The perversion of egalitarianism II

A truly bizarre article in the Guardian by Dylan Evans (via Marcus). He says:

Thomas More, Tommaso Campanella, Francis Bacon and Karl Marx all painted pictures of a future in which there is a strong sense of community, in which work is fulfilling and leisure is used wisely and creatively. Now, at the dawn of the 21st century, this long tradition of idealism has all but vanished. We have no vision - just the paltry consolations of consumerism….We grow up in increasingly fragmented communities, hardly speaking to the people next door, and drive to work in our self-contained cars. We work in standardised offices and stop at the supermarket on our way home to buy production-line food which we eat without relish. There is no great misery, no hunger, and no war. But nor is there great passion or joy. Despite our historically unprecedented wealth, more people than ever before suffer from depression….it is time we devoted more thought to the questions that Plato, More and Marx placed at the heart their utopias; the question of how to make work more rewarding, leisure more abundant, and communities more friendly.

Great stuff. I like to think it’s the sort of thing I’d write in my purpler periods. But stuck amid it is this clunker:

It is this complacency, this lack of idealism, that is in part responsible for the repugnance with which Muslim extremists view western society.

Eh? Eh? Correct me if I'm wrong, but when Mohammed Atta steered that plane into the World Trade Center, he wasn't declaring the merits of workers' co-ops or a shorter working week.

And even if he were, it wouldn't matter. The case for a less consumerist, less alienated, society is strong just as it is. It’s got nothing whatsoever to do with the opinion of a few religious bigots. Just because people have got bombs doesn’t mean they have anything worth listening to. Why pretend otherwise?

Is Mr Evans committing the journalists’error of giving credence to strongly expressed views, even when they have no merit at all?* Is he the victim of some sort of totalizing vision, believing that everything must come back to Islamists? Or is this another example of the perversion of egalitarianism?

* The counterpart of this error is even worse - of ignoring good opinions simply because they are not backed by power.

Comments

[Paddy Carter]

Yes, that's what we lack - utopian fantasies to give our lives more 'meaning'. CD surely even in your purplest periods you'd not subscribe to this hogwash.

I have just eaten a Morrison's bacon and leek pasta bake with relish. burp.

[Chris Brooke]

Are there any passages by Plato, More or Marx which address the matter of how to make "communities more friendly"? Not sure I can think of any, offhand, or any reason to think that this issue was "at the heart of their utopias" (and how happy Marx would be to be described as a utopian!).

Aristotle had one or two things to say on the subject, but this chap Evans doesn't seem to be interested in him.

[Unity]

Plato's solution was enlightened despotism.

More I doubt even considered the question - his Utopia was fundamentally the antithesis of the Albigensian/Cathar heresy; heaven on earth, a temporal expression of his spiritual belief in paradise. In world where everyone it as one with God, making communities more friendly is not a question that would ever arise.

Marx, who was every bit the utopian; ducked the issue. The state with wither and be replaced with... what?

Marx never really said, although logically his ideas imply a state of utopian anarchy, the pure Athenian democracy - all of which takes us full circle and back to Plato and his enlightened despot.

[Unity]

Plato's solution was enlightened despotism.

More I doubt even considered the question - his Utopia was fundamentally the antithesis of the Albigensian/Cathar heresy; heaven on earth, a temporal expression of his spiritual belief in paradise. In world where everyone it as one with God, making communities more friendly is not a question that would ever arise.

Marx, who was every bit the utopian; ducked the issue. The state will wither and be replaced with... what?

Marx never really said, although logically his ideas imply a state of utopian anarchy, the pure Athenian democracy - all of which takes us full circle and back to Plato and his enlightened despot.

Might be worth giving Voltaire a try for something on the subject.

[Unity]

Bugger - sorry about the double post.

[Backword Dave]

Perhaps Mohammed Atta wasn't declaring the merits of workers' co-ops, but the repugnance does seem aimed at our lack of idealism. Just because you don't share the idealism of religious bigots, doesn't mean that they don't have idealism. It's a good thing that idealism is dead, if you ask me.

But I think the thing the bigots object to is the secularity (if that's a word) of cities, which cults and sects have railed against since we put down roots. I don't think there's any content in their stated complaints: the alienation may be real; the analysis is not. If Muslims in Muslim countries view us with repugnance, well, didn't they always? You only need the slighest of reasons to convince you that your instinct that nothing good ever came from foreigners is right.

[dearieme]

Is that the More who had Protestants butchered and the Marx whose writings inspired the murder of a hundred million people in the twentieth century?
The al-Quardian gets sillier and sillier.

[Blimpish]

If it is the lack of idealism they object to, it certainly isn't the lack of egalitarian idealism. Their criticism of us would be that we are so besotted by materialism and this-worldly concerns that we miss the Truth (i.e., God's word). That criticism would apply just as much if we were all good little egalitarians as good little capitalists.

[Backword Dave]

Blimpish: brevity is the soul of wit. If you weren't on my blogroll, I'd add you.

I read a bit of Dylan Evans last night, and I'm starting to understand why newspapers prefer to hire Arts grads to science and econ grads. He's not stupid and not as narrow as Norm suggests. He does have an unfortunate way with words, though. Many paragraphs could be improved by the trimming of their last sentence. As Chris says, his criticism of the things-which-need-improved in the West is fine. He then reaches for a totally inappropriate criticism from, well, idiots and bigots. The effect of which is to make you think, "The West isn't so bad." That's true, though there's still room for improvement, and improvement should be the point. (Though Blimpish and I will disagree on what form that improvement should take. That's a good thing. I have my blind spots, and no doubt he has his.)