fbpx
01 / 05
Abundance Doesn’t End

Blog Post | Energy & Natural Resources

Abundance Doesn’t End

Ideas are not like a jar of jellybeans. We’ll never reach the bottom and go hungry.

Summary: This article challenges the pessimistic view of Emmanuel Macron, who declared the end of the age of abundance due to various crises and shortages. It argues that abundance is the product of freedom and knowledge, meaning political decisions, not physical limits, are what restrict further growth and prosperity.


This article was originally published in The Spectator.

It is political decisions that limit growth and freedom.

Speaking to his ministers at the Élysée Palace last Thursday, the très sérieux Emmanuel Macron called for unity and sacrifice as he announced the end of the age of abundance because of a parade of horrors, including global warming, war in Ukraine, and the ongoing supply problems.

“What we are currently living through is a kind of major tipping point or a great upheaval,” said Macron. “We are living through the end of what could have seemed an era of abundance…the end of the abundance of products, of technologies that seemed always available…the end of the abundance of land and materials including water.”

What is abundance, though? It is the product of modernity – a singular episode in the 300,000-year history of our species that gradually lifted humanity from starvation, disease, early death, ignorance, and permanent war toward historically unprecedented plentitude of food, trebling of life expectancy, management, or complete eradication of a plethora of diseases, close to universal literacy and numeracy, and ‘merely’ episodic outbreaks of war.

The fact that people in the West were shocked by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine attests to a completely different mindset of us—the moderns—from that of our ancestors, who expected armies to cross borders every spring. The same can be said of our approach to the Covid pandemic. Europeans of yore ascribed pandemics to God’s wrath or the passage of Saturn, not tiny organisms that could be defeated with mRNA vaccines.

Modernity started in the Low Countries and in the United Kingdom some 300 years ago, before spreading to much of the rest of the world. Many factors set the stage for this salubrious break with our brutish past, including the Age of Discovery and the introduction of the New World staples to the Continent, the Scientific Revolution that elevated empirical evidence and practical experimentation above the wisdom of the ancients or pronouncements from authority, the Enlightenment that insisted on the primacy of logic and reason, and the Industrial Revolution that harnessed new sources of energy to make humanity much more productive and vastly richer.

The thread that ties different aspects of modernity—technology, science, medicine, production processes, and so on—together is the notion of “continuous innovation.” Of course, man always innovated (we gained control of fire perhaps as early as 1.7 million years ago, for example), but our discoveries were sporadic and, sometimes, reversible. Efflorescences of relative prosperity—Rome of the Antonines and China under the Song dynasty spring to mind—occasionally arose but always petered out, and “dark ages” often followed. All that changed in the second half of the 18th century, when the Western world chanced upon a sustained process of generating, accumulating, and actuating new knowledge. We have been scaling the ladder of human progress ever since.

The process of sustained innovation is chiefly driven by population growth and freedom. Knowledge creation starts with new ideas that originate in the human mind. More minds generate more ideas. It is these ideas that lead to new inventions, which are then tested by the market forces to separate the more valuable from the less valuable. At the end of the market test, humans are left with innovations that drive productivity, economic growth, and large increases in the standards of living. But large populations are not enough to sustain abundance. To innovate, people must be allowed to think, speak, publish, associate, and disagree. They must be allowed to save, invest, trade, and profit. In a word, they must be free.

The social environment, then, provides the incentives that either encourage or discourage individuals to manifest and actuate their ideas. Individuals, who lack equal legal rights, and face onerous regulatory burdens, confiscatory taxation, or insecure property rights, will be disincentivized from turning their ideas into inventions and innovations. Conversely, people who function under conditions of legal equality, sensible regulation, moderate taxation, and secure property rights will apply their talents to their benefit and, ultimately, to that of society.

The modernity of prosperity happened because western Europe and its offshoots stopped disincentivizing innovation and allowed their citizens to contend with new ideas without fear of ostracism, imprisonment, mutilation, or death. Similarly, they allowed for greater freedom of investment and trade without the fear of predation by the nobility or the suffocating hand of a government bureaucrat. Where Holland and the United Kingdom pioneered the way, the United States followed.

