Editor’s Note: The following interview was given by Joseph Pearce, author of Small is Still Beautiful (ISI Books), to the French journal, L’Homme Nouveau.

Question: Through international bodies or global economical and financial networks, a certain human conception seems to be imposed onto humankind. Is this conception your finding?

Mr. Pearce: Yes. The whole of human society, politically, economically and culturally, is being remoulded by powerful international and transnational bodies and networks in order to pursue and actualize the globalist agenda. This remolding and remodeling of human society is being pursued without a democratic mandate and without the interests of the peoples of the world in mind. It is being pursued by the richest and most powerful people in the world to serve their own interests, riding roughshod over the interests of the vast majority of mankind. The system being put in place by the globalists is nothing less than the largest plutocracy in human history.

In “Small is Still Beautiful,” you take in E.F. Schumacher’s works and actualize them. Do you think there is a relation between the view of the man who extols birth control, eugenics, euthanasia, abortion and the utopia of ‘gigantism’?

Yes, there is. Indeed it is ironic that the global plutocrats mentioned above have the same agenda of social engineering as do the socialists. It is no coincidence that Bill Gates and Barack Obama share essentially the same views on birth control, eugenics, and abortion, or that they are both pursuing the agenda of the culture of death with the same proselytizing zeal.

In the long-term, however, the culture of death will kill itself. Birth control leads to an aging and ultimately shrinking population. The smaller proportion of the population who are of working age will not be able to support the burgeoning elderly population, with the inevitable consequence that euthanasia will become widespread as a means of killing off the old and the sick. Those who are too poor to pay for their own retirement or medical expenses, which will be the vast majority of people, will be pressured to allow themselves to be euthanized, though euthanasia will probably be given a new spin, in which we will talk about putting the sick and the elderly to sleep or putting them to rest, the same sort of euphemistic language that we now use when we euthanize our dogs and cats. Such is the price that the majority of people will have to pay for the removal of the concept of human dignity in the service of socially engineered utopia.

The ultimate irony is that the utopia of gigantism will be destroyed by the very social engineering that it puts in place. A global economic system that is dependent on incessant growth will become unsustainable as the global population shrinks. The culture of death, like all parasites, kills itself when it kills the host culture on which it feeds.

In the opposite direction, do you think it is possible to establish a relation between a society which would lean on Schumacher’s principle—Small is Beautiful—and respect of human life from its conception to its natural death?

As a direct and inescapable correlative of the scenario described above, in which the eugenic agenda of the globalists leads to social and political catastrophe, and ultimately to catastrophic economic implosion, it could be argued that Schumacher’s principle of human-scale economic and political structures is the only sustainable and the only sane alternative.

Instead of government becoming bigger and ultimately global, moving further and further away from the ordinary people it is theoretically meant to serve, we need the reinvigoration of small government and the devolving of power away from central government, thereby bringing government closer to the people. This is showing proper respect for the dignity of the human person and the political freedom that this dignity demands.

Instead of economic structures becoming bigger and ultimately global, with globalized corporate management moving further and further away from individual employees, we need the revitalization of small businesses. This is showing proper respect for the dignity of the human person and the economic freedom that this dignity demands.

Finally, the family is at the very heart of Schumacher’s vision. The family is the smallest and most beautiful political and economic structure within human society. There can be no small or beautiful future without the strengthening of the small and beautiful institution of the family. If the family is weakened, the very fabric of human society is weakened. If the family is destroyed, human society will be destroyed. In this context, it comes as no surprise that Schumacher was a great advocate of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical, Humanae Vitae.

Does the notion of global overcrowding not imply an answer in the direction of Big is Beautiful? Global problem, global response…

As explained above, the long-term problem is not one of overcrowding but of under-population. The indigenous populations of Europe and North America are shrinking and China’s one-child policy will ultimately cause the collapse of its burgeoning economy. The problem that we face is not a population explosion but a population implosion.

The whole notion of a global problem requiring a global solution is rooted in a false logic. Effectively, it is saying that because bigness causes problems we need even more bigness to solve them. This is the error of both socialism and capitalist globalism. The problems caused by big government and big business are not solved by making the cause of the problem bigger!

What type of danger does the idea of a global government possess? How can we get out of this danger completely?

The very idea that any form of global government can be democratic in any meaningful sense is preposterous. The centralization of more and more power into fewer and fewer hands is not democratic. Global government will be tyrannical. Make no mistake about it. Globalism necessitates the destruction of freedom and must, therefore, be opposed by all those who value human liberty. We must combat the centralist tendency of globalism by doing all that we can to restore the decentralist tendency of localism. In practical terms, this means that we must resist the surrender of national sovereignty to globalist entities. It also means that, within nations, we should work towards the reinvigoration of local and regional government. In terms of economics, we should understand that every dollar or euro that we spend is an economic “vote” that will bring globalism to power, if we spend our money on globalist products, but will help restore healthy local economies if we spend our money on local products. The environmentalist mantra “think globally, act locally” is true insofar that globalism is so unthinkably evil that we have to resist it where we can, which is where we are, on our own doorsteps.

Finally, can we not say that the solutions are in the principles offered by the Church through its social doctrine?

Yes, the Catholic Church’s social doctrine has the answers to all these problems. The social encyclicals of Leo XIII, Pius XI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI espouse the principle of subsidiarity and insist upon the dignity of the human person. The sanity of subsidiarity is the solution to the madness of globalism, and the defense of the dignity of human life is the only defense against the indignity of the culture of death. The ultimate bottom line is that a society without faith is a society without a future.

The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.

All comments are moderated and must be civil, concise, and constructive to the conversation. Comments that are critical of an essay may be approved, but comments containing ad hominem criticism of the author will not be published. Also, comments containing web links or block quotations are unlikely to be approved. Keep in mind that essays represent the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Imaginative Conservative or its editor or publisher.

Leave a Comment
Print Friendly, PDF & Email