The Crow's Nest

As we embark upon this new year, it may behoove us to stand back and look to the big picture. There will certainly be enough to talk about in the months to come; it’s going to be a busy year. If current trends are any indication, 2008 promises to bring various instabilities in global economies, societies, and environmental conditions. As it turns out, economic, social, and environmental stabilities are the very foundation of sustainability. This, then, is our first glimpse of “the big picture.”

“Sustainability” is a funny word. It’s commonly held to refer to a condition wherein future generations are able to maintain a standard of living at least as high as that enjoyed by the current generation. How many future generations is open to question, however; there seems to be a kind of assumption that generations beyond two or three are on their own. Sustainability is thus not an open-ended proposition, but more of a temporary measure. (Temporary sustainability - - an oxymoron in concept, and pointlessly self-defeating in practice.) But, even assuming that those generations living beyond 60 or 80 years from now need no longer worry about such things, that “standard of living” caveat is bothersome. Levels of standards of living can be measured in terms of resource consumption per capita. There is serious question as to whether resource consumption at current rates can be maintained at all, much less carried over to future generations. Further, humanitarian efforts are continually attempting to ensure that standards of living are increased for underprivileged everywhere (not that this is a bad thing, but it does increase average per capita consumption). Finally, in spite of the fact that the rate of global population growth has declined to 1.6%, the population is still growing, and will reach its projected maximum (over nine billion) before 2050. If per-capita consumption is increasing even as the population is increasing, and current rates of consumption are questionable, how can the goal of ensuring the availability of equivalent rates of consumption for future generations be realistic? As it is currently envisioned, the goal of sustainability may be a pipe dream.

This year is going to bring some big changes. From the “big picture” perspective, it may be a good idea to consider re-envisioning sustainability, or perhaps redefining it altogether. It is pointless to make a resolution that one has little hope of seeing through; let us instead consider a more viable course.

This is an open call for suggestions on how to revise or redefine the concept of sustainability. All reasonable suggestions will be posted. Let's make a resolution to find a goal that is reachable.

It is sometimes the case that a situation presents itself wherein one needs to know more about what is happening, yet cannot due to incomplete information. A twig snaps in a darkling forest -- a falling branch, or a dangerous predator? A deep rumble is heard from over a hill -- thunder, or an explosion? In such cases, it is profitable to extrapolate on the available information in order to anticipate what might come to pass. Only in this way might one brace for the possibility of the worst case. It is an exercise in speculation. And this month of September is worthy of such an exercise, for the signs are increasingly ominous.

In the US, continued funding for the effort in Iraq is to come under Congressional review this month, and there is a distinct possibility that it may indeed expire. There is still a deep divide between public sentiment and President Bush's stance on the matter, and many in Congress, including many from the president's own Republican Party, have taken positions that may threaten to undermine the President's plans. What might President Bush do to safeguard his legacy? What would this president *not* do to prevent the appearance of American weakness and failure in the Middle East? Many possibilities present themselves. Perhaps the method employed would be more subtle than a direct attack on Iran -- perhaps not. It may be that a legitimizing sequence of events would include an Israeli assault, perhaps on Iran, or even on Syria. Any of these scenarios would result in a level of destabilization that would then require a continued presence in Iraq, and even Congress would be powerless to dispute the matter further. Whatever the case, we might stand prepared against the possibility that drastic measures are taken to ensure a continued presence in Iraq, and a renewed commitment to the furtherance of the president's plans.

On the economic front, things are looking grim for the American markets. The "credit crunch" has spread well beyond the bounds of the sub-prime sector, has washed through the general financial and housing sectors, is now impacting the retail sector (including consumer confidence), and may well be approaching the final shores of the banks. Foreclosures are at record highs, surpassing those of the Great Depression. Various schemes, including a $1 billion bailout plan proposed by Mrs. Clinton, have been offered for how to "fix" the problem. In every case, the "fix" would either be ineffectual (as in Hillary's plan), or actually serve to make matters worse (such as increasing already strained levels of available credit). The Federal Reserve is in an extremely precarious position, and its Chairman, Ben Bernanke, may end up being the fall guy in spite of his virtuoso performance in walking the tightrope to date. Increasing numbers of analysts, and many of the staunch bull pundits have begun to express doubt as to the resilience of the American economy, and worse, the world economy, as the effects of this catastophe continue to mount. A wave is building, and may soon, very soon, reach its crest. Where, then, to place one's assets? Equities will certainly be hit hard, and early. Bonds may do the trick, but whose? Federal T-bonds are already paying remarkably low rates, as many investors have already taken the "flight to safety." Clearly, real property will not be an effective hedge. But then, neither do gold nor silver look to withstand the blow. Cash is king this round, but not as deposits. Remember, many banks may not emerge from the maelstrom, and you don't want your deposits to go down with those sinking ships. Choose wisely, and choose soon, for the tide is telling of one whopper of a storm.

The Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) is meeting in Sydney, Australia early in the month, with the leaders of China, the United States, Japan, Russia, Indonesia, and of course Australia in attendance. Free trade is to be one of the main topics of discussion, even as the US and China have been engaging in increasing trade disputes in the past weeks. China makes toys (Barbie, etc.) for Mattel that use lead paint; the toothpaste that goes into some tubes of Colgate is made in China, and contains hazardous levels of a known toxin; pet food made in China has sickened or killed numerous American pets. China, in a classic face-saving
move, has decided to ban the import of US pork, as it purportedly contains unsafe levels of a certain growth chemical. US wood packaging also, apparently, has microscopic worms, and US-made vitamin pills, even fish oil made for children, have been found to be tainted or otherwise substandard. Pressed to its limits, China has threatened what it has called its "nuclear option," that of selling off its US Treasury bonds. Such a move would be a severe blow to the US economy, and both sides know it. That China would be shooting itself in the foot as it did so has not escaped anyone's notice; presumably, China feels itself better prepared to take such a hit than the US. It may be right in its assessment. At any rate, the other big topic on the table is global warming. China, among others, is under no mandate to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocols; neither the US nor Australia joined as a result. Now it would seem that China (of all places) has taken a sudden interest in keeping a lid on greenhouse gases -- and wants the US to participate.
What if the President balks, as seems likely? Almost as bad, how will the President, not known for his diplomatic finesse, choose to rebuff the Chinese suggestion? One may hope that George won't get too surly, or laugh(!) in the notoriously-sensitive Chinese face. This meeting is a powderkeg with multiple fuses, any one of which is sufficient to set it off.

On the northern front, Russia has taken the aggressive move of physically laying claim to the North Pole by emplacing an indestructible flag on the sea floor. Russia's claim is deeply disputed by other interested countries, including Denmark (through Greenland), Canada, and the United States (through Alaska). As the polar ice melts, sea lanes open, and undersea oil reserves become available. The stakes are high, and with the recent chill in relations between Russia and the West, the situation could take a turn for the worse at any time.

We speculate on the worrying potential of these situations. We wonder how it will all unfold. The worst case isn't the most likely case unless it is. But one thing is certain -- we will all know soon. And, in all likelihood, September will be a month to remember.

Can you feel it? There’s a tension in the air, a sense of something pending, almost here. In an individual, this might be chalked up to anxiety. But when it affects a whole culture group, the feeling takes on a life of its own. It becomes an effective causal agent in its own right. And the group having this feeling is no less than the entire world.

Global events, seemingly unconnected, are coming to a head in a way that might be called “synchronicity.” This year’s much-anticipated hurricane season is almost upon us. Tensions in Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, and Palestine are all steadily ramping up. (Will we pull out of Iraq? Will we stay, and if so, for how long, and at what cost? Neither question yields an acceptable answer.) The price of crude oil is skyrocketing, even as the economies that depend upon the stuff are softening to the breaking point. Case after new case of bird flu is being reported, flying in the face of containment efforts. West Nile is on the march again, worse than ever. Bovine spongiform encephalitis (mad cow disease) won’t go away. Botulism in canned food has suddenly become headline news, while e. coli contamination in fresh food has become commonplace. Oh, and then there’s global warming. The effects of global climate change are already being seen, perhaps sooner and more intensely than anyone anticipated; insurance companies and their underwriters are deeply concerned. Short-range problems abound.

There are also the background-level problems that we have always heard about. For example, we grew up knowing, beyond doubt, that overpopulation is the world’s worst problem. It’s obvious: an increasing number of people living ever more extravagant lives, consuming more resources and producing more waste, is bound to catch up with us. Earth is finite, after all. The world’s population hit two billion in 1927 (up from one billion in about a hundred years), three billion in 1960 (33 years), four billion in 1974 (14 years), five billion in 1987 (13 years), and six billion in 1999 (12 years). Today’s population is about 6.7 billion, and we are projected to pass the seven billion mark somewhere between 2010 and 2013. You do the math. Yet recently, governments have been telling their people that they are not having enough babies to replace and support an ageing population of baby boomers. President Bush provided some encouragement along these lines in a recent address. Some countries (Japan and Italy, for example) are actually paying their young citizens to have more children, while others (such as Russia) find a tax incentive more fitting. Even China has backed off its infamous one-child policy. The answer to population, seemingly, is that there is no good answer. Twelve billion, anyone?

And how about them nukes? The US is reconfiguring its antiquated arsenal to deploy a new generation of smaller, more accurate tactical nukes (bunker-busters, and the like). At the same time, new deals are being struck with India to provide nuclear fuel, in defiance of the nuclear non-proliferation treaties. North Korea has been flexing its new nuclear muscle of late, albeit somewhat feebly. Pakistan has just successfully tested a new nuke-capable cruise missile. And where have all the old Soviet warheads gone? President Putin has been voicing concern over deteriorating relations between Russia and NATO, and has even declared an intention to pull out of the non-proliferation agreements. And really, while Iran’s current intentions may be utterly benign, what is Israel (or anyone else) to make of a nuclear-capable Iran? And speaking of Israel, what are its intentions with respect to the use of its now-not-so-secret arsenal? Is it time to take the old bomb shelters out of mothballs again?