Consider an American manufacturing worker. Relative to his wages, the price of pork, rice, cocoa, wheat, corn, coffee, lamb, and beef fell by 98.4 percent, 97.6 percent, 97.1 percent, 96.7 percent, 96.1 percent, 93.8 percent, 78.6 percent, and 75.5 percent respectively between 1900 and 2018. That means that the same length of time that bought 1 pound of each commodity in 1900, bought 62.6, 41.1, 34.8, 30.5, 25.6, 16.2, 4.7, and 4 pounds in 2018.

While people cannot eat rubber, aluminum, potash, or cotton, the prices of these commodities are valuable inputs in the production processes that impact the prices of goods and services, and hence the overall standard of living. Their prices fell by 99.4 percent, 98.9 percent, 98.2 percent, and 95.8 percent, respectively. All the while, the population of the United States rose from 76 million to 328 million.

When the growth of freedom and the accumulated stock of human knowledge mixed with the massively expanding population of the planet in the post-World War II era, abundance went global. Relative to income per person, the average price of the most widely used commodities fell by an average of 84 percent between 1960 and 2018.

The personal abundance of the average inhabitant of the globe rose from 1 to 6.27 or 527 percent. Put differently, for the same amount of time that one needed to work to buy one unit in a bucket of resources in 1960, one could get more than six in 2018. Over that 58-year period, the world’s population increased from 3 billion to 7.6 billion. Moreover, as Gale L. Pooley and I found in our upcoming book, Superabundance: The Story of Population Growth, Innovation, and Human Flourishing on an Infinitely Bountiful Planet, personal resource abundance increased faster than population in all 18 datasets that we analyzed. We call that relationship “superabundance.” Simply put, on average, every additional human being created more value than he consumed.

By our count, abundance has been doubling every 20 years or so. So, a 60-year-old Westerner has seen his standard of living rise from one to two, from two to four, and from four to 8 in his lifetime. Too slow, you say? That’s the modern mind speaking. Prior to the mid-18th century, life remained pretty much the same for millennia and no one thought that unusual. Generations of people lived and died without seeing or experiencing even the tiniest of improvements in their lives. What’s more, the scope for future improvements is immense.

Consider the future discovery of useful materials. The periodic table consists of roughly 100 elements. It took our tiny population of Earth dwellers (14 million in 3,000 BC) to discover that combining copper and tin could produce a useful metal that gave its name to the Bronze Age. A recipe for a useful two-element compound requires up to 9,900 combinations (100 x 99) and a four-element compound up to 94,109,400 combinations (100 x 99 x 98 x 97). Once you get to 10-element compounds, the Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Romer wrote: “There are more recipes than seconds since the big bang created the universe. As you keep going, it becomes obvious that there have been too few people on earth and too little time since we showed up, for us to have tried more than a minuscule fraction of all the possibilities.”

The world, in other words, is a closed system in the way that a piano is a closed system. The instrument has only 88 keys, but those keys can be played in a nearly infinite variety of ways. The same applies to our planet. The Earth’s atoms may be fixed, but the possible combinations of those atoms are infinite. The American economist Thomas Sowell once observed that: “The cavemen had the same natural resources at their disposal as we have today, and the difference between their standard of living and ours is a difference between the knowledge they could bring to bear on those resources and the knowledge used today.” What matters, then, is not the physical limits of our planet, but human freedom to experiment and reimagine the use of resources that we have.

And that’s where Emmanuel Macron re-enters the picture. For all the doom and gloom emanating from the Élysée, there are no material reasons why humanity must come to experience the end of abundance. Shortages today in large part are consequences of bad government decisions. Those include the shutdown of the global economy for a better part of two years and yes, excessive environmental zeal. Or, as Tyler Cowen, one of America’s most highly regarded economists noted last Thursday: “It is hard to regard European energy policy as anything other than a huge unforced error. Keep in mind that energy supplies are far more important than their percentage of GDP might suggest. Energy is the lifeblood of modern civilisation.”

Macron’s shortages are also, most likely, temporary. Many British readers of this fine publication will recall the Winter of Discontent in 1979, while readers in the United States will no doubt remember President Jimmy Carter’s “Malaise” speech of the same year. Things looked bad back then and despondency reigned. The good news is that bad politicians can be replaced, and bad government decisions can be reversed—just think of the Reagan and Thatcher revolutions of the 1980s. And, after an adjustment period, the marvelous wealth-creating machine that is global capitalism can start to hum again. Ideas are not like a jar of jellybeans. We’ll never reach the bottom and go hungry. Nor have we misplaced almost all our copper and iron. They are still here: every ounce of them. Just like the Stone Age man would have remembered. So long as the world continues to provide a safe home for free people, be it in Britain or America, human lives shall grow ever more abundant.

