Why is the World Crazy Now?
video description
Almost every video you did around the time of this video seems based on David Hackett Fisher's 'The Great Wave' theory. As interesting as he is, you've never shown any acknowledgement of his critics and the limits of and biases in his work. Here's one critique:
(Thomas Ford Brown, 2015. Review of The Great Wave: Price Revolutions and the Rhythm of History, by David Hackett Fischer. August 2015, Journal of World-Systems Research 4(2): 196
There are major flaws in Fischer's presentation. First, he conflates two different types of inflation that each stem from different causes, and his theory fails to account for this divergence.
The fundamental difference between the two types of inflation raises questions about Fischer's theory. In the first three price revolutions, inflation was driven by the decline in the value of money relative to other commodities. But the most recent price revolution has been driven by governments debasing their money. Indeed, inflation in the West since 1970 has been caused only by debasement. While the social disruptions consequent to each type of inflation may be similar, the causes are quite different. Is it possible to explain these two phenomena with the same theory?
There are also contradictions and lacunae in Fischer's linkage between his theoretical paradigm and his evidence. First, the rates of inflation vary considerably among historical periods. ln earlier price revolutions, inflation was typically 1 to 3 percent per year. This is trivial compared to the 20th century experience, in which inflation rates greater than 70 percent occurred in several countries only last year. lt becomes necessary to explain why modern economics can tolerate moderate inflation without experiencing the kinds of major social disruption that the same rate of inflation caused in earlier times. Second, we need to explain why inflation often spans national boundaries even in the modern era of floating currencies, considering that only state manipulation of the money supply can create debasement inflation. These questions highlight significant lacunae in Fischer's theory.
More damaging to Fischer's theory are the empirical contradictions. Crucial to his theory is the link between population growth and inflation, but this linkage only pertains until the 1820s. Population grew rapidly in Europe and the US during the later 19th century, yet prices remained stable, even deflationary during this period. Fischer's argument here is founded upon shifting comparisons that arc highly questionable. For the 19th century, his empirical presentation describes a linkage between the growth rate of population and prices in England, which is substantively divergent from his theoretical link between population growth and prices.
There are also empirical contradictions to Fischer's theoretical link between rising prices and inequality. Inequality in Florence increases while prices remain stable between 1330 and 1427. lnequality in the US decreases while prices rise between 1910 and 1970. Fischer expects real wages to fall during inflationary periods, but this doesn't happen between 1946 and 1970. All of these contradictions between evidence and theory are found in Fischer's own text. Clearly, his theory needs refinement.
Date: 2022-07-15
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 9
education
One more thing: globalisation is creating an equivalent of agricultural monocultures in countries economies: some countries are focusing only on providing not even food in general, but a small bunch of specific crops (cotton, sugar cane, wheat, some give low-tech industrial semiproducts, some prepare high-tech r&d. This is all explained and advocated by classic works of Ricardo about comparative advantage.
But as in agriculture, monocultures are very rewarding in short term, but extremely risky in the long term. Famine in potato-dominated XIXth century Ireland is a lesson that we shouldn't put all eggs in one basket, yet we do it with the people all around the world. You live in Uzbekistan, you grow cotton, you live in Bangladesh, you can make t-shirts, you work in Poland, you can do some IT stuff that people in the West don't want to, you live in Germany or US you can be an engineer in the R&D of some big car making or IT company.
Or you can die.
And the problems are:
1. Not everyone wants to be a cotton farmer.
2. Not everyone is intellectually capable of doing it.
3. People differ and they like to do different things, a healthy society is the one with decent options for, well, almost everybody.
The first problem creates resentment in the peripheral world: talented people have to either underachieve or leave their country.
The second creates a problem for people in developed countries not capable of doing high-intelligence work.
