transformities and variations between sectors. Due to inflation the constant may be used only in the year in which it is calculated.
The Cost of Miseducation
Almost every school in the United States is guilty of malpractice – or, as I have referred to it here, miseducation. We discuss The Pledge below with the anti-secessionist propaganda term indivisible as well as the unconstitutional phrase “under God”. The reader can imagine what I might say about the glorification of the Presidency of the United States, the perversion of American history, and other aspects of social studies, but the reader might be surprised to know that I have been equally critical of the teaching of mathematics, reading and writing English, and other language skills, which amazingly is not free of political content; for example, the prejudice against negative numbers can be construed to reinforce the student’s prejudice against dissent, which is viewed as essentially negative and therefore untrustworthy. I do not insist upon this last point as there is plenty of evidence of miseducation without it. As an exception to this general rule, I must concede that elementary schools do an amazingly good job of inculcating green attitudes toward superficial conservation, i.e., saving water, recycling, etc. The point of this sub-section is that this miseducation is not without its environmental costs:
Nowadays, the cost of schools, school security, school administration, standardized testing, curricula, teaching materials, and teaching is taken to be a direct measure of the quality as well as the quantity of education. What is forgotten is that more of a bad thing is a worse thing. Nevertheless, this cost, translated from monetary to energetic terms, is not in dispute by educators. They pride themselves on it.
G* Implies F*
It is obvious that no person or institution can continue to destroy or consume the environment in a systematic way for an extended period of time unless he, she, or it be very badly deceived or be able to deceive others or permit a state of self-deception to endure. No one will tolerate environmental destruction if they understand what is going on, therefore institutional polluters, for example, must employ materialistic propaganda to prevent public outrage. Excessive environmental destruction that occurs when there is competition for wealth in the fields of mining, energy, and chemical production, to give a few examples, requires falsity to a greater extent than simple lying in business (F3). Thus, we see huge ad campaigns on television to paint a rosy picture of American industry, which is certainly F*. Americans may know that the individual ad is false, but the cumulative effect of so many ads serves to create the desired false impression.
If parents, day-care providers, and elementary school teachers, who, within a curriculum of nearly total miseducation, do an amazingly good job of environmental education (except that they are not anti-consumerist), I say, if they were only slightly better informed, most geophagy that might occur even in a dematerialized world could be avoided; but, people who care for children will not be better informed so long as materialism-engendered tyranny is operative in society. Teachers are very much affected by massive authoritarian falsity. I have seen lesson plans for second graders that glorify the Presidency of the United States, the Race into Space, which has replaced the Space Race, with its excessive use of high-grade energy, .
G* If and Only If T*
G* Implies T*
Geophagy constitutes tyranny per se, which is why we can prove the Environmental Axiom from the Freedom Axiom, so G* implies T*.
T* Implies G*
Consider the destruction caused by military action either to promote tyranny or to defend against it. In either case the damage must be charged to tyranny. Tyranny is responsible for the geophagy committed to install it and to spread it, to sustain it, and to oppose it. This is distinct from the geophagy inherent in materialism, which could not exist without tyranny and is a form of tyranny itself as shown above.
I could use the “private war proof” to prove T* implies G*, because the tyrant must take responsibility for the damage to the environment and the (otherwise) unnecessary consumption of natural resources that occur when freedom fighters struggle against him. Look at the damage perpetrated by the Islamic terrorists. Perhaps the rank and file believe the purpose is to spread the tyranny of Islam, but the tyrants who lead the rank and file know that the struggle is against the tyranny of the United States, which is global, whereas their own tyranny, concerning which they do not meditate – probably, is only over those who have agreed to follow them, perhaps for the wrong reasons since falsity leads to more falsity.
Also, tyranny is not (energetically) cheap. Consider, the costs of the armed forces, the police, and, lately, homeland security. An aircraft carrier can be moved only a few feet on a barrel of oil. In addition, institutionalized tyranny, which is materialism itself, requires a huge propaganda apparatus to “manufacture consent” (F*) that has enormous environmental costs associated with it. It is not unreasonable to assume that the entire system of representational democracy in the United States, for example, including the media that reports on it is nothing better than a huge “circus for the people” the sole purpose of which is to create the illusion that ordinary people actually have a voice in the affairs of the nation states that control their lives. When I monitor the activities of the U.S. Congress on cable television’s C-Span, I sometimes get the feeling that I am watching just another television show. Just imagine the environmental costs, especially the diminution of our precious natural resources, associated with this gigantic “dog and pony” show. Thus, T* → G* (both directly and indirectly through F*), which completes the proof that T* is occurrence equivalent to G*.