Blog Post | War

Grim Old Days: Lauro Martines’ Furies

Early modern war was waged not just with weapons, but also hunger and social collapse.

Summary: Through eyewitness accounts and harrowing detail, Lauro Martines’ book paints a grim portrait of premodern warfare, not as grand battles between armies but as prolonged campaigns of starvation, pillaging, and social collapse. Armies devastated both enemy and friendly territory alike, consuming entire regions’ food supplies and triggering waves of famine, cannibalism, and mass civilian death.


Lauro Martines’ book Furies: War in Europe, 1450–1700 powerfully illustrates the impact of war and war-driven famines. In 1633, during the Thirty Years War, Benedictine monk Maurus Friesenegger described Italian and Spanish soldiers with “blackened and yellowed faces,” who were “emaciated, only half dressed or in tatters.” In 1636, the archbishop of Burgos wrote to King Philip IV that most conscripts from his diocese “die of hunger before they reach the garrisons.”

Civilians also died of hunger as armies passed through their villages. To the agricultural laborers along an army’s route, even friendly (as opposed to enemy) troops could cause a food shortage. In Friesenegger’s firsthand account, he notes, “I can’t really say whether more was stolen by foreigners or by natives.”

In the Early Modern Era, “an army of twenty thousand men . . . exceeded the population of most European cities; and when that winding horde of soldiers, with ten to fifteen thousand horses, set out on campaign, it could easily eat up, in a few days, all the food and fodder in the adjacent villages and countryside for many miles around.” Armed runaway conscripts also ate their way through villages. “Desertion was rife, and in the early eighteenth century gangs of disciplined deserters occasionally terrorized rural communities.”

Foreign armies also famously pillaged without mercy. In 1710, an army composed of more than ten thousand of the Dutch Republic’s mercenaries descended upon Rumegies in France, and the diarist Alexandre Dubois recorded that “they destroyed everything. They took fifty cows and thirty horses; and having stolen things at will . . . they violated some of the women and killed several villagers with staff blows.” He observed that in less than three months, 180 villagers died, many from malnutrition rather than direct violence. Dubois wrote that survivors turned in desperation to eating the sort of bread “that dogs would not have eaten the year before.” In the 1630s, “the Hessian countryside was made desolate. Meat became a rarity, while ‘meager handfuls of grain’ were about as much of this substance as villagers were likely to see.”

Fearing pillaging soldiers, peasants and rural folk often fled to the nearest walled city—but these offered little protection from starvation if they were sieged. In the siege of the port city of La Rochelle in 1628, “some fifteen thousand Rochelais perished, mostly from starvation, out of a population of eighteen to twenty thousand inhabitants.”

From late 1572 to August 1573, the hilltop town of Sancerre in central France endured a brutal nine-month siege by a royal army during the war between France’s Catholics and Huguenot Protestants. Jean de Léry, a Huguenot pastor who lived through the siege, documented the ordeal. Léry relates how, after the people of Sancerre finished eating their working animals such mules and horses, they consumed their pets:

Then came the turn of the cats, “and soon all were eaten, the entire lot in fifteen days.” It followed that dogs “were not spared and were eaten as routinely as sheep in other times.” These too were sold, and Lery lists prices. Cooked with herbs and spices, people ate the entire animal. “The thighs of roasted hunting dogs were found to be especially tender and were eaten like saddle of hare.” Many people “took to hunting rats, moles, and mice,” but poor children in particular favored mice, which they cooked on coal, mostly without skinning or gutting them, and—more than eating—they wolfed them down with immense greed. Every tail, foot, or skin of a rat was nourishment for a multitude of suffering poor people.”

Léry also wrote of how the starving denizens of Sancerre ate nonfood objects of many kinds: weeds, shrubbery, straw, candle fat, and “not only white parchment, but also letters, title deeds, printed books, and manuscripts.”

