Dec 6, 2023Liked by Paul Cudenec

Industrialism is what happened when capitalists got their hands on high density fuels. You know where I'm going with this. Suffice to say, it's better to look forward to the postindistrial future than fear it and try to run. Brighter future for those who make it. I agree with all your points, as usual.

Expand full comment

The problem is, there was no golden age of rural bliss before the Industrial Revolution, at least not for thousands of years prior to industrialisation. Life was hard, very hard, for the peasants who worked the land under the system of Medieval feudalism, where the rich land owners were the main beneficiaries and the majority were basically enslaved on plantations. Prior to the emergence of farming and the rural economy, we lived as hunter-gatherers. No doubt we were much more in touch with Nature and our inner beings then, life was more meaningful, but in no sense can we imagine it to be idyllic. We lived on the edge of survival, just like all other creatures, exposed to the harsh elements, vulnerable to attack from other humans and animals.

The Industrial revolution, for all its ugliness, environmental degradation, and rampant exploitation of natural and human resources by the same rich ruling classes who lorded it over us during feudalistic times, eventually set the masses free from the chains of feudalism and granted us a degree of personal autonomy, independence and freedom, where we could at last spare the time to pursue our own goals in life. Of course, real freedom, for those trapped in the 9-5 culture, increasingly reliant upon technology to make their lives supposedly more comfortable and convenient, who increasingly became the prey, the consumed, rather than the consumers; real freedom, after drawing close in the heyday of the industrialised consumer society, then began to rapidly disappear over the horizon once again and here we are today - slaves to the 'new' digital technology. Schwab's Fourth Industrial revolution, aka the Great Reset, aka the Fourth Reich, would have us complete that process so that we are all inescapably enslaved to technology, entirely controlled by our human masters of course, the elite, the globalists, the descendants of the original feudalist landlords.

The way they are going to do this is to reverse the liberating benefits of the Third Industrial Revolution and replace them with the chains of the Fourth. Hence in Britain today, under the guise of 'saving the planet', we are witnessing the destruction of the manufacturing economy and de-industrialisation on a massive scale, which will result in increasing dependence upon imports, the loss of millions of jobs, the impoverishment of the majority in favour of vastly increasing the wealth of a small minority, and the eventual complete loss of the (limited) freedom and personal autonomy which the majority enjoyed as a direct consequence of industrialisation. Steel industry being shuttered, oil refineries closed, fertiliser manufacturing plants closed, vehicle manufacturing industry being destroyed, access to cheap freely available energy to run our economy and power our homes rationed and denied, as a means to achieve control over the masses. This is our dystopian future under the globalists, where once again we live mean, energy deprived and strictly controlled lives, no longer free to travel, to improve our lot in life by choosing our vocation and by working hard in an industrialised free enterprise capitalist society, but reduced to mere slaves of a governing technology completely under the control of the elite.

This is why so many people are wary now of talk of de-industrialisation, because de-industrialisation is THE means by which the elite intend to enslave us.

Expand full comment

Great article and attitude, and everything else, Sir. Yes, people are conditioned to never question The Science AND Industrialism. It also happened to me to explain that nuclear bombs are not the same as the Sun. Yes, both are manifestations of nuclear fusion but bombs are not meant to shine. So technology is Not neutral.

Expand full comment

I have this same feeling that we aren't supposed to live like we are living. I secretly dream of ditching the computer and cutting the electricity and living by daylight with some candles and early to bed...early to rise. To be honest....I can't think of living without a clothes washer! But I like the trajectory you're on.

Expand full comment

I love that your reasoning started with a feeling. The feeling that most captures my response to industrialism, and I would think many others as well, is tiredness. I feel tired...physically, emotionally and energetically. 'Tired' is a response to 'too much'.

I would like to reclaim the words 'innovation' and 'inclusivity'. True innovation doesn't move away from life, but with it, supporting and nurturing it. True inclusivity doesn't move away from life, but with it, supporting and nurturing it.

Expand full comment

Industrialism as usury is a great insight. Living off-grid and making my house and garden out of straw etc I’ve seen friends get loans for industrial products to make houses and built mine for a quarter cost. I’ve been debt free for a while

Expand full comment
Dec 7, 2023Liked by Paul Cudenec

Paul - Ignore the morons who can’t or won’t see or just want to argue and make you repeat yourself. Engage w those of us who seek dialogue re the actual contours of the real-world de-industrialization process and process of de-coupling from technocratic modernity that we must facilitate. Thriving in the future will require, I believe, a complete divorce from the babylon borg monster. What exactly - and comprehensively - should that look like? That’s what I’m thinking about. For ex, electricity and plumbing are really useful and need not be industrialized or centrally controlled.

Expand full comment
Dec 6, 2023·edited Dec 7, 2023Liked by Paul Cudenec

Usury has always been the problem - governments borrow from the financial elite and then promise to repay that amount with interest which is impossible as it requires another loan to repay the first and the merry go round continues while the financiers end up owning and running government.

The real green agenda was hijacked by the financial elite along the lines of disaster capitalism.

The present economic model of Capitalism is fully dedicated to the pursuit of Perpetual economic growth which is impossible to maintain since this requires ever increasing sacrifices from humanity the environment and farm animals.

Usury is the nemesis of a Socialism, remember what happened to Libya or that a well known biblical figure kicked over the tables of the money changers.

