• hydroptic
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Digging deeper: why must the line go up? Pesonally I see it as a deeply emotional, human thing.

    The idea that corporations, economies or any human ventures in general have to grow infinitely is a very recent invention and obsession. I honestly find it worrying that someone would think it’s some sort of deeply ingrained human trait when it’s clearly not culturally universal (eg. small hunter-gatherer tribes wouldn’t exist otherwise) and not present through all of history. Really goes to show how well the current economic system has been “bought” (har har), and how easily we start thinking that some culturally defined phenomenon or another just has to be a fundamental part of humans. There’s a lot of similar thinking around nation states that are ethnically homogenous and based around a shared national cultural identity – people seem to think that that’s the default and how things have been since ancient times, but nation states are barely even 200 years old as a concept.

    The line has to go up because the current economic system demands it has to go up, not some fundamental feature of the human psyche

    • Oliver Lowe@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I honestly find it worrying that someone would think it’s some sort of deeply ingrained human trait when it’s clearly not culturally universal (eg. small hunter-gatherer tribes wouldn’t exist otherwise) and not present through all of history.

      I think “growth” is a strong signal for people to put faith and trust into something. And that these emotions have influenced our behaviour for a long time.

      Why did the Roman empire keep expanding? What made them want more? I’m not a historian nor an anthropologist (far from either!). But this feels like “line go up” behaviour. What would it mean for those in power to communicate that some part of the empire was receding? Even if, overall, the empire was objectivetly huge relative to other organised groups?

      One thing I think about is there could be eroding confidence and trust of those in power by colleagues and the general population. If people lose faith, the powerful lose power; they lose ability to influence behaviour. Growth is obsessed over because it’s a means to capture influence over the means of production (and capture profit).

      The line has to go up because the current economic system demands it has to go up

      What about outside of economics? Even metrics on https://fedidb.org: shrinking numbers are coloured red. Growing numbers green. Green = good, red = bad.

      Another thought. The other day I was at a cricket match. Grand final. Because the home team was losing, the stadium started to empty. It wasn’t about enjoying the individual balls/plays. Supporters were not satisfied with coming second (an amazing achievement, much “profit”!), it needed to be more.

      To stretch this shitty metaphor further, when the supporters (investors?) lost confidence in their ability to deliver more, they just abandoned the entire match (enterprise?) altogether!

      Again: I’m not stating anything here as fact. I’m just absolutely dumbfounded as to why “line go up” is, as you say, such an obsession. I hear you when you say that it’s a consequence of how the modern economy works. That makes sense. I guess I wonder what would happen if we snapped our fingers and we could start again. I wonder what the economy system would look like. Would we still be obsessed with growth?