William Robert Fogel on the Future of America [#Progress]

Back in 2000 William Robert Fogel, the great economic historian, published The Fourth Great Awakening and the Future of Egalitarianism. He argued that American politics, culture, and society has been driven by recurring cycles called “Great Awakenings”. Each cycle lasts about a century and each has three phases:

A cycle begins with a phase of religious revival, propelled by the tendency of new technological advances to outpace the human capacity to cope with ethical and practical complexities that those new technologies entail. The phase of religious revival is followed by one of rising political effect and reform, followed by a phase in which the new ethics and politics of the religious awakening come under increasing challenge and the political coalition promoted by the awakening goes into decline. These cycles overlap, the end of one cycle coinciding with the beginning of the next.

The dates of the awakenings are as follows (notice the overlap):

• First Great Awakening: 1730-1830
• Second Great Awakening: 1800-1920
• Third Great Awakening: 1890-?
• Fourth Great Awakening: 1960-?

The first three are widely recognized by historians while the fourth is Fogel’s own conception.

Here’s a quick characterization of the first phase of the fourth awakening (from the publisher’s link above):

1960-?: Return to sensuous religion and reassertion of experiential content of the Bible; rapid growth of the enthusiastic religions; reassertion of concept of personal sin; stress on an ethic of individual responsibility, hard work, a simple life, and dedication to family.

The second phase:

1990-?: Attack on materialist corruption; rise of pro-life, pro-family, and media reform movements; campaign for more value-oriented school curriculum; expansion of tax revolt; attack on entitlements; return to a belief in equality of opportunity.

After he’d presented his main argument, Fogel concluded the book with an afterward, “Whither Goes Our World?” I offer some passages from that for your consideration.

p. 236

The egalitarian tradition in the United States is alive and healthy. It is part of the bequest of my generation and my children’s generation to our grandchildren. The return to the principle of equality of opportunity as the touchstone of egalitarian progress is not a retreat but a recognition that, at very high average incomes for ordinary people, self-realization becomes the critical issue. Equal opportunity turns less on the command of physical capital now than it did at the close of the nineteenth century. Today, and for the foreseeable future, spiritual capital, especially command of those facets of knowledge that are both heavily rewarded in the marketplace and the key to opportunities of volwork, is the crux of the quest for self-realization.

What’s volwork? you ask. Earnwork is undertaken primarily to earn a living. Volwork, in contrast, is not undertaken to earn a living, but it may often involve vigorous and intense activity rather than lolling around in front of the TV. Fogel presents the following table (p. 189):

Discretionary time excludes 10 hours per day for sleep, eating, and hygiene. Discretionary time is accrued after entry into the labor force.

Expected years after entry into labor force: 50.1 for 1880, 58.4 for 1995 and 63 in 2040.

Expected years in labor force: 42.3 in 1880, 43 in 1995, and 33 in 2040.

Notice the earnwork hours exceed volwork hours by a considerable margin in 1880; that is reversed in 1995. Fogel goes on to remark: “It is the abundance of leisure time that promotes the search for a deeper understanding of the meaning of life and fuels engagement with the issues of the Fourth Great Awakening.”

p. 239

The traditional family is likely to become stronger. Culture is one engine of change. Business, educational, and government institutions are increasingly accommodating themselves to a labor force that places great emphasis on life outside work. The cultural effect of the Fourth Great Awakening, which emphasizes the bearing and rearing of children, is already visible in some new media programming that celebrates religion and the family. Technology, which once promoted large-scale enterprise and separated the workplace from the home, is now facilitating the reunification of workplace and home.

Major reductions in equality among nations over the next half century are also likely.

About that first paragraph, is that in fact what we’ve seen in the last two decades? I know there’s lots of talk about the need for work-life balance, but is there any action on that front? Certainly for a significant class of people the online networked world means that they’re now available for work 24/7/365. How many companies expect employees to honor that total availability for work? Certainly that’s the case for some start-ups, because that’s how start ups are. And beyond that? Is this “the reunification of workplace and home” about increasing opportunities for family life and volwork, or is it about increasing the claims of work on people’s lives?

Surely this has been/is being researched. What’s the data say? I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the data presented a complex picture showing differences among industries and types of work.

 pp. 239-240:

Still, our grandchildren will be faced with critical transitions. Although I expect that the impediments that block African Americans, Hispanics, other ethnic minorities, and women from reaching the highest positions in government and educational and business life will be removed, the will not be removed easily. Winning coalitions must be built and firmly dedicated to a smooth transition from a governing minority that is white and Protestant to a governing majority that is nonwhite and non-Protestant, one that does not sacrifice fundamental egalitarian ethical, political, social, and economic principles. These are dangerous passages attended by an array of contingencies, some favorable, some unfavorable, and arrival at the ultimate destination is not assumed. [...]

Some discoveries may even threaten the progress of civilization. I have in mind the continuing threat posed to the earth’s atmosphere and the ecosystem by the impending doubling of the population in the next half century or so, which some fear may do irreparable damage to the commensal balance among species. However, it is possible, perhaps likely, that progress in science and technology will yield practical and affordable solutions to these problems during the next half century.

More dire is the threat that enhanced scientific capacity may itself become a menace to fundamental human values.

Demographic challenges, pp. 240-242:

Danger to our grandchildren also lurks in the demography of aging. Assuming that life expectancy will increase ten to fifteen years and that the fertility rate will continue at current levels, by 2055 the average age of the population will be about forty-five. About a third of the population, including our grandchildren, will be over age sixty, enough to prevent entry into the best jobs if elderly professionals and executives choose to stay at work rather than retire.

Such a lock on the most fulfilling jobs could mean that younger workers will have to wait an extra decade, perhaps more, to get their turn. Moreover, since younger worker are a major source of new ideas, slowing down the rate of entry of the next generation may retard the pace of technological change. It may also slow down the rate at which women and ethnic minorities can advance professionally since native-born white males will form a larger proportion among the elderly holders of top jobs, women and ethnic minorities abounding among the younger workers who seek to replace them.

The solution to this problem will not be easy.

Finally, China, pp. 241-42:

If, as many believe, China (and much of the rest of Southeast Asia) resists and remains wedded to prevailing values (authority, filial obedience, and discipline), will our grandchildren be able to adjust to the end of an international crusade that has been so large a factor in American vitality during the twentieth century? Will they have to prepare for a cataclysmic war or learn to endure a protracted cultural and political stalemate?

Although the world that our grandchildren will inherit will be materially richer and contain fewer environmental risks, its spiritual struggles will be more complex and more intense than those of my generation. Ethical issues will be at the center of intellectual life, and engagement with these issues will form a larger part of the fabric of daily life than is the case today. The democratization of intellectual life will broaden spiritual debates and insinuate spiritual issues more deeply into political life.