'Sustainable Resource Use' and The Nature
of Civilization and Government/Economy
under Thus-far Human Evolution

Appendix - The Circumstantial Complexity of Today's 'Thus-far Pecking-Order-Based, Diasporation Economics'(*g)

"... there is no aspect of 'lifestyle and the quality of life' as we know it today, especially of 'the well-to-do' -homes, clothing, food, entertainment et cetera, that can be supported under 'sustainable resource use', that can be supported, that is, except out of pecking order, 'diasporatively cheap natural resources and labor' and an eventually-to-be-appreciated-in-hindsight, severely pejorative influence on 'the best well-being and viability of the organism-whole'".

With relatively few exceptions of a 'philosophical' nature, there are no government/economies (historical or present) that are other than 'based upon warm-blooded vertebrate pecking-order'. This is important in that an understanding of human configuration space and our thus-far evolution in it clearly identifies a 'destined' and significantly different form of organism existence and operation as inevitable(*1), important because the nature of that 'being' depends entirely on that understanding and how we incorporate that 'destined inevitability'.

Two facts completely account for how that 'destined inevitability' is to be determined out of the thus-far 'pecking-order-based commonality of all government/economy' (most human interaction):

1 - In the absence of 'substantive countering' (item 2, next), mankind's thus-far presence on earth is that -evolutionary thruout, and classical(*2), of a 'new' organism diasporating into an ecological domain (configuration-space) defined and limited by-solar-system properties and mechanics.

2 - Knowledge of mankind's 'affect on the system' has successively evolved therein (inherent of 'deliberative capability'), but has remained -'absence of substantive countering', that of-
an organism of a fundamentally pecking-order-based disposition.

Regarding the interpersonal or socio/psychological material of pecking order then -as opposed to the operational material identifying and manifesting those relationships-
3 - All fundamentally non-reproductive operation of the past and present (government/economy eventually) is the natural, pecking-order-based operation of an evolving hominid that has yet to appreciate (inevitable) other than 'getting what he wants when he wants it' by imposing on others or by 'positioning' himself with respect to others for eventual such imposition.
[-the 'alpha' animal, the 'bully', the 'schemer', the 'pater familias', the clan head, the village chief, the 'leader', the dictate, the 'king', the innovator, the institutionalizer, the entrepreneur, the huckster salesman, the employee ('bootlick', lackey and slave at the bottom), the manager and his 'brown-nose'; the public servant, the government official and his lobbyist; the 'justice' buyer and seller, and the ignorant in his explanation of phenomena he does not understand that eventually becomes religion and belief in god for other ignorants -and any and all variations thereof for 'getting ahead'.]

'Pecking-order expression' is an issue (then) because meeting 'genetic imperative and sex' is determined by how its personal facilitation -'best well-being and viability for me and my own', fits into its general facilitation for others in the hierarchic complex of what we now call civilization. Thus we 'determine' our pecking order by 'the nature and constitution' (existence and maintenance) of everything from where we 'hang our hats' (domicile and 'appointments') to what we do with our free time including the expression of 'self-esteem', and the various 'badges' that tell others of our 'independence from pecking order itself'. (See companion piece, 'Business' and 'Making money'.)

4 - More importantly however, pecking order is an issue because the energy and other natural resources that go into that lifestyle-and-quality existence and maintenance (items 1 and 2, above) are subject to an intrinsically successive 'maximizing of organism viability' that is driven by genetic imperative -but determined by the successively evolving heuristics implicit the natures of 'configuration space' and 'deliberative capability'(*4) -inherently optimizing the use of natural resources and implicitly vestigializing their 'pecking-order-based abuse'. With respect to such 'inevitably heuristic hindsight', in other words, we are able to look back into the present from a future of 'inevitably vestigializing pecking-order' to see 'lifestyle and the quality of life' successively tailored to maximizing viability, thus there is no aspect of 'lifestyle and the quality of life' as we know it today, especially of 'the well-to-do' -homes, clothing, food, entertainment et cetera, that can be supported under 'sustainable resource use', that can be supported, that is, except out of pecking order, 'diasporatively cheap natural resources and labor' and an eventually-to-be-appreciated-in-hindsight, severely pejorative influence on 'the best well-being and viability of the organism-whole'.

Human existence on earth, in other words (however innocently and inadvertently), has thus-far managed to parlay pecking order into the profoundly convoluted and wasteful use of the resource/environment that is 'the government and its economics' today (appendix -*g).

