Western Europe (part 2)

Over the decades, has there not been a certain evolution in Europe ?

Indeed ! Under the growing pressure of the financial world, money became the new god, individualism became accentuated. Male-female relations have become even more distorted by the concept of "Western-style women's liberation" which wants them to fit into the socio-economic mold provided for men by financiers, but above all give even more priority to consumption itself and perhaps even more so consumption on credit. When I sought to document the question, I was very surprised to discover that the subject of the manipulation of women had been seriously studied already shortly after the first World War, even if there are already traces of attempts at manipulation before 1900. This manipulation was seen as a promising way to keep the economic and social structures in place and counter the Russian revolution that wanted to end the possibility for the financial world to make money without producing anything, only from the capital held. Not being able to consume without producing anything thanks to the capital held is obviously the most "horrible" situation possible for the holders of capital. It is not surprising that they seek by all means to prevent this kind of evolution. The result of the manipulations of relations between men and women is that these relations, already difficult in the West as a result of the psychological problems created by sexual repression that lasted hundreds of years and was reduced not so long ago, have become even more confrontational today, with all the consequences that this entails not only for relations between spouses within families but also for child-parent relations and the priority given to consumption rather than the development of the real economy or technologies or the priority given to "feeling" rather than analysis. One of the consequences is the dislocation of the social fabric with an extremely high divorce rate and widespread use of sedatives, antidepressants and alcohol by both men and women. Another consequence is the fall in the birth rate in populations of European origin, with women increasingly prioritising their jobs over their families. Nor should we be surprised by the strong growth of homosexuality among men.

Another dramatic change is the shift from the priority that was previously (at least in appearance) given to production to the priority given to services, speculation, the financial industry. The end of the 1960s was, it seems, the end of the industrial cycle and the beginning of the post-industrial era. No more need to produce, other countries were going to take care of it to get our "hard currencies", a beautiful myth. Studying the implementation of petrodollars is instructive...

What practical consequences at the level of individuals? If, 50 years ago, people were still interested in machines, tools, a garden, 20 years later, not only has interest in real production disappeared, but in addition, the new generations have generally not acquired even minimal experience of what the basics of production are or the harsh constraints of nature. Individuals now see the world through a personal experience that is mostly reduced to the constraints of social relations and to a mostly theoretical learning on the benches of schools and through the media, without being able or without wanting to analyze the implication of their choices for the whole society or without wanting to understand the global functioning of it (*See "Second world", chap 9 Parallel worlds, from my book "What future for humanity" in french "Quel futur pour l'humanité" ). The experience of the material world with all its natural and technical constraints is very limited for the vast majority of the population in most European countries.

I was very surprised to discover that there is a big difference between behavior in a person-to-person relationship and behavior within a group. For example, during a period of workshop work, following the observation of a recurring problem that was easy to solve, I would talk to those around me about it to get their opinion. They shared the same opinion and I then proposed to talk about it at a scheduled meeting with a manager. At that meeting, with no one speaking, I decided to share the problem. What was not my surprise, when this manager asked the other participants if they thought the same thing, to hear them say that " no, everything is fine, no problem !». After the meeting, I asked the others what this reversal of position meant. The answer ? "It is necessary to say what the manager expects, not to be noticed..."A few experiences like this have led me to be both more careful and to try less to solve problems that would affect me only for a limited period anyway. Finally, if people want to stay with their problems and do not have the courage to face their anxieties, this is their choice ! It's up to them to bear the consequences ! Unfortunately, I had to observe the same behaviour even in the face of serious problems, such as handling highly toxic products without adequate protective measures. Surprise, surprise ! This behavior was mainly that of the ethnic populations in contrast to the more demanding foreign workers... Personally, faced with this type of problem of working with toxic products, as soon as the situation was blocked, the other workers did not want to react, I "resigned" in the following days.

I have occasionally seen unfortunate situations. For example, after telling a worker (of local origin) about the extreme danger of the products he was handling without adequate means of protection, he replied: "Anyway, my wife sends me to work, if I no longer bring money, she fires me. I find myself without children and having to pay my wife a pension if I end up finding another job. I might die because of the current job ? All the better, that way I'll be quiet ..."Sad, really sad ! A life far from the image given by society... After that we are surprised at the number of suicides!