Occurrence Equivalence of F* with To, Ť1 = Ğ1, T2 = G2, Go, Fo, F1, and F2
Manufacturing Consent, F*
I have suggested a number of names for F*, the type of falsity associated with (1a) “manufacturing consent”, (1b) repressing dissent, (1c) inculcating materialistic notions in children, (1d) miseducating children and adults, and (1e) disseminating materialistic propaganda. Tentatively, I suggested the terms mass deception, materialistic propaganda, and, if we wish to retain the word falsity in its name, authoritarian falsity. The name we give it doesn’t matter. In the rest of this chapter we shall refer to it as F*.
Conjecture 1. The various types of falsity denoted by F*, namely, (1a) “manufacturing consent”, (1b) repressing dissent, (1c) inculcating materialistic notions in children, (1d) miseducating children and adults, and (1e) disseminating materialistic propaganda, are found together or not at all. Thus, they are occurrence equivalent and may be treated as a single violation of the Truth Axiom.
Plausibility Argument for Conjecture 1. If every manifestation of F* is occurrence equivalent with materialism, then each manifestation of F* is occurrence equivalent with every other manifestation of F*, since materialism, M, is just one thing that is either present or not present. Clearly, none of the types of F* can occur unless materialism be present as each requires someone to have and maintain power over someone else, e.g., the owner of a television station over a performer or a principal over a teacher. Thus, F* implies M. Moreover, it is unlikely that M, which shall be shown to be equivalent to T*, could exist unless every possible available mode of falsity were employed to promote it and sustain it as we have seen in the United States. If a new form of falsity were to be discovered, it would be employed to shore up belief in the unbelievable as the stakes are very high, and materialists will do whatever is necessary to continue to play the game of life under rules that favor themselves, i.e., as an improper game. Thus, M implies F*, and F* if and only if M, which was to be shown. We now wish to show that F* is occurrence equivalent with T0, Ť1, T2, G0, Ğ1, G2, F0, F1, and F2.
We begin with an observation, namely, that all of the activities (1a – 1e) associated with F* are present in the United States, which is our model for a capitalist economy, despite the numerous socialistic features and gross departures from free-market capitalism. The term “manufacturing consent” is in quotes because it is taken from the title of the book by Ed Herman and Noam Chomsky [1]. I have placed it first in a list of five members even though it could be taken to be a reasonable name for the entire list. But, is it true that our parenting and early childhood education in America contribute to a widespread belief in the American system? Consider the Pledge of Allegiance, which, by the way, is validated by every parent who permits his or her child to recite this Pledge in any school where it is, in turn, validated by the teachers, who exercise much too great an influence over our children’s lives even though, in many cases, the teachers are essentially children themselves. The Pledge inculcates a number of conclusions relative to open questions, which I have discussed elsewhere in this essay. Whatever the cause, it is certainly true, that the open questions as to the validity of Capitalism or Communism are not perceived as open by the majority of Americans. The proof that they are still open is this discussion, whereas the proof that consent has been manufactured lies in the fact that many readers think otherwise.
Schoolyard Bullies and Family Tyrants, To
F* Implies To
Materialistic propaganda is one of the ways in which conformity to the American system is enforced. To what extent is it responsible for schoolyard bullies? Gun-toting tough guys who don’t take any back talk from anyone are ubiquitous on television and in the movies. Small children are helpless targets for similar examples of ruthless domination of one person or animal by another in cartoons such as Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon. Children act out these fantasies on playgrounds; and, when they get a little older, they act out these fantasies in Iraq. Footage has been shown on CNN (Cable News Network) of American soldiers interrogating Iraqi citizens on the streets of Baghdad. They are brusque and discourteous. They show no respect for their elders. Where did they learn how to act like this?
