CHAPTER ONE
THE NEW ROME
The Decaying City
The form was still the same, but the animating
health and vigor were fled.
âEdward Gibbon, The History of the Decline
and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776â1789)
Picture a man of the late nineteenth century, perhaps your own great-grandfather, sitting in an ordinary American home of 1890. And now pitch him forward in an H. G. Wells machine, not to our time but about halfwayâto that same ordinary American home, circa 1950.
Why, the poor gentleman of 1890 would be astonished. His old home is full of mechanical contraptions. There is a huge machine in the corner of the kitchen, full of food and keeping the milk fresh and cold! There is another shiny device whirring away and seemingly washing miladyâs bloomers with no human assistance whatsoever! Even more amazingly, there is a full orchestra playing somewhere within his very house. No, wait, itâs coming from a tiny box on the countertop!
The music is briefly disturbed by a low rumble from the front yard, and our time-traveler glances through the window: a metal conveyance is coming up the street at an incredible speedâwith not a horse in sight. Itâs enclosed with doors and windows, like a house on wheels, and it turns into the yard, and the doors open all at once, and two grown-ups and four children all get outâjust like that, as if itâs the most natural thing in the world! He notices there is snow on the ground, and yet the house is toasty warm, even though no fire is lit and there appears to be no stove. A bell jingles from a small black instrument on the hall table. Good heavens! Is this a âtelephoneâ? Heâd heard about such things, and that the important people in the big cities had them. But to think one would be here in his very own home! He picks up the speaking tube. A voice at the other end says there is a call from across the countryâand immediately there she is, a lady from California talking as if she were standing next to him, without having to shout, or even raise her voice! And she says sheâll see him tomorrow!
Oh, very funny. Theyâve got horseless carriages in the sky now, have they?
What marvels! In a mere sixty years!
But then he espies his Victorian time machine sitting invitingly in the corner of the parlor. Suppose he were to climb on and ride even farther into the future. After all, if this is what an ordinary American home looks like in 1950, imagine the wonders he will see if he pushes on another six decades!
So on he gets, and sets the dial for our own time.
And when he dismounts he wonders if heâs made a mistake. Because, aside from a few design adjustments, everything looks pretty much as it did in 1950: the layout of the kitchen, the washer, the telephone.... Oh, wait. Itâs got buttons instead of a dial. And the station wagon in the front yard has dropped the woody look and seems boxier than it did. And the folks getting out seem ... larger, and dressed like overgrown children.
And the refrigerator has a magnet on it holding up an endless list from a municipal agency detailing what trash you have to put in which colored boxes on what collection days.
But other than that, and a few cosmetic changes, he might as well have stayed in 1950.
Letâs pause and acknowledge the one exception to the above scenario: the computer. Instead of having to watch Milton Berle on that commode-like thing in the corner, as one would in 1950, you can now watch Uncle Miltie on YouTube clips from your iPhone. But be honest, aside from that, whatâs new? Your horseless carriage operates on the same principles it did a century ago. Itâs added a CD player and a few cup holders, but you canât go any faster than you could fifty years back. As for that great metal bird in the sky, commercial flight hasnât advanced since the introduction of the 707 in the 1950s. Air travel went from Wilbur and Orville to bi-planes to flying boats to jetliners in its first half-century, and then for the next half-century it just sat there, like a commuter twin-prop parked at Gate 27B at LaGuardia waiting for the mysteriously absent gate agent to turn up and unlock the jetway.
Other arenas arenât quite as static as the modern American airport, but nor do they move at the same clip they used to. When was the last big medical breakthrough? I mean âbigâ in the sense of something that takes a crippling worldwide disease man has accepted as a cruel fact of life and so clobbers it that a generation on nobody gives it a thought. Thatâs what the polio vaccine did in 1955. Why havenât we done that for Alzheimerâs? Today, we have endless âraces for the cure,â and colored ribbons advertising oneâs support for said races for the cure, and yet fewer cures. Itâs not just pink ribbons for breast cancer, and gray ribbons for brain cancer, and white for bone cancer, but also yellow ribbons for adenosarcoma, light blue for Addisonâs Disease, teal for agoraphobia, periwinkle for acid reflux, pink and blue ribbons for amniotic fluid embolisms, and pinstripe ribbons for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. We have had phenomenal breakthroughs in hues of awareness-raising ribbons. Yet for all the raised awareness, very few people seem aware of how the whole disease-curing business has ground to a halt.