Blue collar workers in the rich countries, smart people in the poorer ones or just Frenchmen who hate cheese are all angry at the globalisation. And angry people create problems.
reply
One more thing: globalisation is creating an equivalent of agricultural monocultures in countries economies: some countries are focusing only on providing not even food in general, but a small bunch of specific crops (cotton, sugar cane, wheat, some give low-tech industrial semiproducts, some prepare high-tech r&d. This is all explained and advocated by classic works of Ricardo about comparative advantage.
But as in agriculture, monocultures are very rewarding in short term, but extremely risky in the long term. Famine in potato-dominated XIXth century Ireland is a lesson that we shouldn't put all eggs in one basket, yet we do it with the people all around the world. You live in Uzbekistan, you grow cotton, you live in Bangladesh, you can make t-shirts, you work in Poland, you can do some IT stuff that people in the West don't want to, you live in Germany or US you can be an engineer in the R&D of some big car making or IT company.
Or you can die.
And the problems are:
1. Not everyone wants to be a cotton farmer.
2. Not everyone is intellectually capable of doing it.
3. People differ and they like to do different things, a healthy society is the one with decent options for, well, almost everybody.
The first problem creates resentment in the peripheral world: talented people have to either underachieve or leave their country.
The second creates a problem for people in developed countries not capable of doing high-intelligence work.
Blue collar workers in the rich countries, smart people in the poorer ones or just Frenchmen who hate cheese are all angry at the globalisation. And angry people create problems.
reply
NoCensorship
School schootings definitely have other reasons. I don't have the answer but I have some ideas: shielding kids in American society due to a fear fueled paranoia perpetuated by media and due to car centric urban design that makes kids lives very difficult without a car and locks them into houses, preventing proper development as children. Lead from fuel could also be an explanation or certain pesticides or chemicals in use. There is a clear very visible scientific connection between lead and violence. Brain damage is just not good for you, who would have thought, am i right? lol. Media could totally play a bigger role here as well. Anyways, questions like that are best left to people like Jordan peterson who have true expertise in human psychology
reply
School schootings definitely have other reasons. I don't have the answer but I have some ideas: shielding kids in American society due to a fear fueled paranoia perpetuated by media and due to car centric urban design that makes kids lives very difficult without a car and locks them into houses, preventing proper development as children. Lead from fuel could also be an explanation or certain pesticides or chemicals in use. There is a clear very visible scientific connection between lead and violence. Brain damage is just not good for you, who would have thought, am i right? lol. Media could totally play a bigger role here as well. Anyways, questions like that are best left to people like Jordan peterson who have true expertise in human psychology
reply
Cameron
The US became a superpower, policing the world's oceans for free. geezus christ.
How you could say this with a straight face is beyond laughable. The amount of economic and military benefit the USA has received by being the world superpower and policing trade routes is extraordinary. The fact that they threw it all away by de-industrializing, implementing extreme neoliberal policies, and fighting demoralizing wars is nothing to do with their gracious generosity to other western states. ffs
Your reference of Niall Ferguson and other conservative historians gives an insight into where your biases are coming from.
reply
The US became a superpower, policing the world's oceans for free. geezus christ.
How you could say this with a straight face is beyond laughable. The amount of economic and military benefit the USA has received by being the world superpower and policing trade routes is extraordinary. The fact that they threw it all away by de-industrializing, implementing extreme neoliberal policies, and fighting demoralizing wars is nothing to do with their gracious generosity to other western states. ffs
Your reference of Niall Ferguson and other conservative historians gives an insight into where your biases are coming from.
reply
Richard
Hmm, this matter of 'proving God' is ambiguous. If we are talking about an Eternal Entity that instantiated the Universe, then I think there is sufficient evidence. But if you mean some particular tribal concept of a deity, they fall into two categories:
1) Eternal Creators
2) godlings born in the flow of time who are obviously NOT our Creators.
Each culture for the most part has some kind of Creator, but they each have their own cultural interpretation of Him.
In my view, they are all the same thing, but through different cultural lenses.
reply
Hmm, this matter of 'proving God' is ambiguous. If we are talking about an Eternal Entity that instantiated the Universe, then I think there is sufficient evidence. But if you mean some particular tribal concept of a deity, they fall into two categories:
1) Eternal Creators
2) godlings born in the flow of time who are obviously NOT our Creators.