The producers of popular entertainment may not favor authoritarian attitudes over egalitarian attitudes, but the persistence of the profit motive dictates the continued existence of these harmful influences upon children and young adults. While no one, not even the President of the United States, will advocate authoritarianism directly, only the demise of materialism and, in turn, materialistic falsity has a chance to permit the disappearance of childish despotism. Although that may not be enough to effect a complete eradication, it should result in a vast improvement.
To Implies F*
The argument for this proposition must be that F* does not prevent To from occurring, but rather prevents egalitarians from inculcating peaceful attitudes in very young children, as discussed above in connection with occurrence implication. Admittedly, many parents and teachers do their best to discourage bullying and other ways in which some people dominate others; however, in a society in which “success” is defined to be the domination of other people financially, politically, and physically, what chance do they have. Nowadays, national leaders refer to “successful states”, which children know are precisely those that have the power to bully other weaker states and children notice that they do bully other states. If the children are not watching television news with their parents, they will see plenty of bullying in the cartoons. The news and children’s entertainment are part of the process of manufacturing consent as are significant portions of the child’s pre-school or school day beginning with the Pledge of Allegiance. As a parent, I am powerless to prevent this from happening as school is compulsory – “liberty and justice for all” notwithstanding. Materialistic attitudes impressed into pre-reason children are especially insidious. When they grow up they will no longer remember how they were acquired, therefore these attitudes will seem to be innate, in other words natural, and not open to criticism.
Many will claim that children are naturally manipulative and that they are programmed by their DNA to try to get their own way. This may or may not be true, but it is easy to show that such behavior can be corrected. However, the glorification of dominant people in the media and elsewhere makes it difficult for egalitarian parents to counter authoritarian ambience. Indeed, even support for the institution of President of the United States constitutes approval of leadership in the sense of the domination of the many by the few in the sense that George Bernard Shaw spoke of “natural leaders” in the preface to The Millionairess.
When (or if) a quasi-authoritarian education is no longer compulsory and the channels of dissent are no longer cut off, egalitarians will be able to indoctrinate children in egalitarian attitudes, and To will be diminished considerably. Society can tolerate some residual childish despotism without resorting to punishment as a response to conflicts in living of this nature. In any case, this is not the form of tyranny that threatens the human race with self-extinction, although it must not be taken too lightly.
Narcissism and Other Self-Deceptions, F1
Let us suppose that disproportional regard for oneself to the exclusion of attention to external or outward directing goals in the sense of Bertrand Russell [2] can be ameliorated by education. But, education in the United States is directed toward earning a living even in kindergarten and the first grade as I have discovered lately to my sorrow. This directs the child’s mind back toward himself or herself, which encourages narcissism. In an economy without artificial economic contingency, this would not only be unnecessary it would be impossible.
Doublethink in the sense of George Orwell seems to be a factor that occurs in most forms of self-deception. Let us suppose that the contradictions inherent in materialism make doublethink practically a necessity in the mental life of a compliant citizen of every sovereign state, especially in the United States. For example, we must manifest simultaneously a regard for the welfare of people living in developing countries whilst consuming five times to hundreds of times the Earth’s storehouse of real wealth. This necessitates a belief in a virtual Flat Earth that extends in all directions infinitely far and therefore has sufficient wealth for all regardless of how profligate their lifestyles. Thus, we believe that everyone could live the American Dream if only they would see things our way. This is only an example of how materialism and F1 are linked.
Superstition, F2
Superstition does not arise naturally. Here is a case of a problem that can be eliminated as soon as the reasons for creating the problem can be eliminated. Presumably, then, if priests, bosses, and kings can no longer exercise domination over us because we have abandoned materialism, at most only a tolerable remnant of superstition will remain. Even the baseball player’s playful superstitions might disappear in a population wherein reasonableness has been inculcated throughout childhood.
Contrariwise, in modern America, superstition is inculcated by schools with the Pledge of Allegiance and after school and throughout the lives of our citizens by television such as cable’s “Court TV”, which is at this writing is promoting belief in psychics, and the Lord of the Rings, which promotes belief in magic. Recently, I spoke to two young adults who were employed in a computer game store both of whom were convinced that time travel would be part of our immediate future. They could not understand that time travel is logically impossible, which makes physical impossibility superfluous. Paradoxically the ‘progress’ of electronic technology that exploits quantum mechanics and other advanced scientific knowledge has advanced the cause of superstition by means of cheap special effects in movies and other media. In the wake of dematerialism this can be corrected easily.