[Under 'genetic imperative' one does not 'choose' to survive; rather, one 'survives' -or dies, naturally or unnaturally(*5), and in a competitive society (thus-far evolved government/economy -'American free-enterprise capitalist democracy' in particular) one cannot but 'survive, pecking-order-based' -'make as much money as one can and spend it as he choose', 'trickle-down' as necessary -as long, that is, as 'diasporatively cheap labor and (untapped) natural resources' exists to support 'competition'. What eventually develops (and has) -all civilized government/economy today, is a situation in which the once-employed is in fact abandoned to become either 'cheap labor' himself or be 'viability-supported' thru some institutionalized hand-out on 'the cushion of other diasporatively cheap natural resources and labor' -as long, that is, as the system is 'fat' enough to support the disemployed and not 'intellectually or circumstantially driven to appreciate this relationship and bend to inevitable correction'.]

Projecting forward then, under eventual (and inevitable) 'sustainable resource' use it will not be possible to sustain anything but a very small part of the energy consumption manifest in 'the human phenomenon and things human' today(*6). What we are talking about here is 'economic attrition to what the system can bear' -dirigiste heurism(*7) under inevitable response to genetic imperative -'lifestyle and the quality of life' today affecting carrying capacity in geological time-frame(*4).

'American free-enterprise, capitalist democracy and the right to make as much money as you can and spend it any way you choose (-as long as there's no law against it :-) (-from 'Business' and 'Making money')

Economics is defined as "the science that deals with the production, distribution and consumption of commodities" (American Heritage Dictionary). Given the differences between peoples, societies and nations, and their various 'isms' and resource/environments then, 'production, distribution and consumption of commodities' of the world is one profoundly complex whole. It is possible to get some very good idea of that complexity nevertheless, by 'etiologically' approaching its progression into present dynamics -excluding in this sense, considerations of 'national autonomy', form of government, religion, ethnicity, culture, ignorance, natural resource wealth and various philosophics of one kind or another which, literally, multiply that complexity, a progression, further, which suggests a world of eventual economics significantly different from what they are today.

Following next, in an 'adversarial framework', is a progression of statements and clauses underlying economics today -western democracy (the US in particular) effectively bringing the rest of the world into economic communion with it. The bottom line of this progression is that we have no idea how what we are doing to the resource/environment is going to affect our future, but we do know with certainty that we will regret what done -someone eventually wondering "What in the world were they thinking???"

1 - People exist and population is growing,
-so 'The economy has to grow' to give people the food, clothing, shelter, education and entertainment they need,
-but people do not naturally know what they need (The Base-Domain of Human Requirements),
-so some things they 'need' are therefore a waste of labor and natural resources of some possibly better future use(*a).

2 - Democracy is the best form of government because (natural rights and freedoms) people decide for themselves what they need and how to get it
-college education and an inheritance for their children, for example, and comfortable well-being in retirement,
-but democracy is not obligated to the goods and services people want or think they need
-so some things people want(*b) are a waste of labor and natural resources of possibly better future use;
-democracy, furthermore, is an artifact of thus-far pecking-order-based human evolution,
-and therefore certain to evolve(*c);
-still, democracy is the best form of government because people decide for themselves what they need and how to get it.

3 - Free enterprise is good because it motivates people to avail themselves the goods and services they need
-by creating money-making jobs for the generation (creation), production, distribution and consumption of goods and services (free enterprise itself a service therein),
-where, however, the 'value' of goods or services is not determinable until people are advertised to 'use and want' them (another service),
-and the validity(*d) of goods and services is not determinable except in some appropriate framework(*e),
-but free enterprise is not obligated to goods and services people need(*f),
-so some principals undertake free enterprise expressly to increase their incomes for the consumption of pecking-order-based goods and services,
-and some free enterprise then, is a waste of labor and natural resources of possibly better future use;
-still, free enterprise is good because it generates income money which can be plowed back into the economy as venture capital for more free enterprise (goods and services people need).

4 - Competition is good for people because it lowers the prices of goods and services to consumers
-by impelling the discovery and exploition of cheaper sources of labor and natural resources (immigrant and imported eventually),
-and by promoting more efficient generation, production and distribution,
-thereby availing more people more of the goods and services they need;
-some people, however, will become unemployed by competition,
-so their now lost buying power has to be supplanted by new 'free enterprise and competition'
-or by governmenting new institutionalization for economic stability (another service therein)
-existence of which (governmenting and institutionalization) consumes labor and natural resources even when dormant,
-and sometimes results in unemployable people(*h);
-competition, furthermore, is not obligated to lower prices,
-and some principals undertake competition expressly to increase their incomes for the consumption of pecking-order-based goods and services,
-so some competition then, is a waste of labor and natural resources of possibly better future use;
-still, competition is good because it generates income money which can be plowed back into the economy as venture capital for more free enterprise and competition.