Each culture for the most part has some kind of Creator, but they each have their own cultural interpretation of Him.
In my view, they are all the same thing, but through different cultural lenses.
reply
Barney
Its amazing how you say right wing populism is on the rise as if THATS the concerning half of the equation rather than the far left extremism that is clearly causing the right wing reaction.
If a politician in American ran on the policies of a democrat from the year 2000 theyd be called a far right fascist. The left today has gone so far left it would be inconceivable to left wing moderates of twenty years ago.
Tossing out a casual condemnation of anything right wing is so lazy. Its something hacks do.
reply
Its amazing how you say right wing populism is on the rise as if THATS the concerning half of the equation rather than the far left extremism that is clearly causing the right wing reaction.
If a politician in American ran on the policies of a democrat from the year 2000 theyd be called a far right fascist. The left today has gone so far left it would be inconceivable to left wing moderates of twenty years ago.
Tossing out a casual condemnation of anything right wing is so lazy. Its something hacks do.
reply
Craig
The world today seems insane to you because you are young.
Read some history.
The world has always been insane.
Look at the US during the Vietnam War era.
Or, Europe in the 1930's.
Or, Europe right before WW1.
Or, the 30 Years War period.
Or, our Civil War era.
Or, the Roman Empire being invaded by so many barbarians in the 4th Century.
etc etc etc.
The world has been mostly crazy, it seems to me.
Humans are just crazy, IMO.
(if you knew my family,
reply
The world today seems insane to you because you are young.
Read some history.
The world has always been insane.
Look at the US during the Vietnam War era.
Or, Europe in the 1930's.
Or, Europe right before WW1.
Or, the 30 Years War period.
Or, our Civil War era.
Or, the Roman Empire being invaded by so many barbarians in the 4th Century.
etc etc etc.
The world has been mostly crazy, it seems to me.
Humans are just crazy, IMO.
(if you knew my family,
reply
Айбулат
21: 15 is not true. Western stereotype is to count every Soviet citizen killed by Nazis as combatant, while the most of the victims were civilians, prisoners and starved to death (they also always bring up Holocaust while forgetting that there were more soviet and polish citizens killed in concentration camps. The correct ratio should be around 1. 7 and it is mostly due the ineffectiveness at the start of war.
reply
21: 15 is not true. Western stereotype is to count every Soviet citizen killed by Nazis as combatant, while the most of the victims were civilians, prisoners and starved to death (they also always bring up Holocaust while forgetting that there were more soviet and polish citizens killed in concentration camps. The correct ratio should be around 1. 7 and it is mostly due the ineffectiveness at the start of war.
reply
education
As an Indian, I acknowledge the American contribution to the world and its true that American Institutions benefited the world immensely.
But i disagree that it was free, American population using almost 25% of worlds resources being the biggest example.
As far as problems are concerned we are used to wars and bloodshed unlike 1st world.
Social connect and Atheism is again a developed world problem.
reply
As an Indian, I acknowledge the American contribution to the world and its true that American Institutions benefited the world immensely.
But i disagree that it was free, American population using almost 25% of worlds resources being the biggest example.
As far as problems are concerned we are used to wars and bloodshed unlike 1st world.
Social connect and Atheism is again a developed world problem.
reply
Josh
The comment on pandemics being a normal thing when populations expand out into more wild areas and encounter pathogens sure didnt age well considering now the lab leak theory is looking to be true.
Of course this could just be the elite trying to thin the herd and remedy the population problem in order to avert the coming crisis and maintain their power.
reply
The comment on pandemics being a normal thing when populations expand out into more wild areas and encounter pathogens sure didnt age well considering now the lab leak theory is looking to be true.
Of course this could just be the elite trying to thin the herd and remedy the population problem in order to avert the coming crisis and maintain their power.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