Excessive Procreation out of Ignorance, Ť1 and Ğ1
Five motives for excessive procreation in violation of the Token Theorem, which permits every person to replace herself or himself, are (i) narcissism, (ii) fear that not all will live, (iii) cheap labor to promote family wealth, (iv) hope for support in old age, and (v) to spread rapidly a racial plurality, a religion, ideology, culture, or general system of “family values”, often superstitions and myths, to which the violator of the Token Theorem is committed, dedicated, or enthralled – or at least wishes others to be committed, dedicated, or enthralled. Accidental pregnancies will be treated as though they were simply another form of inadvertent environmental destruction. Presumably, inadvertent pregnancies can be eliminated by a combination of education, indoctrination, and science all unfettered by superstition.
The first reason, narcissism, for having more children than is morally valid is very likely to disappear (at least as a reason for having children) in a society free of materialism (M) and materialistic propaganda (F*), which is occurrence equivalent with materialism. This was discussed above and will be taken up again below. Moreover, when a beloved child dies the parent’s grief is not diminished by the survival of another child, therefore the motive for having more children to ensure against such a tragedy may be assumed to be narcissistic as well. Most of this can be corrected by early childhood training, which is certain to go forward in a society that does not prevent it or counter it with materialistic propaganda designed to ensure a readily available surplus labor supply to account for the cycles of boom and bust inherent in all market economies according to Norbert Weiner’s Cybernetics [3].
Wanton Killing of Plants and Animals, T2 = G2
F* Implies G2
Extremely violent and environmentally destructive television and movies are both part and parcel and a result of the massive propaganda effort that is necessary to encourage young people not only to support materialistic wars but to dress up in military uniforms and fight and die in them. A side effect of this, undoubtedly deplored by most authoritarians and materialists, is the occasional wanton killing of plants and animals.
G2 Implies F*
Either voluptuary cruelty arises naturally or it does not. If it does it can be educated away by appropriate childhood indoctrination, which can be prevented only if T* and F* exist. If it does not arise naturally, it must be caused by F* (or T*). Children who have been cruelly treated, which is T*, occasionally take it out on plants and animals, but T* implies F* as will be shown.
Accidental Environmental Destruction, Go
Clearly, materialism is not required for someone to pollute a stream by dropping a can of paint thinner in it – assuming we will somehow manage to obtain paint and paint thinner in a post-Peak-Oil economy. Moreover, accidental pregnancies have been lumped in with Go.
Some carelessness is unavoidable despite the best education and upbringing. However, institutional carelessness can be eliminated and a nearly universal desire to make reparations for one’s mistakes can be inculcated easily in the absence of F*. Nevertheless, accidents happen and must be exempted from this discussion. We can live with a few unavoidable accidents. The reader recognizes that residual environmental damage of this sort is not what this theory is about.
Less than Scrupulous Honesty in Erotic Relationships, Fo
Dishonesty in business, especially in advertising and marketing, sets the stage for dishonesty in erotic relations. In a non-materialistic setting scrupulous honesty can be inculcated in early childhood and throughout our lives. In particular, there will be nothing like F* to prevent it from being established as the norm rather than the exception. It is noteworthy that conservatives nowadays like to cloak their rhetoric in liberal language, casually tossing off phrases like liberty and justice for all when they mean no such thing. This sort of dishonesty straight from the lips of conservative spokespeople is bound to have an effect on many people who come under their influence. While it is not claimed that liberal policies will be at all effective, conservatives disguise their agendas by using dyslogistic or eulogistic terms for their policies or their agents in situations where an honest person would use a neutral term. For example, the second President Bush refers to our soldiers in Iraq as heroes and the soldiers of the insurgency as villains or in terms of that sort. Also, the terms good and evil applies to deeds or practices not to individuals.
