The slow changing of the way of life we take for granted here in the West is proceeding relentlessly. Along the way it’s turning out to be fairly instructive to watch the politics and the posturing. Quite a few of our leaders can be seen clinging to the old ideas, the old paradigms. They’re trying to defend a status quo that is, at least partially, undefendable.
It seems to me that the logic used to do this defensive work is often that of duality. For example they put forward the idea that it’s “growth or ruin”, or in terms of transport that it’s “oil power or green tech”. The list goes on and I imagine every reader could add an example. All of this is presented to us in a very “good vs evil” dualistic way. We are reassured by the simple plain views, the clear easy choice, but are these choices really that clear cut?
Take oil power or green cars for example, why no mention of a boost in public transport and the creation of walkable cities? Also, economic growth vs deflation is presented with a few assumptions about which is best, but with no mention of the steady state society. Also no mention of the fact that future growth might be very constrained.
I’ve come to the opinion that the point of this sort of thing is to prevent a real debate on the very important issues. We are steered onto desired courses via a ‘false dilemma’ fallacy, presented with two choices chosen from a larger set with the aim of blinkering us to the possibilities. The whole aim of this seems to me, to be to present a series of false choices that defends the status quo to the bitter end.
We need our capabilities of skepticism and critical thinking more than ever.
