The Band Playing Live With A Famous Orchestra Album
One side says x, the other says y, another interjects with z. I'm hearing a repetition of the same debates that have gone on for years. This generations turn to chew the same cud coming to the same conclusions. History really does repeat itself. Nothing appears to be changing. And I know that has been said before too.
Every year there's the next person to feel disillusioned with something or other. So this generation would rather experience it for themselves, not dodge the bullet and learn from the last generation. It's almost a passage of rite. We could save ourselves years if, on some matters, we just accepted, trusted and learnt from the previous generation.
As an example; we didn't learn from the last recession, nor the recession before that. It seems we carried on blindly, accusing top economists of being doom mongers. Our leaders do know history, right? If some of the top economists are saying "this growth is too fast and can only lead to recession", why not listen to them? And then put in place strategies to a recession or even strategies to avoid a recession altogether. Use history to foresee a problem, use history to see a resolution. So what if the strategies aren't used and the economists were proven wrong, a ship doesn't have lifeboats because it will definitely sink.
History could help us move on, makes me wonder if civilisation has peaked. As long as we are only living for this number of years, by the time we've grown old and realised for ourselves that we agree with the last generation, it's too late. Maybe if average life expectancy was 50 or 500 the world would be a different place. Not convinced civilisation is based on life expectancy, but...
History could teach us so much, if only we'd trust it.
May 2nd, 2011 - 03:00
Civilisation *is* based on life expectancy. Before writing, what was passed down was what could be remembered and taught before the elders died. With writing, that expanded – you could learn from past generations. With printing, you can learn from past generations in other parts of the world.
But physical degeneration is part of life expectancy. In my mid-40s, it’s already harder to read than it was, and I’m going to have to get off my bottom and buy some reading glasses one day soon. So before widespread optics, life expectancy slowed progress – the greatest minds were restricted by maybe 20 years of being unable to read.
It takes, apparently, 40 years to learn enough of the world to be a leading politician. And then you’ve only 20 or so years to try your new ways before finding they’re the old ways after all.
The young men who caused Black Monday in 1987 on the Stock Market are now the old hands who won’t cock it up next time. But they cost a fortune, and they don’t want to spend 16 hours a day at work, so they’re off one way or another and the next wave of Young Guns will make the same mistakes all over again.
So if expectancy was 50, I suspect we’d not have the financial and political systems we have. And if it were 500, we might learn enough to avoid the heffalump traps next time. Might. I suspect deep down we’re just basically flawed.