[Léry] tells his readers how the Sancerrois, in their feverish search for food, cooked animal skins and leather, including harnesses, parchment, letters, books, and the membranes of drums. Some of the people who perished in Sancerre also ate pulverized bones and the hooves of horses. The skins, he tells us, including drumheads, were soaked for a day or two . . . They were then well scraped with a knife and boiled for the better part of a day, until they became tender and soft. This was determined “by scratching at the skins with your fingers” . . . Now, like tripe, they could be cut up into little pieces.

Many ate horse excrement “with great avidity,” according to Léry, combing the streets for “every kind of ordure,” whose “stink alone was enough to poison those who handled it, let alone the ones who ate it.” “I can affirm that human excrement was collected to be eaten,” Léry further laments.

Finally, some people turned to cannibalism. Léry wrote of how a grape-grower named Simon Potard, his wife, and an old woman in their household, had together eaten the brains, liver, and innards of Simon’s daughter, who was about three years old. Léry personally saw “the cooked tongue, finger” and other bodily remains of the toddler in a cooking pot, “mixed with vinegar, salt, and spices, and about to be put on the fire and cooked.” The cannibals claimed they only dismembered and ate the little girl after she had died of hunger, although many suspected she had been killed to be eaten. The townspeople had Simon “burned alive, his wife . . . strangled, and [the] body [of the old woman in their household] was dug out of its grave and burned. She had died on the day after their arrest.” Presumably the old woman died of starvation, despite her cannibalistic attempt to ward off that fate.

The harsh punishment was enacted because, as Léry put it, “it was to be feared—we had already seen the signs—that with the famine getting ever worse, the soldiers and the people would have given themselves not only to eating the bodies of those who had died a natural death, and those who had been killed in war or in other ways, but also to killing one another for food.”

The pattern of escalating desperation as starvation set in unfolded in every city under siege. During the Siege of Augsburg (1634–1635),

Pack animals, horses, and pets had disappeared from streets and houses. Eaten. Animal skins had gone the same way. All eatable greenery must also have disappeared before the onset of that icy winter, when the waters of the encircling moat, outside the city walls, froze over. As for eating carrion, some time earlier, the famine-stricken had been seen to gnaw at dead horses rotting in the streets. The eating of human flesh was inevitable. And the subject now broke into reports and conversation. Grave diggers complained that many bodies were brought to them missing breasts and other fleshy parts. What to make of this was only too obvious. “To his horror . . . a Swedish soldier who had stolen a woman’s shopping basket discovered flesh from a corpse.

Johann Georg Mayer, a neighboring village’s pastor who was staying in Augsburg, noted that due to widespread cannibalism “the bodies of the living had thus become the graves of the dead.”

Similarly, during the 1590 Siege of Paris, “hunger turned into keening famine” and dogs and cats were soon consumed, eventually followed by cannibalism.

[Bernardino de Mendoza], the Spanish ambassador who had witnessed strident hunger among Spain’s soldiers in the Netherlands in the 1570s, made a remarkable proposal to the city council. Thinking of food for the needy, he recommended that they mill and grind the bones of the dead in the Cemetery of the Innocents, mix the bone meal with water, and turn it into a breadlike substance. No one present appears to have objected to the recipe. It was also on this occasion, probably, that Mendoza spoke of a recent incident in which the Persians had reduced a Turkish fortress to the eating of a substance “made of ground-down and powdered bone.” With so many of the city’s poor having already eaten cooked animal skins, grass, weeds, garbage, vermin, the skulls of cats and dogs, and every kind of ordure, Parisians now ate the bones of their dead in the form of bone-meal bread. Reports of cannibalism surfaced insistently. The anonymous witness gives an account—one of the most detailed—of a Parisian lady whose two children . . . had starved to death. She dismembered, cooked, and ate them.

Amid the siege, Paris likely saw “ thirty thousand casualties: the results of starvation, malnutrition, sickness, and the violence of soldiers outside the city gates, where the starving often scurried about in search of something to eat.”

