The following idea is from The Communist Manifesto, by Karl Marx, published in 1848. This was a highly influential book that continues to shape social, economic, and political thought to this day. Read my mini-review and overall impressions of The Communist Manifesto.
The lower middle class, the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the peasant, all these fight against the bourgeoisie, to save from extinction their existence as fractions of the middle class. They are therefore not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay more, they are reactionary, for they try to roll back the wheel of history.
The lower middle class, the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the peasant, all these fight against the bourgeoisie, to save from extinction their existence as fractions of the middle class. They are therefore not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay more, they are reactionary, for they try to roll back the wheel of history.~Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto
As we examine our modern society, we know that the middle class is stereotypically Republican. They hold conservative political views.
By definition of the term conservative, they wish to conserve the existing social order. We may think that our political views are arrived at by reason, but it is more than likely that they are more reflective of our position in society. Conservatives are perfectly contented that they are not on the bottom of the social order, so they would just as well maintain that position, even if they are willing to admit that the social order is flawed.
For if we were to reorganize society, how are they do know that they wouldn't get the short end of the stick? From their point of view, why should they fight for equality when it is much more desirable to remain above the majority?
It is important to remember that it has always been this way throughout history. This was the case during Marx's time, and he was able to make this observation by examining the time periods before him.
It's the same old Darwinian impulse - to bicker and fight for position in the status hierarchy. Chimps and monkeys who are in the middle of their social hierarchy act the same way. They will fight and help defend the topmost monkeys when those are threatened so that they can maintain their own mediocre place in the hierarchy. They are careful and conservative. They don't dare strive for anything better, lest they lose it all. Mediocrity is better than being on the bottom.
But as Marx says, this is a reactionary point of view. This is how our genes mandate that we act when we are in that particular position in society. That has mathematically been the optimal strategy to follow for maximal genetic replication.
But it doesn't serve humanity, and it doesn't serve ourselves. If there is a point that I keep trying to make, it is that the potential of humanity is held back and enslaved by our genes. But we can't see it. We have been specifically designed to never see it. Progress is generally made when a single man manages to shake of the shackles and pull the entire race forward. Religion is a system we have devised to interfere with the normal Darwinian programming and provide a means for accomplishing that, and for that it is to be commended. Nay, for that it is to be praised.
If a single man can pull the entire human race forward, what will happen when every single person on the planet becomes such a man?
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Do you agree with this idea? Perhaps you like the idea but you disagree with my interpretation? Let your voice be heard.