The Leftward Movement of Western Society
In the November 27th issue of Newsweek the columns of Fareed Zakaria and Anna Quindlen clearly expound the feminine materialistic thinking of Western society without either of them realizing it. Apparently no one else realized it either, and therein lays the Western tragedy.
Fareed Zakaria wrote the following: “Growth is also producing environmental degradation on a colossal scale. For those who worry about the United States’ not signing the Kyoto accords, keep in mind that China and India are already constructing 650 coal-fired power plants, whose combined CO2 emissions will be five times the total savings envisioned by the Kyoto accords.†That statistic moved me. What effect will breathing increasingly polluted air have on humankind? And what magnitude of effects will the collateral activity of supporting these coal fired plants cause to the environment, whether in polluting water tables, topsoil erosion, and waste disposal? I thought that possibly Fareed had begun to get a glimmer of understanding as to the devastating impact of Western society upon the world.
My hopes were short lived as less than 50 words later he wrote: “There is no way to turn off this global economy, nor should one try. Every previous expansion of global capitalism has led to greater prosperity across the world. The story of the past 100 years is one of an ever-expanding pie.†That’s true. That pie of physical, mental, and emotional degeneration has grown at an exponential rate.
The physical degeneration occurs to the people as well as to the earth. Topsoil erosion; water, air, and food pollution; the elimination of hundreds of species of plant, animal, and insect life; all combine to devastate the physical world in which we live. Our bodies belong to the physical world, and like it they are deteriorating. The mental state of this nation functions at increasingly lower levels as witnessed by continually decreasing academic performance at the most fundamental levels. The emotional level of our nation has deteriorated to the point that mental illness has become the major health issue.
I’m sure a well-educated man like Fareed Zakaria knows all these things; therefore, for him to call for the continued expansion of global capitalism indicates to me that he considers the production and acquisition of stuff more important than quality of life, or more likely, he probably considers the production and usage of material things as quality of life. Thorstein Veblen in his book the Theory of the Leisure Class pointed out the desire for conspicuous consumption and pecuniary emulation in society. While his theories have been challenged, from a social viewpoint we do indeed live in the manner described by Veblen as can be deduced from Fareed Zakaria’s column.
Anna Quindlen in her column Overhearing the Agenda, writes: “If the body politic always winds up eventually tacking toward the center, it’s difficult to imagine how progressive measures ever take hold. The reason is simple and cyclical: the center slowly shifts. It is now a moderate position to believe in the full participation of women; 30 years ago it was a radical position, and 50 years ago it was barely a position at all. The reason anti-gay-marriage amendments in seven states were approved may have less to do with passionate homophobia than with a profound sense of cultural whiplash: too much, too soon. Which will someday, I’m certain, seem quaint to our children. What a difference a couple of decades can make in terms of what’s considered fair and normative.â€
Anna Quindlin calls progressive the tearing down of natural patriarchal structures necessary to the well being of society. She correctly assesses the governmental trend of continually shifting to the left. What was once considered radical is now called moderate.
Conservatives uphold what is considered to be moderate until the next radical movement becomes accepted and considered moderate. All of society continually moves to the left until it disintegrates completely. Quindlen doesn’t see this. She considers the movement to the left to be progressive and positive. If she would pause to consider the lot of society in the progressive 50 years that she refers to she would see that the prison population went from under 200,000 to more than two million, that unwed motherhood went from 1% or 2% to 33%, and that the number one debilitating illness of the American woman has become depression.
Zakaria and Quindlin share in common a grossly materialistic and individualistic Philosophy. Both of them are known and accepted on an international basis and reflect the thinking of a large portion of America and the Western world. They, like most of the West, do not understand the basic reason for human existence-to grow spiritually-and that the vehicle for doing this is family. All fundamental tribal and cultural laws were based on the propagation and preservation of the species, which required the support of the family and the tribe.
The tenet of Western thinking is expressed by Zakaria and Quindlin; ultimate individual freedom in a material world. This tenet is diametrically opposed to the tenet of responsibility to the family and tribe as part of spiritual growth.
Quindlin pointed out that liberal and conservative, democrat and republican are labels that no longer apply, and she is right again. They are all part of and believers in the tenet of ultimate individual freedom in a material world. Religious and political organizations are all infected with the same beliefs. Only when the realization is reached that materialism leads to the downfall of society can people begin to make change, and it will have to come from individuals, not existing organizations. It will originate and function outside of the system and create its own system. Individuals who have a sense of family and the unseen world can band together and collectively make positive change. It is time for those men to stand up and be counted and do something.
I'm also the Chief of Men's Action to Rebuild Society, an organization that not only addresses the issues confronting you, but takes action to resolve these issues. | More from Elder George
Stumble It!
November 25th, 2006 at 5:41 pm
Mr. George:
You end your article by appealing to others to stand up and make a change:
I submit that many already are, and I have a few names in mind already. I am curious if you recognize whether such a movement is already afoot, and if so, how would you personally identify it?
John Dias
Founder, DontMakeHerMad.com
November 25th, 2006 at 9:20 pm
To John Dias,
I know there are many men who are dissatisfied, disgruntled, and depressed over the situation, but I have not seen any positive movement to make change. In keeping with the Western psyche, all efforts that I have seen are on the effect, and that does not bring about change. When the cause is understood then change can begin.
I do not feel this battle can be won in the courts until such time as there is a cadre of courageous men who see the situation for what it is. Patriarchy is family. I have not seen family survive for an extended period without a patriarchal structure.
My website contain more info and also information materials.
November 26th, 2006 at 12:52 am
“They, like most of the West, do not understand the basic reason for human existence-to grow spiritually-and that the vehicle for doing this is family.”