Thus, pervasive dishonesty on the part of the champions of materialism as well as F*, which cannot be countered in like force by egalitarians, provides circumstances where dishonesty by men, for example, to achieve erotic goals is easily rationalized. But, exacerbating this difficulty is the puritanical nature of our sexual norms and the scarcity of desirable sexual objects in a sexual arena where the ground rules are set by those least qualified to set them, namely, the advertisers and the media, who are telling men they must only be attracted to women of a particular body type with faces that look like the face of the current media Sex Goddess, and the religionists, who are telling men that they should not be attracted to anyone. No wonder men are confused. Perhaps, even in a non-materialistic world, some residual instances of F0 will persist, but the situation will be drastically improved when people no longer have an interest in perpetuating the principal causes of F0.
At least, in a natural economy, no one would have anything to gain by creating sexual stereotypes that make one woman seem more desirable than another for any reason other than her disposition (which is all that matters after the first two weeks). Also, in a natural economy no one would have any incentive to inculcate sexual repression, which, according to Reich [3] and others, is used to promote political repression ultimately; therefore, with the conquest of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, we could get back to having sex with whomever we please, which would put an end to much of the falsity associated with sex as an improper game played in a “sexual arena”. (If more people have sex more often, it stands to reason that fewer people will be completely frustrated from lack of sex, and one may safely say that that almost no one is jealous of those who enjoy more desirable sex partners while he is actually engaged in passionate sex. Furthermore, the violations themselves are of a highly local character and do not constitute the pernicious evil that this theory is dedicated to ending. [Undoubtedly, some women feel otherwise and they will struggle against this type of falsity restoring more rigor to my theorem in the bargain.] Thus, the relations would be proved well enough for all practical purposes and the exceptions would not be damaging to my thesis, in particular they would not invalidate the Fundamental Theorem (sustainable happiness if and only if not-M).
Socrates and Six Degrees of Separation, S6
I believe that, unless he is forced to drink hemlock or the modern equivalent of so doing, Socrates or his modern surrogate would dispel all falsity on a one-to-one basis. Perhaps the ability to spread the truth on a one-to-one basis should be included in our list of philosophical assumptions. I believe that Heidegger was right when he said the truth is one to one. If it is true that each of us is separated by everyone else in the world by at most six degrees of separation, an incontrovertible change of attitude toward wealth sharing and individual autonomy can be spread around the globe rather quickly on a person-to-person, one-to-one basis – especially if this change of attitude, which clearly facilitates survival of the species, is not opposed by mass propaganda. If it cannot be falsified scientifically, let us see this principle, denoted S6 in my essays, carried out in practice as a final test of its validity.
M Is Occurrence Equivalent to G1 ( = T1), G3, and F3
Excessive Procreation for Materialistic Reasons, T1 and G1
It is not difficult to see that excess procreation to provide oneself with cheap labor or to support oneself in one’s old age is occurrence equivalent with materialism and F*. The case of excess procreation to spread belief systems is a little more subtle, but it should be recognized that when no person can dominate another by any means and when dissent is easily expressed and is protected, authoritarians, for example, will not require strength in numbers but will be able to make their case easily without such drastic methods, which would tend to undercut their ideas anyway. Either free debate will defeat those who might dissent from the views expressed here or these views are incorrect, in which case, hopefully, they will never be adopted.
Since many people will elect not to have children and not to pass on their tokens to people who wish to have additional children, the population will shrink toward an optimal density. If someone is motivated to have additional children intentionally for some reason other than the reasons specifically named, we can only hope that this mistake will be compensated for by people who do not reproduce. Early childhood training, non-puritanical sex education, and rational propaganda in the absence of F* should mitigate this difficulty if it exists. In addition, many materialistic practices require engaging in falsity two of which are covered in the next two sub-sections. (Clearly, industrial pollution of the type G3 is not something one would want to tell the truth about.)
Industrial Pollution in a Materialistic Society, G3
Can you imagine competition for wealth without environmental destruction due to mining, extraction of oil and gas, and industrial pollution whenever a competitive edge can be achieved thereby! Everyone knows that the air, water, and soil pollution caused by businesses trying to gain an advantage over their competitors or to increase profits is the environmental pollution opposed by environmental activists and the federal Environmental protection agency. What may not be sufficiently clear is that even if those organizations were successful in changing business and consumer patterns the destruction of the environment for other reasons would wipe out nearly every single species. If we wish to preserve species, we must reduce environmental destruction beyond what is possible in a materialistic economy.
