So what is "decadence" exactly?
Courtesy of the folks at dictionary.com we have two definitions:
However, this negative implicationa arises from certain assumptions, which I believe are incorrect in the context of a modern, technological society. Allow me to explain:
Thousands of years ago, human beings first started living as nomads and farmers, rather than simply as hunter-gatherers. This was because the hunter-gatherers had been so successful at being fruitful and multipying that there wasn't enough forage to go around anymore. It became necessary for people to take control of their food supplies, with the intent of increasing the amount of food available. Herders fostered their herds, and farmers their crops.
Unfortunately, these types of lifesyles, especially farming, involved a whole shitload of work, compared to the older, hunter-gatherer lifestyle. To quote my college anthropology TA, "Hunter-gatherers have got it easy." And he should know, since he lived with some for a while.
Eventually, farming cultures gave rise to what we commonly call "civilization"--namely, the tendency to live in cities. However, the intensive work required to continually grow food plants has remained necessary up until modern times, since cities require farms to supply their food. In fact, communities who worked harder had a distinct advantage over those who didn't, and thus the work ethic was born. Over thousands of years, this work ethic has evolved into something more and more strict, until reaching the point where work is considered the sole reason for a person's existance. Indeed, a person is now defined by what type of work they do, and is expected to devote the bulk of their time to this work, leaving little time left over for the more pleasurable, less productive aspects of humanness.
It is my contention that, due to the power of modern technology, especially farming technology, it is no longer necessary for all of us to be slaving our asses off for our entire lives. We don't really benefit by it--in fact, the primary benefit goes to whoever we are working for. This is a bullshit system, and it needs to stop. Decadence is the key.
It is common to hear social conservatives making statements decrying the tragic loosening of morals in modern society. The implication of these complaints, which becomes more and more clear over time, is the belief that if decadent behavior is allowed, it will inevitably lead to the downfall of society (which is why definitions of "decadence" inevitably include terms like "decay", "degenerate", and so on).
2000 years ago, or even 200 years ago, this was true. Nowadays, it is not. We have machines now which can do the work formerly done by entire communities of peasants or slaves. But rather than change our precious social system, which in reality is little more than a modified variety of feudalism (in which a small number of landowners get rich off the labor of their social inferiors), we continue to spend the bulk of our lives enriching our betters--people who are fully willing to throw us out on the street as soon as their precious profits dry up. The fact that people not only continue to put up with this, but that the endentured classes will actually argue in favor of this system in exchange for a few shiney baubles (a new car, a big-screen TV, etc.) is surely proof that human beings are not nearly as intelligent as advertised.
People, we shouldn't be working all day, we should be fucking our brains out. We should be frolicking naked in the sun (which would be safe to do, if only the owners hadn't fucked up the ozone layer). Eat, drink and be merry, should be the order of the day. (And I'm pretty sure "be merry" is a euphamism for "fuck.")
Of course, we can't do this all the time--then society really would collapse. But I'd guess we could get by on a fraction of the amount of effort we're currently putting in.
(Disclaimer: I am also well aware that getting from here to there would not be a simple thing. Deliberately trying to re-engineer society is an endeavor frought with risk. But I don't think that's a legitimate reason not to try.)
1) A process, condition, or period of deterioration or decline, as in morals or art; decay.This definition, not surprisingly, is not what I'm interested in. Continuing:
2) often Decadence A literary movement especially of late 19th-century France and England characterized by refined aestheticism, artifice, and the quest for new sensations.This is closer to the mark. Dictionary.com typically includes definitions from more than one dictionary, so there is also this:
n : the state of being degenerate in mental or moral qualitiesAgain the implication is negative.
However, this negative implicationa arises from certain assumptions, which I believe are incorrect in the context of a modern, technological society. Allow me to explain:
Thousands of years ago, human beings first started living as nomads and farmers, rather than simply as hunter-gatherers. This was because the hunter-gatherers had been so successful at being fruitful and multipying that there wasn't enough forage to go around anymore. It became necessary for people to take control of their food supplies, with the intent of increasing the amount of food available. Herders fostered their herds, and farmers their crops.
Unfortunately, these types of lifesyles, especially farming, involved a whole shitload of work, compared to the older, hunter-gatherer lifestyle. To quote my college anthropology TA, "Hunter-gatherers have got it easy." And he should know, since he lived with some for a while.
Eventually, farming cultures gave rise to what we commonly call "civilization"--namely, the tendency to live in cities. However, the intensive work required to continually grow food plants has remained necessary up until modern times, since cities require farms to supply their food. In fact, communities who worked harder had a distinct advantage over those who didn't, and thus the work ethic was born. Over thousands of years, this work ethic has evolved into something more and more strict, until reaching the point where work is considered the sole reason for a person's existance. Indeed, a person is now defined by what type of work they do, and is expected to devote the bulk of their time to this work, leaving little time left over for the more pleasurable, less productive aspects of humanness.
It is my contention that, due to the power of modern technology, especially farming technology, it is no longer necessary for all of us to be slaving our asses off for our entire lives. We don't really benefit by it--in fact, the primary benefit goes to whoever we are working for. This is a bullshit system, and it needs to stop. Decadence is the key.
It is common to hear social conservatives making statements decrying the tragic loosening of morals in modern society. The implication of these complaints, which becomes more and more clear over time, is the belief that if decadent behavior is allowed, it will inevitably lead to the downfall of society (which is why definitions of "decadence" inevitably include terms like "decay", "degenerate", and so on).
2000 years ago, or even 200 years ago, this was true. Nowadays, it is not. We have machines now which can do the work formerly done by entire communities of peasants or slaves. But rather than change our precious social system, which in reality is little more than a modified variety of feudalism (in which a small number of landowners get rich off the labor of their social inferiors), we continue to spend the bulk of our lives enriching our betters--people who are fully willing to throw us out on the street as soon as their precious profits dry up. The fact that people not only continue to put up with this, but that the endentured classes will actually argue in favor of this system in exchange for a few shiney baubles (a new car, a big-screen TV, etc.) is surely proof that human beings are not nearly as intelligent as advertised.
People, we shouldn't be working all day, we should be fucking our brains out. We should be frolicking naked in the sun (which would be safe to do, if only the owners hadn't fucked up the ozone layer). Eat, drink and be merry, should be the order of the day. (And I'm pretty sure "be merry" is a euphamism for "fuck.")
Of course, we can't do this all the time--then society really would collapse. But I'd guess we could get by on a fraction of the amount of effort we're currently putting in.
(Disclaimer: I am also well aware that getting from here to there would not be a simple thing. Deliberately trying to re-engineer society is an endeavor frought with risk. But I don't think that's a legitimate reason not to try.)
posted by cke at 12:49 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home