Industrialism and Liberalism: the Evolution and Fate of Both

1. There are trillions of problems that humans confront and deal with daily; but industrialism is the root cause of most of them.

Our species’ evolution extends back in time farther than can be adduced; yet we here—as I freely type these words on this computer made by labor-slaves in China—are products of about 400 years of radical global ecological transformation caused by industrialism.

If we define industrialism precisely it is the ecological action perpetrated by large populations of mechanizing organic systems of life for the purpose of realizing anthropocentric goals. The key term here is mechanization. Like beavers and bacteria, humans share the drive to shape environments to enhance survivability. Unlike other creatures, humans construct vast, complicated and dynamic physical structures that operate semi-autonomously to de- and re- construct environments to fulfill species’ specific goals. Other species’ self-interest is obvious, for living beings want to live; but humans are unique in their ability to ignore the interests of other creatures on a global scale over centuries of passing time.

Perhaps more vexing is the fact that liberalism and indeed most/all modernist value systems that arose in conjunction with industrialism are inextricably knitted into the industrial process of de- and re- constructing environments to fulfill the existential goals laden in these value systems. Due to centuries of industrial action, our species’ survivability is seriously undermined—and co-incidently most/all systems of value, knowledge and meaning.

2. The USA intended to spread liberal values globally through industrialism, and failed due to the exterminatory effects—planetary biocide—of industrial actions perpetrated by mass populations.

Industrialism finds its modern source in the European invasion and colonization of the rest of the world, beginning around 1492; for the shared goal of those Europeans and today’s industrial nations is anthropocentric. The action of colonization and industrialism is also the same: the de- and re- constructing of environments to enhance the actors’ survivability. The Europeans then expected colonization to bring riches to them in exactly the same way “modern nations” expect industrialism to bring riches to themselves; monarchical and despotic political systems of yore did not pretend the riches would be share equitably but modern liberal systems do, as the Guardian reports on 1/3/23:

**Kerry said the US was committed to helping the developing world with loss and damage, but that the details of the fund would need more work in 2023.

“How can you look somebody in the eye, with a straight face, and not accept the notion that there are damages, there are losses?” he asked. “We see them all around the world. You see them in heightened sea levels, we see them in fires, we see them in floods, in Pakistan and elsewhere. We see them in the higher intensity of storms.”

But he added: “How you manage [loss and damage] is still at issue: how do you approach this challenge of the financial arrangements. But it was important to acknowledge that they’re there and we have to work at this in good faith.”** Kerry’s effort is well-intentioned, perhaps, but futile for at least 2 reasons. 1) Industrial culture—especially Kerry’s—intends to persist despite, and indeed in response to—its effect of planetary biocide. 2) Kerry-type appeals to industrial culture are performative; that is, they form part of a coordinated, official and military-backed stalling tactic that allows industrial actors time and space to ignore the only real solution to the evolutionary problem and existential crisis that is industrialism.

The solution to the problem/crisis of industrialism is to stop industrialism: to cease industrial behaviors.

3.The primal source of global despair and violence of 2023 is caused by the inability of mass populations to de-industrialize.

Presently, no national governments or international institutions are promoting or perpetrating de-industrialization. There is no money to be made doing so. Despots might never move to de-industrialize because militarism is dependent upon industrialism, and liberals won’t either for the same exact reason. The liberal promise of equality is predicated on the economy of industrialism, of “all boats being lifted by the tide” or conversely by the “trickle down” effect of ever-increasing GDP. The primary fact of planetary biocide aggravated by climate change obviates the promises of all contemporary political systems. People are well aware of this, even those who ignore it and demand others ignore it too. Hence our present state of global despair and violence: both are increasing and will increase until, perhaps, the industrial era ends. So—as depressing as Biocitizen’s message is, it is a hopeful one.