The list of depressing facts and figures goes on and on. For instance, did you know that the world’s fisheries have been reduced to less than 10% of their former selves? And that ALL species of sea food fish are expected to be extinct before 2050? I haven’t even mentioned fresh water supplies yet. THAT will likely be the one that “gets” us. At any rate, the fact of the matter is that the news that we DO know is bad, and that there is more bad news to come. Yet, no one is surprised -- and that is the point. There is an expectation of bad news, really bad news, with each passing day. There’s something happening here, what it is ain’t exactly clear.

This mood, this collective anticipation, has established itself as a new norm in 21st century society. It shapes our decisions, and colors the way we view the world. Because it is so well substantiated by the news, it is thoroughly entrenched in our minds, and thus in our hearts. It shapes an overarching attitude of despair that manifests in go-for-broke money-for-nothing credit schemes and wild, unsupported bull markets. Unfortunately, the manic market behavior is bound to be a short-term event, signaling the end of the wild ride. The balloon will burst, and the market will crash -- may even be crashing now. Yet the causes for despair will still be there, and the effect will only be enhanced by the rapidly approaching global recession. Stay tuned for the ways in which this timely new moral sentiment takes shape in the days and weeks to come.

A New Story's first video on the immanence of armed conflict with Iran and how it will affect us at home. Yours truly is interviewed by Gretchen Light.

Get Ready! That's the message of the Department of Homeland Security (see their webpage http:\\www.ready.gov ), and this time, we agree with them. While the Department wants us to be ready for just about anything, we have some more specific concerns. It looks like events and circumstances may be pointing toward a temporary fuel shortage in parts of the country, and that the situation may become severe enough to disrupt some delivery schedules. That might not seem like a big deal, but when the groceries don't get to the store on time, some folks may get a little nervous. We're not used to that sort of disruption in this country; isolated pockets of panic might flare up, and you don't want to be caught up in the middle because you're low on toilet paper.

The biggest contributing factors to a possible problem are, of course, the deteriorating nuclear negotiations with Iran, the growing instability in Nigeria (particularly with respect to pipeline security), and the possibility of hurricane disruption in the Gulf of Mexico. Secondary considerations are our current diminishing crude oil reserves and the dollar's volatility on the foreign exchanges. Any of these could create minor problems; taken together, they could spell big trouble.

The best part of this scenario is that, almost no matter how it plays out, the effects will be temporary. If a disruption in deliveries caused by fuel shortages (or anything else, for that matter) does happen, a few places may require the services of civil authorities to quell potential panic violence. Some stores may close temporarily, others may limit sales of certain items, or the number of customers in the store at any given time. Regardless of how it plays out in your area, the best advice is to avoid the rush altogether -- by being Ready!

By assembling a Ready kit in your home, you should be prepared to weather just about any disruption temporary fuel shortages may have to offer. By having a few extra weeks of canned and non-perishable stores in reserve, you'll be comfortably watching the panic on television instead of being a part of it. The stuff stacks easily, and once purchased and packed away, will be no further trouble. Getting it together and having it on hand will be far easier than not having done so when you need it.

So get Ready!

Welcome to The Crow's Nest! From here, one can see a bit further. Surface features are less distracting, and the horizon is long. Here, above the workaday noises of the crowded deck, we gain a new perspective. We are able to discern distant events with greater clarity. When a far threat appears, we take its measure and, with a name, cry out a warning. At the smell of green things on telltale winds, and with the glint of sunlight off the wings of distant gulls, we send down the call, "Land Ho!" Here in The Crow's Nest, we take in the long view, and report it faithfully, as we see it. In these exceptionally stormy waters, it is ever more important to have good eyes on the long watch.

The Crow's Nest is the semi-official voice of A New Story Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization devoted to the challenge of achieving social stability. As one of the three pillars of sustainability, social stability is second in importance only to environmental stability. There are many NPO's working on environmental concerns; the value of adding yet another seems marginal. Conversely, organizations involved in social stability generally approach the challenge piecewise. Whether by addressing issues of social justice, feeding and housing the poor and/or homeless, providing medical assistance to the blighted, or educating the less-developed, most such organizations focus upon a single piece of the social stability puzzle.

At A New Story Foundation, we examine these (and a host of other) social problems from the broadest perspectives. By determining the demographics of social problems at various scales, and for different levels of social organization, we are able to derive solutions that are situationally specific. These solutions are then packaged into project format for presentation to authorities at the appropriate level. The net result is assistance to those who need it most, at the level where it can help the most. The Crow's Nest offers glimpses of social situations that have the immediate attention of the Foundation, and may be under study for a project proposal.