Saturday, December 1, 2012


Budgets, bills, time constraints and deadlines. Good luck with that stretch! Acrylic on Bristol paper, 10x12 inches.


  1. Lately I'm of the mind that there's a growing demand for fine art and illustration that addresses the brink of "The Long Emergency" in an euphemistic way. What do you think?

    "One casualty will be what Kunstler calls our "hallucinatory" economy, epitomized by the stock market. The hugely complex financial instruments and trading schemes that now govern our economy have divorced real value from perceived or potential value. (Like mortgage shell games) The financial sector, now an "industry" in its own right, runs money shell games and pyramid schemes that work only if we maintain faith in perpetual economic growth. A psychological product of the oil fiesta, that faith won't survive, and the markets it supports won't either.

    Instead, we'll need to ratchet down our material expectations and live in austerity. We will need to produce essential goods locally, close to where we'll use them. We'll live in smaller, walkable cities surrounded not by malls but by farms. We'll all do more manual labor."

  2. Thanks for commenting Michael. I'm afraid you're correct on many points. I see our government's continued out of control spending and so many American's with an entitlement mentality and the Feds practice of printing money like we live in a Monopoly game to your list of a financial world that doesn't see reality.

  3. As a fine artist and commercial artist it seems for work to sell it touches on these subjects but the mood has to be light. Have you had these conversations? Or, as it seems, you might disagree with me on some points. I'm having lunch with nationally recognized fine artists Robert Jackson tomorrow. His work approaches these subjects but in a brilliantly whimsical way. I'm wondering how to bring this up.

    It seems two things are coming together at once. "The Long Emergency" and "The Iron Law of Oligarchy"

    The Iron Law of Oligarchy

    A hundred years ago a German sociologist, Robert Michael's came up with "The Iron Law of Oligarchy", which said that democracy will always devolve into oligarchies and plutocracies ruled by the few and ruled by the rich, unless the process is interrupted by a revolution.

    In America we've broken up these oligarchies by periodic revolutions. The revolution of 1776, the Civil War, the New Deal, every one about 80 years apart. And it's been 80 years since the New Deal started.

    This is in a very real way oligarchy. It's time for a revolution.

    Abraham Lincoln, December, 1847
    "[T]he habits of our whole species fall into three great classes - useful labour, useless labour and idleness. Of these the first only is meritorious; and to it all the products of labour rightfully belong; but the two latter, while they exist, are heavy pensioners upon the first, robbing it of a large portion of its just rights."
    He went on the say that government should drive useless labor out of existence. Mitt Romney on the other hand wants to defend the useless labor income of the Paris Hiltons of the world who make their livings sitting around the pool waiting for the dividend check to arrive and then pay a fraction of the income tax that working people must pay.

  4. More on "The Long Emergency"

    According to the authors of the 1972 book "Limits to Growth" which sparked the environmental movement, there will be die off of billions starting in and around 2050 - 2070.

    Club of Rome, Rotterdam, May 7th, 2012


    Thom Hartmann's conversation with Michael T. Klare, Author of fourteen books, including his latest "The Race for What's Left".

    We've been on this planet for 160,000 years. It's been 10,000 years since the agricultural revolution. It's only been since 1865 when Colonel Drake drilled the first commercial oil well in Titusville, PA and we've been using oil in a big way. And in that 160 years or so, our planet's population hit its first billion in 1800. We hit 2 billion in 1930. And now well into the age of oil we're pushing 7 billion. Would it be fair to say that the planet without oil, without our using ancient sunlight to run our machines and move our produce around, that could really only feed a billion people or fewer. Is that an accurate analysis in your mind?

    I think in general principle that's accurate. I don't want to be specific about numbers, how much the planet can support without oil, because with solar power and wind power we could probably replace oil for many purposes. But the basic premise is accurate. It's only with oil we've been able to increase the world population to where it is today. People don't appreciate how much food production today is dependent on cheap oil.