Since no one violates environmental laws, not even environmental standards widely-held within his (or her) community, except to make money or to increase his political power, geophagy of this type would not occur in a completely cooperative nonmaterialistic society. People would recognize their common interest in a sustainable world with all of the delights of nature. The people who have a vested interest in keeping them in the dark would no longer be around. Thus, we could argue that without materialism we would not have tyranny, without tyranny we would not have falsity, and without falsity no one would imagine that geophagy was in anyone's interest and so it would disappear. The reason that environmental destruction continues is that people are competing for wealth and power.
In addition to the environmental destruction per capita, materialism is the principal cause of overpopulation. Industrialists need a large over-supply of labor to take up the slack and keep wages low even in the boom times associated with market economies. Religionists tend to encourage childbirth and oppose family planning. They wish to increase the size of their ministries with the least expense to themselves, namely, by excess procreation.
Presumably environmental destruction associated with both production and consumption over and above what is absolutely necessary occurs if and only if both the producers and the consumers are competing for material wealth. Moreover, the quantity of this type of geophagy is roughly proportional to the quantity of production.
The sole cause argument should prevail to prove G3 implies M, since (almost) no one tears the earth up except to make money. But, is it fair to say that tyranny represented by the poring of a toxic chemical into a creek will never occur in an egalitarian society without competition for S* or any other type of materialism? Well, without the restraint upon free discourse and rational education of a materialistic society, nothing can stop intelligent people from inculcating the strongest possible psychological tendencies not to do such things.
Dishonesty in Business, F3
G3 is a form of F3 since unnecessary environmental destruction due to business occurs only if there is dishonesty in business; however in this sub-section we are concerned principally with false advertising, the car salesman’s lies, the vendor’s promises that he does not expect to keep, creative bookkeeping, embezzlement, tax evasion, and worse. When I was a child I believed that my father was an honest businessman. The reader is at liberty to doubt whether this were likely to have been true or not. In any case, in the real world, dishonesty in business is an unpleasant fact; whereas, in a non-materialistic world, the question would not arise. Thus, M if and only if F3 trivially.
The elimination of materialism would remove the incentive for falsity – usually. Why should manufacturers lie to the public if they have nothing to gain by doing so! If fewer people want their products, they can concentrate on research to a greater extent, reduce their impact on the environment, and, perhaps, even enjoy more leisure. Also, it seems fairly clear that we shall not have to tell lies to clients, employees, etc. if there be no commerce, i.e., not-M. Let us ask ourselves how much falsehood is caused by competition for wealth, power, and even fame, e.g., plagiarism. Also, consider the lies told by politicians some of which are told, no doubt, simply to keep their jobs. Finally, practically no one will tell the truth if he is destroying the environment, which, presumably, he would not do unless he needed to do it for money. Thus, materialism must result in some falsehood concerning how businessmen treat the environment. Without materialism the motivation for this would disappear.
Further, with materialism and artificial economic contingency abandoned, people would have no need to fool themselves or others. It is not clear that women would not flatter men and men lie to women; but, as explained earlier, when sex is no longer used to sell merchandise and sexual morals are normalized, the likelihood of these types of falsity might diminish.
Traditional Male Dominance, T3
It was easy to prove directly that G1 ( = T1), G3, and F3 are occurrence equivalent to M. Their relationships to the other social evils are evident. The relations between traditional male dominance T3, materialism M, authoritarian falsity F*, hierarchical dominance T*, and excessive procreation G1 and Ğ1 including accidental pregnancies G0 are somewhat complicated. Regardless of any appearances to the contrary, the evils of traditional male dominance, especially general societal attitudes that were engendered by traditional male dominance, are still operative and as destructive as they have ever been – even if a woman be president of the United States.
Thus, in this essay, traditional male dominance does not refer to instances of men dominating women directly only (or to women dominating men in reaction to the former), but to a societal attitude that lurks in the background of every relationship whether men or women are actually exercising power over one another or not. Thus, the desire of men to continue the male line so as to perpetuate their name (Ğ1), the asymmetry between our attitudes toward men seducing women and women seducing men (a partial cause of accidental pregnancies, especially among unmarried people), the generally conceded view that under some circumstances war is an appropriate response to social disorder (F* if and only if T* if and only if G*), the pedestrian desire to exercise power or authority over other people by dint of physical strength, political position, or economic hegemony (T*) – all of these and more can be laid at the feet of traditional male dominance.
