Peter Pogany’s Thermodynamic/Economic Analysis of Recent World History

Here I’ll attempt to outline Peter Pogany‘s thermodynamic/economic analysis of recent world history, which entails two and potentially three global systems. There are some parallels, I believe to Jordan Hall’s Blue Church/Red Religion analysis, where the Blue Church represents the current status quo (Pogany’s GS2) that is falling apart, and the Red Religion represents the desire to correct the problems not by progressing forward, but rather by regressing backward to Pogany’s GS1 stage. What is needed, however, is a “Phase Shift” – an evolution of consciousness (Jean Gebser’s integral consciousness) that will support a P2P/Commons approach (Bauwens), with non-rivalrous dynamics (Schmachtenberger), which Pogany calls GS3.

Pogany calls classical capitalism GS1 – Global System 1, stemming from Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations in 1776 to the beginning of WWI in 1914. “Laissez faire/metal money/zero multilateralism” – a free market system with little if any regulation, based on the gold standard, and zero collaboration between different nation-states.

“An ideological conviction took root that blossomed into the following general view: Scientific progress and the magic power of the market are destined to make man (the subject) the master of nature (the object). The free market credo effectively locked the repertoire of socioeconomic behavior into the narrow closet of calculative, money-metric self-interest and turned the past into the prehistory of a rationally assessable, eternally valid, equilibrium-centric order.”

Much like the idea of the earth itself as a self-organizing system (Lovelock and Margulis’ “Gaia hypothesis), Pogany sees the development at this time of world socio-economic systems that come to be self-organizing, hence “GS1”).  What did it take for GS1 to emerge? A chaotic transition, otherwise known as the French revolution.

Much success ensued. The free market was right for its time and improvement compared to what came before. By the early 20th century, however, GS1 came into what would in Gebserian terms be called its “deficient” stage (Jean Gebser, The Ever-Present Origin). Every stage concludes with a deficient stage, and we do not see smooth transitions that evolve to the next stage. For this reason Gebser did not like the term “evolution,” but rather spoke of mutation. Each period of mutation was accomplished by breakdown and crisis before the new system would emerge. GS1 lasted until the outbreak of WWI in 1914 (Pogany, 2009).

And so we see the chaotic transition of 1914 to 1945, between which were experienced two world wars and the great depression.

Emerging from that crisis was what Pogany called GS2 – Global System 2, where Roosevelt’s New Deal and the Keynesian economic model was predominant. Pogany characterizes GS2 as “mixed economy/minimum bank reserve money/weak multilateralism.” Until the fall of the communist governments in the 1980s, socialism remained an unsuccessful alternative to GS2. Both GS1 (unfettered market capitalism) and socialism influenced GS2, as it navigated its way between these two polarities.

GS2 performed very admirably for about 60 years, and an improvement on what came before. Some of the signs of deficiency, however, have been around a long time now, evident at least since Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring and the Meadows, et al Limits to Growth books, and the first American oil crisis. Real deficiency came with policies that were put in place with Reagan and Thatcher (a regressive move reaching back to the ideas of GS1).  And the global crisis of mutation/transition began with 9/11 and marked again with the collapsing economies of 2008.

It is often asked, “how do we make this move when a dialectic has been set up that says one is being a marxist or left wing socialist, etc., when one posits these new realities?”

This is the same question Pogany asks: “What will it take to go from the current hostile disgust with the dystopia of tightened modes of multilateral governance to people around the world on their knees begging for a planetary guild? It will take nothing less than a mutation in consciousness, as outlined in the oeuvre of Jean Gebser (1905-1973).” (quoted from his 2013 paper on Thermodynamic Isolation and the New World Order). And that mutation in consciousness, he believes, will only take place after a chaotic transition – likely more chaotic than the great depression and two world wars. “The current world order,” he said, “cannot deliver long-term sustainability on a planetary scale. By design, it is incapable of recognizing humanity’s thermodynamic reality.” The new world order, GS3, will likely be characterized as “two-level economy/maximum bank reserve money/strong multilateralism.” Micro-activities would be subject to globally-determined and nationally allocated macro-constraints; money creation would be curbed and disciplined.” [Perhaps parallel to Rifkin’s 3rd revolution, or Edgar Morin’s dictum that “we must globalize and deglobalize.”]

Thus “The grand and painful path of consciousness emergence” (Gebser’s EPO, p. 542).

For more on Peter Pogany, please see our Peter Pogany page.  And stay tuned for a post that provides more focus on what Global System 3 might entail.

4 comments on “Peter Pogany’s Thermodynamic/Economic Analysis of Recent World History

  1. I have more than a few reservations about “Rifkin’s 3rd revolution” as it honestly smacks a bit too much of Public-Private Partnership 2.0 than it does “GS3,” which I should think would be about health and balance on all “scales” from local to global rather than — yet another — universally global “solution,” if you get my drift.

    No one ever does get my drift, but quite a few red flags went up for me during that very popular presentation of his, not least in his unquestioning embrace of Elon Musk-esque technologies but, perhaps especially, when he answered the question as to who would “control” this “interlinked energy network” with: “A global authority.”

    I realize, of course, there’s a lot to work through during this transition. It’s possible he’s just attempting to allay the fears of the greatest beneficiaries of the fossil fuel industry itself (i.e. energy corporations); trying to convince them that they won’t be made obsolete by a transition to “clean” energy and so on.

    Then again….

    I can’t help but notice, however, that communities of place and their unique attributes and requirements never seem to be on the “global” radar any more than they are on the “national” one.

  2. davidm58 says:

    IW, I entirely agree. I mentioned Rifkin so that some would have a reference point, but I’m not comfortable with a number of his “solutions” that often seem to rely on technology. And thanks for underscoring the importance of communities of place. Unique attributes and requirements, yes.

  3. Don Dwiggins says:

    Coming late to the party…
    I also agree with the importance of communities of place. Some of the best work in this area is in the publications of John McKnight and Peter Block. Their recent book “The Abundant Community” lays out the course of transition that leads away from the dominant economic model toward genuine communities. Also look up “The Learnings of John McKnight” (https://www.tamarackcommunity.ca/library/the-learnings-of-john-mcknight).

    Another interesting development is a growing interest in the way people lived in North America before the European Invastion. One good book on the subject is Robin Kimmerer’s “Braiding Sweetgrass”; another is F. David Peat’s “Blackfoot Physics”.

    • davidm58 says:

      Thanks for the comments Don. I’ll check out your links. I’ve heard good things about “Braiding Sweetgrass.”
      Keep your eye on this space for more Peter Pogany.

Leave a comment