Great provocative writing! It made me consider that all of the annointed and esteemed figureheads of the world’s great religions were terrible family men.
Jesus? A celibate bachelor with no experience of marriage or normal work-a-day domesticity.
Mohammed? A pedophile with a nine year-old
faux-bride?
Buddha? He viewed women as a prime source of suffering and so extinguished his desire for them.
Confucius? Don’t even think about it…
Is there a single major male religious icon who had successful relationships with women?
November 26th, 2006 at 1:50 am
What is your Web site, Elder George?
John Dias
November 26th, 2006 at 3:08 am
Individuals need to band together to counter other individuals who have already banded together. What is wrong with this statement? I rather suspect that our decisions as to how to band together, in what purpose and to what end, is already established in our nature. While I have sympathy for the continuance of the family -even the tribe – it may be that Nature is overtaking our insistence upon individuality as we reach critical mass. The Planet as an entity is forming a brain which will incorporate us all, whether we like it or not. It is revolutionary in evolution. The Noosphere is becoming concrete. Previously we have been individuals entirely, isolated and apart, our thoughts and dreams and ideas our own, even within a family or tribe. Now, through the fruits of hundreds of thousands of years of individual expertise and effort and the more advanced, modern but inexorable increase in joint effort and enterprise we are being subsumed into the collective. It is not just the centre of politics (if one wishes to persist in outdated axial views)that has shifted, but the human-ness of humanity too. Cultural, traditional, ‘normal’ modes of organising ourselves and our intimate relations are falling away all around. We are becoming Earthlings. The task of Earthlings in the future is just how do we contribute individuality, individually, to this collective being that is Planet Earth. It is not just individual people but the Planet which has a spiritual growth.
November 26th, 2006 at 6:27 am
To John Dias,
My website is http://www.mensaction.net. I thought it was obtained automatically by those who make comments, as some of the comments I receive are made through my website. I read your website and will be in touch.
November 26th, 2006 at 6:56 am
To DadWithGirls,
Mohammed was a family man and promoted mariage among his followers. Marriage contracts with minors have existed tothe present day.
What we know of Jesus is primarily a European,feminine, materialistic creation. I don’t comment of people’s religious beliefs even though I have some license here as a Christian.
The Buddha’s father was the Bill GAtes of his time. The Buddha had 10,000 dancing grils for entertainment. He decided there was more to life than carnality and entertainment.
I thought Confucius’ teachings were the handbook of Asian family life. I understand he even challenged the Tao as not giving sufficient credit to the family.
Your question was, Is there a single male relious icon who had succesful relations with women? I wasn’t speaking about religion, but Mohammed was one. I was speaking about family. Do you need a religious book to explain the inportance of family to you? Extended family and the patriarchal structure necessary to maintain it existed in North and South America, in Africa, and among the Polynesians. They did it without a religous icon.
November 26th, 2006 at 7:09 am
To amfortas,
The Western consprt of a collective that you describe is a materialistic collective without any permanent values and it is disintegrating. It does not understand the fundamental concept of gender, or as the Chinese refer to it as the yin and yang from which all things flow. It sees us as a genderless and godless collective, as so many interchangeable parts in in a consumer oriented collective.
That thinking and all it produced is coming down, you can be sure of it.
November 26th, 2006 at 8:50 am
While unquestionably I agree with the premise that we are deteriorating mentally (that’s a bit vague but you describe it adequately in the piece), but claims of physical deterioration I find more troublesome.
For all the panic in some corners, and reactionary bans of this and that, and the constant poiting out that we have pollution here and erosion there, how do we account for the fact that life spans are increasing, and the increase has been most dramatic during the periods of the most macro level industrialization? Do not read into my words a sort of Rush Limbaugh tongue in cheek “exploit it if you can and how” attitude. I am for checks and balances, but to imply we are in dire straights and falling apart sets your premise on its ear. This type of thinking has given birth to the most poorly named product in history…organic food. I’ve been asking someone to lead me to the inorganic food isle for years, no takers.
The drift leftwards and its ultimate endgame is fairly predictable as you say, but the patriarchal groups of coops all “living as one”, while philosophically interesting, practically speaking are not achievable without tossing in a madman and a gulag. The core, or father headed family, though is achievable and must be set back on the collective mantle of our country as how families work. Not 2 moms, not 2 dads, not single moms (a term that used to get my sympathy, now gets my suspicion), etc.
November 26th, 2006 at 11:07 am
To conservativation,
The increased life span that you mention refers to my age group, those born before and during the depression. We did eat organic food because chemical fertilzers were not used then, or not extensively. Also, herbicides and pesticides did not exist then. The generations after mine are putting the financial load on the health care crises. If people are healthy why is so much medication being prescribed for them? The number of diabetics in the 30 to 39 year age group has increased 60%. People with diabetis usually don’t live as long as the norm. Close to ten percent of American women get breast cancer, whereas in some primitive societies such as the dogon tribe in Mali breast and cervical cancer do not exist.
We are most definitely in a severe health crises in the Western culture. The next time you take a bus or train take a good look at the passengers getting on and off and see if they look and act healthy to you.
November 26th, 2006 at 11:55 am
Anna Quindlen: It is now a moderate position to believe in the full participation of women;
November 27th, 2006 at 6:10 am
the elimination of hundreds of species of plant, animal, and insect life
Excellent. Evolution in action. Now, when do we get to see the new species forming?
November 27th, 2006 at 3:10 pm
I would go as far as accepting that the decreasing academic performance and increasing mental illness is because we are not down on the farm any more and because we live in the big city we have disconnected from our social roots. But it is a too much of a stretch for me to accept that environmental problems are the cause. I think I agree with most everything else.