The difficulties of establishing exact occurrence equivalences between traditional male dominance and other social evils accounts in part for the viability of theories that seek to establish traditional male dominance as fundamental, e.g., Feminism. Clearly, though, in a non-materialistic world whatever societal attitudes persist concerning gender, it will not be possible for men to hold women in economic bondage nor in domestic slavery. Conspicuously missing in this analysis is a subject parallel to sexism, namely, racism, which will be considered next:
Racism
Racism has not been discussed in this essay despite the author’s lifelong opposition to racism beginning in grade school, continuing into the university, throughout the period of the Civil Rights Movement, and up to the present moment. Not withstanding suggestions that a black man might run for president, racism is just as pervasive as ever. The difference between racism in a materialistic society and in a non-materialistic society is that, in a non-materialistic society, with a natural economy, racism would not be effective in altering the lives of people except insofar as who their friends were. Moreover, as with other materialistic attitudes, racism could be attacked with rational propaganda. (I almost said ‘education’.) Finally, and this is most important, when people enjoy the same economic status as ourselves we feel a kinship that is not experienced generally between the rich and the poor. Thus, the elimination of poverty will wipe out racism to a marvelous extent. It remains to be seen if the occurrence equivalence between racism and materialism is absolute. “And there we must leave it.”
Summary
Since we have introduced a large number of subcategories of tyranny, geophagy, and environmental destruction, it makes sense to look at each subcategory separately and determine that we have forged each link in the logical chain that connects it to materialism. This network of logical chains would be complete and perfect except for two difficulties: (i) I may have omitted a subcategory completely, in which case I can only hope that the reader will discover whatever might be missing and determine for himself if the omission is fatal to my thesis or not. (ii) Admittedly, some instances of inadvertent environmental destruction or petty tyranny, etc., are certain to occur in a post-materialism world. Clearly, a society currently reeling under enormous impediments to life, liberty, and happiness can cope with a little residual naughtiness. The important determination the reader must make is not that this logic is complete and correct, but rather that materialism can be eliminated. This logic is certainly good enough.
To guarantee that our arguments have covered every instance of materialism and every type of violation of each of our three moral axioms, it is convenient to make a chart. (In Table 9-2, below, the entry for T3 is omitted. Moreover, racism is not given a symbol even.) The way to read Table 9-2 is as follows: The symbols in the left-hand column of each row are causes and the (same) symbols in the top row of each column are effects. The 1 in the intersection of row X and column Y means that X implies Y directly. If X implies Y and Y implies Z, we can put a 2 in column Z of row X. Similarly, if Z implies A, we can put a 3 in column A of row X, and so on. Thus, we can establish occurrence implications either directly or indirectly.
|
Table 9-2. Causal or Contingent Relations |
||||||||||||||||
|
‚ |
M |
To |
Ť1 |
T1 |
T2 |
T* |
Go |
Ğ1 |
G1 |
G2 |
G* |
Fo |
F1 |
F2 |
F3 |
F* |
|
M |
X |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
To |
2 |
X |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
Ť1 |
2 |
2 |
X |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
T1 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
X |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
T2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
X |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
T* |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
X |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
Go |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
X |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
Ğ1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
X |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
G1 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
X |
2 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
G2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
X |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
G* |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
X |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
|
Fo |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
X |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
F1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
X |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
F2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
X |
3 |
1 |
|
F3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
X |
2 |
|
F* |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
X |
Such instances of moral laxity as To, Go, and Fo are somewhat more likely to occur in a non-materialistic society (or ‘natural’ society, as we have elected to term a society free of materialism) than the very great evils denoted T*, G*, and F*. It is understood that the human race and its environment can survive a few residual instances of minor imperfections. Our hope, though, is that, when M is gone, T* and, in turn, F* will be gone and ‘Socrates’, by which I mean a great teacher (not me), will be able to inculcate gentleness among children, greater mindfulness at all times among everyone, and scrupulous honor among lovers. After all, profit, the great (Satanic) motivator, will no longer tempt weak-minded folks to inculcate machismo among children, carelessness among adults, and rapacity among lovers by means of materialistic television shows, movies, junk sports, and hard-boiled pseudo-music, shoddy schooling, and dog and pony shows, such as the space program, that promote materialistic aspirations. (The space program is very much like a television show with astronauts as role models for wasteful displays of vast power, the conquest of nature, the annihilation of natural barriers, and fictitious male potency – even for mannish women.)