Usury makes slaves out of everyone.

Expand full comment

Some of your ideas remind me of Derrick Jensen's book End Civ in which he says human civilization is based on exploitaton/enslavement of animals and people to serve a few, and the various stages of industrialization are just accelerations of that enslavement. He also talks about all the toxic effects of technology gone out of control (or rather "in control" by capitalists and socialists with industrialist agendas). He poses various hypothetical scenarios like what would happen if a dam was blown up and salmon were freed and nature took its course.

One large problem emerges which is that many people today are truly dependent on technology, not just for convenience or making money. Our modern civilization has reached a majority opinion that illness can be fixed and disability should be accommodated and housing/food insecurity should be remedied. Would you throw out that progress despite the problems? What is the alternate path? For example can we get technology and industry under social control so that everyone benefits rather than only a few? Can they be implemented using a precautionary principle so that they are safe?

Expand full comment

"People will sneer at you, make up insults, tell you to shut up."

Right and Jaime Semprún, whom you recommends, wrote something still extremely valid about that:

"The abolition of history is a kind of horrible freedom for those who have effectively liberated themselves from any debts with respect to the past as well as any responsibilities with respect to the future: the moderns love this freedom, composed of irresponsibility and openness (openness to everything that domination wants to make of them), more than the very apple of their eye, whose extinction they have meekly entrusted to their TV screens. Anyone who criticizes the emptiness of this freedom, by recalling, for example, the existence of history in the form of numerous and terrible debts that are now coming due at this end of the century, as if they comprised the bill that had to be paid for misusing the world, will be accused of harboring a fascistoid nostalgia for a pre-technological harmony, or of displaying tendencies toward religious fundamentalism when not apocalyptic fanaticism."

From The Abyss Repopulates itself, 1997

Peace be upon him, he died in 2011.. I can't tell if it is bad or good, in one side we don't have this vivid spirit in such dire times among us anymore, in other side he didn't live to see the decomposition and deacadence of society advancing at the highest heights.

Expand full comment

Prior to capitalist industrialization there was feudalism. Serfs lived on a medieval lords estate, "out in the countryside," however, they were little more than slaves.

Capitalism, transformed serfs into wage slaves, as medieval lords were transformed into oligarchs. To put it simply, the more things change the more they remain the same.

That being said, a knife can be used to stab someone or to butter a slice of bread. So if technology was actually allowed to develop in a way in which it could enhance lives modernization would not be viewed as a threat to humanity.

Nevertheless, if industrialization devoles into fascist totalitarianism then all new developments must be deployed to maximize profits through human and environmental exploitation. Hence, technology must then be utilized in ways to ensure control over those who are being exploited.

The jury is still out as to whether Homo sapiens are capable of maintaining a stable civilization without targeting populations for barbaric abuse.

Expand full comment
Dec 6, 2023·edited Dec 6, 2023

Anti-industrialist, yes of course. Anyone with enough education (purposely withheld) to look with unbiased eyes at the long view of human history -- meaning through hundreds of thousands of years -- will know that with the Industrial Revolution, whatever good it's given us is far outweighed by the endless suffering, toxicity, poisoning the planet it has caused. It has resulted in galloping paranoia and neurosis as the steady state individually and between people. But saying one is anti-industrialist is not enough. Check out the sane life ways, culture, and behavior of the Australian aborigines, for example, as demonstrated in Voices of the First Day by Robert Lawlor. You will see what we have lost. Of course, the precursor to industrialism-- the underpinning -- is capitalism. Without getting rid of that which has almost become a primal urge, we don't stand a chance

Expand full comment

Natural forces might kick us back to a pre-industrial lifestyle within the next 10-20 years. Beyond this, even more global upheaval.


Expand full comment

The problem with most systems is that they are easily corrupted. There will always be a few who will try and take advantage of the many for profit...until we get to a different mindset.

I agree that industrialization has led to control over humanity in ways never before seen or expected. Humans are so easily driven to live in fear and thus become highly subjected to indoctrination.

Not to be a pessimist, alarmist or conspiracy freak, but we appear to be headed into the abyss where the powers that be want to destroy 80-90% of humanity, again for personal gain, power and simply to soothe their supreme arrogance.

Expand full comment

While I can't appreciably disagree with any of your reasons, as they all seem so sane and sensible, the seventh appears almost irresistible from any right-minded perspective, which is to say, to anyone aware of the threats posed by the New World Order's Hararian/Schwabian vision.

That being said, an Errol-Flynn-in-tights future is hard to picture. And doing without electricity is something almost no one wishes for, let alone can or dares to imagine.

A pleasure reading, as always.

Expand full comment

Bravo! I really needed this essay right about now to help me realise there are still some kindred spirits in the world. All of a sudden I am not so alone.

Whenever I talk like you did here I am accused of being a Luddite. First I point out that luddites are not totally against all technology, they just ask, who is to benefit from this new technology which our labor has payed for? and then they demanded an answer ...or else.

Regardless of what happens in the near future of one thing I can be certain...the future is all about LESS! There are many different ways it can come about, some good, and some very bad. I advocate for consciously, intelligently, wisely, managing our way there so it can be the best possible outcome. Less.... the absolute easiest thing people can do but also nearly impossible.

Cheers! jef


Expand full comment