COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	June 28
C00010 ENDMK
C⊗;
June 28

For Hidaka

1. technology

2. desperation and the need to be able to live peacefully and accept 
representative demicracy - violence against representative democracy
as a tactic

3. left wing conformity

4. blueprints

Dear Professor Hidaka:

I read the English language edition of your book "The Price of Affluence" 
purchased on a visit to Japan, and it gave me much to think about.  I have
some comments on some of the issues discussed.  First let me introduce
myself. I am a professor of computer science, and I work in the field of
artificial intelligence. I was brought up to believe in Marxism in its
communist form, but I dropped that in 1953 and after 1970 became conservative 
in politics. I shall comment on four matters.

1. Technology. It has been claimed that the increase in standard of living
of the poor countries will require that rich countries such as Japan and
the United States reduce their standard of living. Many who discuss this
question propose to answer it on the basis of sociological or economic 
principles.  Thus, some say that attainment of equality among nations
requires that those who have more give up something to those who have less.
Others say that the principles of economics prove that the poor countries
can reach any given level if only they organize their economics properly.

In my opinion the answer depends on answering a number of detailed 
technological questions. What levels of production of food, energy, minerals,
etc. are required?  What substitutions are needed and possible for resources
that will run out?  What changes will be required to avoid enviornmental
changes that will threaten human life, enjoyment or continued productivity?
Can productivity be increased so that no-ones prosperity, leisure and
cultural opportunities depend on someone else living in poverty? I have
studied some of these technological questions in detail, and I agree with
the other scientists who have concluded that the answer to all these 
questions is positive.  Present science makes possible technologies that 
can support several times the earth's present populations at standards 
of comsumption several times higher than those of today's richest countries
for millions and perhaps billions of years. Further scientific discoveries
will make this easier.

The above does not answer either the question of whether the present or a
future social organization will achieve this result. It also doesn't answer
whether such levels of consumption will be desired by individuals or by 
societies.

My own opinion, for which I will not offer arguments here, is that a high
standard of consumption will be desired by individuals, and will result
in the highest number living at a high intellectual, cultural and moral
level.

My next point involves political, sociological and economic considerations
as well as technological considerations.  It seems to me that the example
of the rapidly industrializing Asian countries shows that the present 
international trade situation permits any country to make economic progress
through its own efforts.  Foreign aid can help but isn't essential.  
Furthermore, as P.T. Brown has argued, it is often harmful, because it is used
to expand bureaucracy that suck up domestic resources as well.

Most harmful of all to the poor countries is the belief, which your book
fosters, that their poverty is the fault of Japan and the other advanced
countries and can be alleviated by coercing these countries into giving
more. This allows politicians whose policies divert domestic resources
into bureauacracy to retain support by diverting militancy at foreign targets.

2. Living in peace. There are many causes for which people are killing others
these days. I am doubtful about the person living in a peaceful society with
representative democracy who says he is willing to die for some cause. I want
to ask him, "How many people are you willing to kill for the cause? Are you
willing to tell lies for it? Are you willing to overlook injustice or 
unfairness on the part of you allies? Do you ascribe evil or bad motives to
people who disagree with you?

China since the days of Mao may alsobe an example of a poor country 
progressing through its own efforts. However, the Chinese communist ability
to generate favorable publicity in the West is so great that I can't be
sure that their seeming progress isn't just another successful lie.

I am very doubtful about your criticism of the consumption-oriented
person, because the consuption-oriented peron in prosperous societies is
peaceful if given a reasonable aspirations. He accepts the fact that the side
he favors cannot always win the elections.
-------