Compare the Twenties to the Nineties: in the former, the discovery of insulin and penicillin, plus the first vaccines for tuberculosis, diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough, on and on. In the last decade of the twentieth century, what? A vaccine for Hepatitis A, and Viagra. Good for erectile dysfunction, but what about inventile dysfunction? In October 1920, a doctor in London, Ontario, Frederick Banting, had an idea as to how insulin might be isolated and purified and used to treat diabetes, which in those days killed you.1 By August 1922, Elizabeth Hughes, the daughter of Americaâs Secretary of State and a diabetic near death, was being given an experimental course of the new treatment. By January 1923, Eli Lilly & Company were selling insulin to American druggists. Thatâs it: a little over two years from concept to patient. Not today: the U.S. Food and Drug Administration now adds half a decade to the process by which a treatment makes it to market, and theyâre getting slower. Between 1996 and 1999, the FDA approved 157 new drugs. Between 2006 and 2009, the approvals fell by halfâto 74.2 What happens during that half-decade? People die, non-stopâas young Elizabeth Hughes would have died under the âprotectionâ of todayâs FDA. Because statism has no sense of proportion. You can still find interesting articles about new discoveries that might have implications for, say, Parkinsonâs disease. But thatâs all youâll find: articles, in periodicals, lying around your doctorâs waiting room. The chances of the new discovery advancing from the magazine on the coffee table to your prescription are less and less. To begin the government-approval process is to enter what the cynics of the twenty-first-century research biz call the valley of death.
When America Alone came out, arguing that the current conflict is about demographic decline, globalized psychoses, and civilizational confidence, a lot of folks objected, as well they might: seeing off supple amorphous abstract nouns is not something advanced societies do well. Youâre looking at it the wrong way, I was told. Technocratic solutions, new inventions, the old can-do spirit: thatâs the American way, and thatâs what will see us through.
Well, okay, so where is it?
CRESCENT MOON
Half a century ago, the future felt different. Take 1969, quite a year in the aerospace biz: in one twelve-month period, we saw the test flight of the Boeing 747, the maiden voyage of the Concorde, the RAFâs deployment of the Harrier âjump jet,â and Neil Armstrongâs âgiant step for mankind.â Buzz Aldrin packed a portable tape player with him on Apollo 11, and so Sinatraâs ring-a-ding-ding recording of âFly Me to the Moonâ became the first (human) music to be flown to the moon and played there.3 Had any other nation beaten NASA to it, theyâd have marked the occasion with the âOde to Joyâ or Also Sprach Zarathustra, something grand and formal. But thereâs something marvelously American about the first human being to place his feet on the surface of a heavenly sphere standing there with a cassette machine blasting out Frank and the Count Basie band in a swinginâ Quincy Jones arrangementâthe insouciant swagger of the American century breaking the bounds of the planet.
In 1961, before the eyes of the world, President Kennedy had set American ingenuity a very specific challengeâand put a clock on it:
This nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth.4
Thatâs it. No wiggle room. A monkey on the moon wouldnât count, nor an unmanned drone, nor a dune buggy that canât take off again but transmits grainy footage back to Houston as it rusts up in the crater it came to rest in. The only way to win the bet is with a real-live actual American standing on the surface of the moon planting the Stars and Stripes. Even as it happened, the White House was so cautious that William Safire wrote President Nixon a speech to be delivered in the event of disaster:
Fate has ordained that the men who went to the moon to explore in peace will stay on the moon to rest in peace ...5
Yet America did it. âFly Me to the Moon/Let me sing forever more.â What comes after American yearning and achievement? Democratization: âEverybody Gets to Go the Moon.â That all but forgotten Jimmy Webb song from 1969 catches the spirit of the age:
Isnât it a miracle
That weâre the generation
That will touch that shiny bauble with our own two hands?