As food ran out, a besieged city would often expel residents deemed to be mere “useless mouths.” In 1554, a group of children fleeing besieged Siena, orphans from that city’s Hospital of Santa Maria della Scala, were killed when “a company of Spanish and German mercenaries pounced on one of the convoys and its charge of more than 250 children, ranging in ages from six to ten.” More expelled starving peasants tried to escape the city, but “time and again the besieging soldiers appear to have kicked, clubbed, and punched the unwanted ‘mouths’ back to the walls in a pitiless and bloody seesaw that went on for eight days, their victims fighting to stay alive by eating herbs and grass. In the end, about three fourths of them starved or were killed, some dying without ears and noses.” Soldiers often cut the ears and noses from people trying to escape sieges. The starving women expelled in 1406 from the besieged city of Pisa met that gruesome fate:

When the first group of poor women, now expelled from Pisa, appeared outside the city walls, Florence’s mercenaries refrained from killing them, in a show of mercy, but cut off the backs of their skirts and all the clothing over their backsides. They then proceeded to brand their buttocks with the fleur-de-lis, one of the devices on Florence’s coat of arms . . . When branding failed to stop the exit of poor women, the soldiers took to cutting off their noses and then driving them back again.

After the siege succeeded and the Florentines entered Pisa, they were faced with a terrifying scene of starvation:

Florentine reported that the appearance of the Pisans “was repugnant and frightening, with all their faces hollowed out by hunger.” Some of the soldiers went into the city carrying bread. They threw it at the starving inhabitants, at children in particular, and the reactions they got were shocking. They were seeing, they thought, “ravenous birds of prey,” with siblings tearing at each other for chunks of bread, and children fighting with their parents.

The food blockades were enforced with an iron fist. In 1634, a young peasant boy was killed outside the besieged city of Augsburg and his corpse was put on display with three larks tied to his belt; he was executed for the crime of attempting to sneak those larks into the city as food. During the Siege of Siena in 1554, the Marquis of Marignano, had surrounding trees “festooned with the bodies” of men executed by hanging for breaking the blockade.

The soldiers themselves often died of starvation, too. For example, in 1648, the Earl of Inchiquin, complained that “divers [sic] of my men have dyed [sic] of hunger after they lived a while upon catts [sic] and dogs.” In fact, “the mortality rate in French armies, even in peacetime, could attain a yearly average of 25 percent, while, for the entire century, European armies in general seem to have been ravaged at the rate of about 20 to 25 percent per year.”

The soldiers shared much in common with those they pillaged and starved. “Since more than 60 percent of soldiers came from humble rural and market-town stock, peasants in wartime were likely to be the victims, for the most part, of men who were much like themselves.”

NBC News | War

Armenia and Azerbaijan Agree on Treaty Terms

“Armenian and Azerbaijani officials said Thursday that they had agreed on the text of a peace agreement to end nearly four decades of conflict between the South Caucasus countries, a sudden breakthrough in a fitful and often bitter peace process…

However, the timeline for signing the deal is uncertain as Azerbaijan has said a prerequisite for its signature is a change to Armenia’s constitution, which it says makes implicit claims to its territory.

Armenia denies such claims, but Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has repeatedly said in recent months that the country’s founding document needs to be replaced and has called for a referendum to do so. No date has been set.”

From NBC News.

CNN | Energy Production

The US Is Dismantling Nuclear Warheads to Power Reactors

“Inside a highly classified facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee — the same facility that enriched uranium for the first atomic bomb in the era of the Manhattan Project — workers are turning old, unexploded warheads into fuel that will power cities.

The recipe to create advanced reactor fuel involves melting weapons-grade uranium with low-enriched uranium in a crucible — a massive, metal cauldron heated to around 2,500 degrees Fahrenheit to turn its contents into molten soup.

Emerging from its furnace, a glowing orange cast filled with the hot liquid uranium is slowly lowered into a cooling chamber. The hardened finished product, which looks like black charcoal, can be safely held in-hand.

This fuel is set to power the next generation of America’s nuclear reactors — small, modular power stations that are easier and cheaper to build. They require far less upkeep and physical space than the aging fleet of large nuclear power plants.”

From CNN.

Reuters | War

Colombia and ELN Rebels Extend Ceasefire by Six Months

“Colombia’s government and National Liberation Army (ELN) rebels have extended their bilateral ceasefire for another six months starting Tuesday, the same day they announced the creation of a fund backed by multiple donors to finance the process.

An initial six-month ceasefire expired last week and was then extended by five days.”

From Reuters.