The Post Protestant Paradigm
No religion? Well, we live in a Protestant world, or more precisely the post-Protestant paradigm of utilitarianism. It is so stripped down to essentials that even God is an option, although Progress is a given. It exists to condemn us all to be "happy", or at least to attempt to delude us that a constant round of fun will distract us from thinking about anything serious. It was discovered by painful experiment that the post-Catholic paradigm, dated to 1789 (major upgrades 1871 and 1917) ,Historical Necessity mediated by the Party, was simply not as effective as the 1688 model (upgrades in 1776 and post-1945). In the real Brave New World, world controller Mustapha Mond and his colleagues could not function without decentralisation, and the ideal has proved to be the self organising system of the market.
The post Protestant paradigm (the PPP from now on) really emerged as the sole faith around 1960. Franco was the last traditional leader of any note - the PPP Opus Dei seized control of the last Catholic theocracy in the 60s, and four decades on it is amongst the most immoderately liberal states on Earth. While the death rattle took thirty years, Communism was emotionally and intellectually dead by 1960 in the West (it took China another decade to discover that). Both the PCP and PPP were surprisingly socially conservative - the family and traditional social roles were taken for granted - and the death of competing faiths does make you wonder about the social revolution of the 60s. I have always thought that it was an amazing coup by the Frankfurt school fellow travellers, but conspiracies are rarely plausible on their own, it had to be pushing on an open door. Restraints destroyed by the lack of competing faiths; or the fact that, as the economic machine had supplied the developed world with necessities, the PPP machine needed to destroy traditional morality to keep consumption increasing? - interesting that in Japan, where traditional morality has survived better, the consumer state has failed to be established and the demographics have tanked more than elsewhere. Christopher Lasch considered the therapeutic state's relation to sociology as similar to Keynesianism's relations to classical economics and communism: true conservatives wanted to retain the traditional patriarchal family, and socialism toyed with destroying it, while the therapeutic state retains it in theory but autocratically directs it with experts.
Fascism was the only non-materialistic choice on offer (which is why the PRC is not fascist). At the moment it is a semi-fascistic strain of Islam, but interesting that while it has violence and demography as weapons, it make very few converts, while traditional Islam was still converting Indonesia, in a syncretic way, quite peacefully as late as the 19C. It does seem to repel non-adherents but galvanise the faithful, in the same way that Hitler only spoke to Germans. Other possible alternatives have either been converted into PPP therapeutics , in other words, techniques to help people be happy or reduce suffering, but not change the status quo. These include Christian Evangelicalism , also westernised Buddhism (self improvement, totally misses the point) and Hindu guruism.
The parallels with late Rome are seductive, but the problem is different. That was a brutal and loveless society, which needed to discover the love of God (agape) and a sense of sin. This may be a shallow world, with more than a touch of narcissm, but it is not loveless, by and large people do care for others, and are still committed to ideals like fairness. The problem is emptiness (the root of narcissm) - homo economicus has no soul, which is why existentialism, authenticity, deliverance through art are all empty suits.
I have been reading conservative writers recently, and they are like annoying office juniors who come moaning about the problems. The ones who are considered for promotions have at least suggestions for solutions, and no plausible ones have been offered, just new variants of PPP therapeutics. Well in which case apply sticking plasters to the biggest problems (environment, demography). The PPP is hugely flexible, thus it can dematerialise materialism by marketing "services" including therapeutics. As for the empty soul, the East makes a cult of emptiness anyway. There is a narrtive there, based on the evolution of the universe, but none has told it well so far, Carl Sagan, Arthur C. Clarke and Teilhard de Chardin are not first division.
The result is uncreative except in the technical sense, broad but extremely shallow , but potentially sustainable. Athens or Jerusalem it is not, but better than collapse or revolution, but then my irrational faith is Muddling Through and Something Will Turn Up.
The post Protestant paradigm (the PPP from now on) really emerged as the sole faith around 1960. Franco was the last traditional leader of any note - the PPP Opus Dei seized control of the last Catholic theocracy in the 60s, and four decades on it is amongst the most immoderately liberal states on Earth. While the death rattle took thirty years, Communism was emotionally and intellectually dead by 1960 in the West (it took China another decade to discover that). Both the PCP and PPP were surprisingly socially conservative - the family and traditional social roles were taken for granted - and the death of competing faiths does make you wonder about the social revolution of the 60s. I have always thought that it was an amazing coup by the Frankfurt school fellow travellers, but conspiracies are rarely plausible on their own, it had to be pushing on an open door. Restraints destroyed by the lack of competing faiths; or the fact that, as the economic machine had supplied the developed world with necessities, the PPP machine needed to destroy traditional morality to keep consumption increasing? - interesting that in Japan, where traditional morality has survived better, the consumer state has failed to be established and the demographics have tanked more than elsewhere. Christopher Lasch considered the therapeutic state's relation to sociology as similar to Keynesianism's relations to classical economics and communism: true conservatives wanted to retain the traditional patriarchal family, and socialism toyed with destroying it, while the therapeutic state retains it in theory but autocratically directs it with experts.
Fascism was the only non-materialistic choice on offer (which is why the PRC is not fascist). At the moment it is a semi-fascistic strain of Islam, but interesting that while it has violence and demography as weapons, it make very few converts, while traditional Islam was still converting Indonesia, in a syncretic way, quite peacefully as late as the 19C. It does seem to repel non-adherents but galvanise the faithful, in the same way that Hitler only spoke to Germans. Other possible alternatives have either been converted into PPP therapeutics , in other words, techniques to help people be happy or reduce suffering, but not change the status quo. These include Christian Evangelicalism , also westernised Buddhism (self improvement, totally misses the point) and Hindu guruism.
The parallels with late Rome are seductive, but the problem is different. That was a brutal and loveless society, which needed to discover the love of God (agape) and a sense of sin. This may be a shallow world, with more than a touch of narcissm, but it is not loveless, by and large people do care for others, and are still committed to ideals like fairness. The problem is emptiness (the root of narcissm) - homo economicus has no soul, which is why existentialism, authenticity, deliverance through art are all empty suits.
I have been reading conservative writers recently, and they are like annoying office juniors who come moaning about the problems. The ones who are considered for promotions have at least suggestions for solutions, and no plausible ones have been offered, just new variants of PPP therapeutics. Well in which case apply sticking plasters to the biggest problems (environment, demography). The PPP is hugely flexible, thus it can dematerialise materialism by marketing "services" including therapeutics. As for the empty soul, the East makes a cult of emptiness anyway. There is a narrtive there, based on the evolution of the universe, but none has told it well so far, Carl Sagan, Arthur C. Clarke and Teilhard de Chardin are not first division.
The result is uncreative except in the technical sense, broad but extremely shallow , but potentially sustainable. Athens or Jerusalem it is not, but better than collapse or revolution, but then my irrational faith is Muddling Through and Something Will Turn Up.
Labels: History
posted by Total Issues at 10:44 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home