Whatever happened to that?
Four decades later, Bruce Charlton, professor of Theoretical Medicine at the University of Buckingham in England, wrote that âthat landing of men on the moon and bringing them back alive was the supreme achievement of human capability, the most difficult problem ever solved by humans.â
6 Thatâs a good way to look at it: the political class presented the boffins with a highly difficult and specific problem, and they solved itâin eight years. Charlton continued:
Forty years ago, we could do itârepeatedlyâbut since then we have not been to the moon, and I suggest the real reason we have not been to the moon since 1972 is that we cannot any longer do it. Humans have lost the capability.
Of course, the standard line is that humans stopped going to the moon only because we no longer wanted to go to the moon, or could not afford to, or something.... But I am suggesting that all this is BS.... I suspect that human capability reached its peak or plateau around 1965-75âat the time of the Apollo moon landingsâand has been declining ever since.
Can that be true? Charlton is a controversialist gadfly in British academe, but, comparing 1950 to the early twenty-first century, our time traveler from 1890 might well agree with him. And, if you think about it, isnât it kind of hard even to imagine America pulling off a moon mission now? The countdown, the takeoff, a camera transmitting real-time footage of a young American standing in a dusty crater beyond our planet blasting out from his iPod Lady Gaga and the Black-Eyed Peas or whatever the twenty-first-century version of Sinatra and the Basie band is.... It half-lingers in collective consciousness as a memory of faded grandeur, the way a ninetheenth-century date farmer in Nasiriyah might be dimly aware that the Great Ziggurat of Ur used to be around here someplace.
So what happened? According to Professor Charlton, in the 1970s âthe human spirit began to be overwhelmed by bureaucracy.â The old can-do spirit? Oh, you can try to do it, but theyâll toss every obstacle in your path. Go on, give it a go: invent a new medical device; start a company; go to the airport to fly to D.C. and file a patent. Everythingâs longer, slower, more soul-crushing. And the decline in âhuman capabilityâ will only worsen in the years ahead, thanks not just to excess bureaucracy but insufficient cash.
âYes, we can!â droned the dopey Obamatrons of 2008. No, we canât, says Charlton, not if you mean âland on the moon, swiftly win wars against weak opposition and then control the defeated nation, secure national borders, discover breakthrough medical treatments, prevent crime, design and build to a tight deadline, educate people so they are ready to work before the age of 22....â
Houston, we have a much bigger problem.
To be sure, thereâs still something called âNASAâ and it still stands for the âNational Aeronautics and Space Administration.â But thereâs not a lot of either aeronautics or space in the in-box of the agencyâs head honcho. A few days after Charlton penned his elegy for human capability, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden appeared on al-Jazeera and explained the brief heâd been given by President Obama:
One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math; he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and third and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science and math and engineering.7
Islam: The final frontier! To boldly go where no diversity outreach consultant has gone before! Whatâs âforemostâ for NASA is to make Muslims âfeel goodâ about their contributions to science. Why, as recently as the early ninth century Muhammad al-Khwarizmi invented the first universal horary quadrant! Things have been a little quiet since then, or at least since Taqi-al-Dinâs observatory in Istanbul was razed to the ground by the Sultanâs janissaries in 1580. If you hear a Muslim declaring âWe have lift off!â itâs likely to be a triumphant ad-lib after lighting up his crotch. As far as I recall, the most recent Islamic contribution to the subject of space exploration came from Britainâs most prominent imam, Abu Hamza, who in 2003 declared that the fate of the space shuttle Columbia was Godâs punishment âbecause it carried Americans, an Israeli and a Hindu, a trinity of evil against Islam.â8
Itâs easy to laugh at the likes of Abu Hamza, although not as easy as it should be, not in Europe and Canada, where the state is eager to haul you into court for âIslamophobia.â But the laughâs on us. NA...