[Fortunately or unfortunately, 'natural rights and freedoms' (democracy, here) does not have implicit 'college education and an inheritance for their children or comfortable well-being in retirement' except as a matter (personal) of free enterprise and competition -which means then, that those goods and services depend largely on what money one makes and saves -ergo 'American free-enterprise, capitalist democracy and the right to make as much money as you can and spend it any way you choose -as long as there's no law against it'. The problem here then, is that pecking-order-based as these complex dynamics are, they have little to do (except pejorative) with an ineluctable 'best well-being and viability of the organism-whole' in The Nature and Course of Human Evolution ...]

5 - Self-regulation is good because it motivates the principals of free enterprise and competition to generate and plow more venture capital back into those services
-by compensating them (income) for 'making the right money-making (venture-capital) decisions'
-but decisions under 'self-regulating compensation' do not naturally lead to 'venture capital for the goods and services people need'
-and principals are not obligated to other than money-making decisions,
-where 'making the right decisions' is now a commodity, and the principal is its agency of 'free enterprise and competition',
-so some principals make decisions expressly to increase their incomes for the consumption of pecking-order-based goods and services,
-some, furthermore, influencing government to these such ends(*i),
-thus some self-regulation does not result in 'improving availability of goods and services at lower costs',
-and is therefore a waste of labor and natural resources of some possibly better future use;
-still, self-regulation is good because it motivates making more money than is doable thru less directly involved regulation by government -money which can then be plowed back into the economy for more free enterprise and competition.

[A 'stock market' was born when some first, probably late-neolithic man accepted a second's stated expectancy to deliver some particular 'stock item or service easing sustenance' at some agreed-upon, future time -essentially 'improving life-style-and-quality by reducing the physical labor of each'. If now, evolvingly, that first 'middleman' advanced the second something 'valuable' in the way of use or assistance (money eventually), he may be said to have 'invested' in that first expectancy towards that autonomy. Second and higher-order expectancies eventually developing with such 'investment of his space by mankind', a stock market, the mechanics for trading and managing such operation in earliest (eg Sumerian) civilization (nepotism and intermarriage included) eventually came to constitute the government/economy we associate with civilization today -stock-trading eventually a hierarchy of speculation including that of 'speculation itself': call, long, short et cetera -derivatives ('betting' on the outcomes of 'betting') encompassing all. (-from Unemployment and Economic Policy)]

6 - Globalization is good because it motivates 'outside' nations into democratic communion and economic parity in goods and services that their peoples need
-by promoting the development and/or importation of their cheaper natural resources and labor for money-making jobs,
-by promoting the development of their cheaper natural resources and labor for money-making jobs,
-thereby lowering the prices of goods and services,
-and promoting 'free enterprise and competition' (democracy) of their own,
-but globalization does not naturally lead to 'democratic communion and economic parity',
-and principals are not obligated to other than making money,
-so some principals undertake globalization expressly to increase their incomes for the consumption of pecking-order-based goods and services;
-some globalization therefore, is a waste of labor and natural resources of some possibly better use in the future;
-still, globalization is good because it makes money which can be plowed back into globalizing democratic communion and economic parity.

[Purpose in 'earning one's keep' by computerized stock-trading is, quite simply, minimizing one's sustenance-related activity with the more 'esoteric' purpose of maximizing autonomy of life-style-and-quality -'having whatever time and money necessary to do what one feels like doing when he feels like doing it' -necessarily, therein, as little 'work' (clearly undesirable) possible. Whatever (stock) makes money, consequently, 'works', regardless of validity -'substance' irrelevant. Computerized stock-trading, in effect, is 'the highest form of classically aristocratic -and primitive, freeloading' -sucking on the system, but 'What the system, ultimately and only a matter of time, will not bear'. -And worse, this freeloader will do anything within law constraints (not uncommonly 'without') to secure and 'advance' that modus operandi/vivendi. (-from Unemployment and Economic Policy)]

['American free-enterprise, capitalist democracy' is remarkably classical in its aristocracy: the farther down the 'democracy' one is, the more likely ignorant of its pecking-order-based dynamics he is and is accordingly 'used' by those above, and the higher up one is (related factors equal), the more likely he is to understand those dynamics and 'elevate himself' within them -government included. 'Free-enterprise, capitalist democracy' in this respect, is profoundly 'incested' -officers of one company serving on the director boards of others with (for want of better words) 'magnanimous power in the dispensation of various favors and blessings of a financial nature'. Worse still, it is inherent that agencies most influentially involved with 'the goods and services people need' (the economy) also be most influential in its government -ergo, pecking-order-based, the various laws and governmental 'dispositions' favoring such agencies -immigration and land development policies, tax structures, pension and retirement systems(*k) et cetera.]