Apocalypse Now?

`Last week we spent a good deal of time in class talking about the next half-century, and what sort of apocalyptic predictions could be made about American civilization in that time period. The claim was that, if the unemployment rate rises to an unbearable figure, if enough children are going hungry and families feel that there is no opportunity for the next generation, if enough people lose their homes and their ability to support themselves, that something will necessarily change. That sounds reasonable enough to me, but what I take issue with is the idea that, as things get worse, the system as it exists will be incapable of supporting the people, that discontent will grow to such an extent that the working class will rise up and claim what is rightfully theirs. Reading about the “Hungry Forties,” I noticed a particular sentence that felt essential to this argument: “Hunger itself does not cause revolution. It does, however, test governments’ abilities and their legitimacy.” As an American citizen, in the past 8 years, no matter how frustrated I became with the failed policies of the Bush Administration, I never lost fail in the system of democracy itself. Maybe I lost a bit of faith in the American people, not quite believing that they had willingly elected Bush a second time around, but I felt that, ultimately, the system would find a better alternative in the end, and someone would be able to come in and tidy up at least a bit of the mess made in the past.

I guess, in that sense, I hold tight to the belief that, in this situation, the United States will go the route of England during the early 19^th century. As the rest of Europe at that time was an ugly mix of chaos, bloody revolt, and repression following the revolt, England was, comparably, peaceful. It’s not that there weren’t problems in England, but the main difference seems to have been that the administration, even the conservative authorities, finally saw that something needed to be done. Instead of simply telling the people to be quiet and ignoring their grievances, the English government made just enough changes to appease the people. The situation there wasn’t perfect then, surely, but there was always a hope that the government would support the people in achieving reforms, at least to some extent, and the people accepted that the government was at least attempting something. Given that precedent which seems just as strong as the one of revolution as a response to general unhappiness, hunger, and unemployment, I would be surprised if the United States simply erupted into blatant class conflict, complete with barricades in the streets, any time soon. Maybe I’m naïve, but I believe that, even when our government’s abilities and legitimacy is tested, some changes will have to be made, but that the foundations are solid enough to survive the difficult time.