During periods of factory work, I was regularly approached by workers who asked me to fight for them, because I was not married. They explained to me that by participating in a social struggle, they risked losing their jobs. To put pressure on them, the company sent a mail to their home with the threat of losing their job, which was sure to trigger a serious conflict with their wife (which led me to question how these wives viewed their husbands...). When I asked them if this was not the role of unions, they said that union representatives were usually chosen directly or indirectly by management or that management promised them a better career if they worked together. This is not to mention a probable collusion between the management of trade unions and employers ' organisations or political parties.
I finally opted for a certain neutrality. One can participate in a struggle alongside other people but not fight in the place of adults who do not want to face their problems, or question their way of life. That this generates unrest within families is not a valid argument for asking others to fight to solve your own problems. One can only fight in the place of children, invalids, sick, unable to do it themselves.

Financiers have increasingly replaced engineers at the head of companies. Emotions, that is, most often a form of expression of anxieties that result from psychological structures, largely dominate social, economic, political life. There is no collective project, no common goal, not many links to the real world. The link between consumption and production has disappeared from the field of consciousness for the majority of the population who believe that real wealth is money and not goods and services. People think less and less, substituting "felt" for thought. This is what the dominant classes are looking for : for people to act according to what they feel rather than following a thorough reflection on the situation. It is a conscious policy that aims to favor feeling (which results from "educational formatting") to neutralize any questioning of the system and especially of the dominant classes. There is no better way to cut ties with material constraints than to let people do what they want, according to what they feel. This is a vicious way of divide and conquer. People who mostly seek to please themselves do not unite in an organization to fight to change the system...

Words and images have become a means of manipulating anxieties through the media. In general, people react on the basis of unconscious motivations related to their upbringing and not on the basis of any analysis of the world around them. They repress any information that could cause anxiety. "Political correctness" has replaced the search for truth. Words no longer have much connection with reality. They have become a means of presenting a facade to others, a means of being recognized. For example, I found that many people who kept talking about human rights, democracy, freedom, people's and workers rights and often called themselves "left-wing" did not hesitate to support the attack on Libya by calling Gaddafi a dictator, an attack which resulted in more than 100,000 deaths and more than 1 million refugees out of a population of less than 6 million inhabitants as well as the destruction of infrastructure, especially the water supply, which is vital for the country. I soon discovered that these people knew absolutely nothing about the type of economic or social organization of Libya, the standard of living in this country (the highest in Africa and higher than in most European countries before the attack by the West) and often did not even know exactly where that country was until they were asked for. Not only did these people have no idea about the true geopolitical goals of the attackers but in fact this question was absolutely not of interest to them ! To be "recognized within the group", it was necessary to call Gaddafi a dictator, which is what they did. How far can this type of behavior go ??? ... Today in addition to the destruction of Libya, gangs of Wahabi fanatics continue to plunder the country, killing and massacring what remains of the population. What a disaster !!

Deprived of an existence of their own by their education, their work, people then seek to exist by their belonging to a group without asking the question of the objectives of this group, nor of the manipulations with which it is subjected by the dominant classes. Among those who still have higher incomes, some try to exist by the goods they buy, especially when it comes to goods presented as indicating belonging to a higher social status. I buy so I exist! "There is no worse blind than the one who does not want to see..." applies exactly to the current situation. At the same time, only a minimal situation of comfort allows people not to face their anxieties or question the world around them, this choice can be reinforced by alcohol, antidepressants,... They are not interested in the problems of others, let alone those of countries colonized, exploited or destroyed by Western armies.

I found out that in the crowds there were mainly two types of individuals. Those who consider themselves superior to others and find it normal to impose themselves and those who seek to be recognized, "accepted". These two groups react on the basis of their emotions, and complex motivations whose origin comes from a second world type education (*see chapter 9). Individuals still turned to the material world, of matter, of nature, (*type "first world", see chapter 9) who think before acting and ask themselves questions about the world in which they live are now only a very small minority, without real weight in society. Despite the official discourse, Europe has built a media-formatted consumer society, a society with a kind of assisted mentality and not a society of production, technology or innovation and knowledge, let alone a society in which people would like to take control of their destiny.

The number of people in work is shrinking, while the number of pensioners, the unemployed and the disabled is steadily increasing. In addition, the majority of those who have a job do not work in the real economy to produce a good or service, a very significant part works in a public or private bureaucracy without any participation in any type of production in the real economy. The few producers that still exist face enormous difficulties in surviving, including the farmers who are supposed to produce the food we consume, leading some of them to suicide. The largest companies invest in the financial sector, relocate their production outside the main European countries and base their growth on absorbing competitors or dismantling existing companies. The deindustrialisation of Europe is underway and is indeed very advanced. The new generations have less and less knowledge and especially experience (other than financial or marketing) related to industrial or agricultural production.

CIESINT   Published on 2017-06-22   Read by 2881  Translated on 2021-09-12

Copyright by Christian Isaac, 2015. All rights reserved. For information on getting permission for reprints contact us.