In Table 9-3, below, we take advantage of the identification of Ğ1 with Ť1, G1 with T1, and G2 with T2. Also, assuming that we will prove that M, T*, G*, and F* are occurrence equivalent (below), we may represent all four by M. Instead, we choose to devote a row and a column to F* because To, Ť1 = Ğ1, T2 = G2, Go, Fo, F1, and F2 could not exist to the extent that they do exist without F*. We shall devote an entire section to discussing why this is probably true, but we are aware that this is the weakest part of the proof. However, the reader knows that a community might do very well in spite of a few residual problems such as occasional childhood misbehavior; residual narcissism and fear of infant mortality; occasional instances of cruelty to animals; accidental and, from time to time, intentional environmental destruction; occasional dishonesty among lovers; a little self-deception; and, last but not least, a modicum of superstition.
|
Table 9-3. Reduced table of causal and contingent relations |
|||||||||||
|
‚ |
M |
To |
Ť1 |
T1 |
T2 |
Go |
Fo |
F1 |
F2 |
F3 |
F* |
|
M |
X |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
|
To |
2 |
X |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
Ť1 |
2 |
2 |
X |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
T1 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
X |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
T2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
X |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
Go |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
X |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
Fo |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
X |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
F1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
X |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
F2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
X |
3 |
1 |
|
F3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
X |
2 |
|
F* |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
X |
In Table 9-4, we chose to devote a row and a column to F* because To, Ť1, T2, Go, Fo, F1, and F2 could not exist without F* (at least to the extent that they do exist) and, therefore, are a reliable sign that F* (and, in turn, M) is present. Thus, we can replace seven violations of the moral axioms by one, which we might as well call I for ignorance, even though it may be more a case of believing a falsehood is true because it entered one’s mind before the age of reason and is no longer susceptible to education or argument. In short, F* is materialistic propaganda, which is necessary in a materialistic society as the vast majority of people would not put up with materialism otherwise. It is not in their best interests. It is not in the best interests of anyone who does not know for certain that he will become a member of an elite super-rich ruling class. The chances are enormous that any given candidate no matter how bright, no matter how strong, no matter how determined will not be successful in the materialistic sense. Or, as is often said, “Everyone has a scheme for getting rich that won’t work.”
|
Table 9-4. Further reduced table of causal and contingent relations |
|||||
|
‚ |
M |
I |
T1 |
F3 |
F* |
|
M |
X |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
I |
1 |
X |
2 |
2 |
1 |
|
T1 |
1 |
3 |
X |
2 |
2 |
|
F3 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
X |
2 |
|
F* |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
X |
Accidental and other types of forgivable environmental destruction are exceptions to the rule that, if geophagy be present, materialism must exist. This is the only residual geophagy with which we need be concerned. The reader should consider carefully whether there are any cases the author has overlooked. As always we shall have criminal cases and acts committed by diminished persons. Also, it is not clear that dematerialism can eliminate all residual flare-ups in the proverbial battle of the sexes. Let us suppose that we can live with a little of this. Presumably, the struggle between two men over the sexual favors of an attractive woman is less harmful than the struggle of two nations over the natural resources of an appreciable part of a subcontinent.
References
1. Herman, Edward S. and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent, Pantheon, New York (1988).
2. Shaw, George Bernard, Preface to The Millionairess, Penguin Books, Baltimore (1961).
3. Reich, Wilhelm, The Function of the Orgasm, Pocket Books, New York (1978).
4. Wayburn, Thomas L., The Collected Papers of Thomas Wayburn, Vol. II (Work in progress 1997).
Houston, Texas
January 6, 2005
[TLW1] In Chapter 3, we showed that M implies the certainty of differences in wealth, which, in turn, implies that some social link will impose upon another eventually; or, what amounts to the same thing, no person can be certain that such an imposition will not occur.