The fraud of primitive authenticity
by Spengler
adspar's quick summary:
This sprawling commentary in the Asia Times Online is presumably inspired by Nicholas Wade's Before the Dawn. Spengler wonders why it is that popular culture typically portrays primitive people as "peace-loving folk living in harmony with nature" and not the nasty, violent savages they really were. He concludes that as Americans move beyond Christianity, we're left without inspiration, so we'll take whatever we can get.
why you should read it:
The 2nd to last paragraph ends with one of the most incisive comments I've ever read. I truly felt shocked when I read it. You need to read the rest of the article to understand the quote properly, so I don't want to post it here yet. (Now I've built it up too much and you'll be disappointed. Sorry.) There's also a criticism of Jared Diamond that I don't really agree with, but I'll admit that could be my politically biased brain at work. Maybe I'll write more about that later.
My quick summary contained an idea that I’m very familiar with from my musings on the irrationality of religious faith, which is the idea that people are inclined towards believing comfortable lies. Spengler’s observation is that Americans are easing their transition away from one comfortable lie (the supernatural mythology of Christianity) by propping themselves up with another (the noble savage).
As I said at the time, I’m a bit perplexed by his criticism of Jared Diamond. While I’m certainly no expert, I would think that if Diamond had defended the noble savage idea too strongly I would have noticed, having read Stephen Pinker’s demolishing of the noble savage in The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature
Dave has recently criticized me for being overly critical of an America that he thinks is a much better place than the rest of the world. While he didn’t especially articulate his complaint well in those comments, I sympathize with (what I think are) his aims, at least to some extent. I think putting America’s shortcomings into a broader context of humanity can be interesting and enlightening (though I continue to assert that the vast majority of my criticisms stand on their own, and that context could only make the complaints look less severe, which doesn't erase those criticisms, and which could even dull our motivation to correct them), and likely quite helpful when trying to solve those problems. He emphasized a modern global political perspective as the means of putting America in context, which certainly has merit. But perhaps he’s overlooked that I’m often trying to put my observations into another broad context, an understanding of human nature.
So all that that being said, I'm going to discuss Spengler's criticism of America, and I'm going to attempt to draw from a broader understanding of human nature supplied by psychology and anthropology and history (eventually - the purpose of this post is more to elaborate and explain the problems I see). I want to do this because half a year after first reading it, I'm still kind of blown away by that powerful paragraph I mentioned in my "why you should read it":
An overpowering nostalgia afflicts the American post-Christian, for whom the American journey has neither goal nor purpose. He seeks authenticity in nature and in the dead customs of peoples who were subject to nature, that is, peoples who never learned from the Book of Genesis that the heavenly bodies were lamps and clocks hung in the sky for the benefit of man. Even more: in their mortality, the post-Christian senses his own mortality, for without the Kingdom of God as a goal, American life offers only addictive diversions interrupted by ever-sharper episodes of anxiety.I get chills just reading "American life offers only addictive diversions interrupted by ever-sharper episodes of anxiety." Holy shit! I’ll preemptively note that I of course think that American life offers more than JUST that. My strong reaction though is because I think he’s cutting through to a truth that resonates pretty deeply, at least to me and 4 other people.
Another reasonable complaint is that this bleak view of modern life isn’t limited to America, but Spengler’s observation is that many other nations have a deep cultural heritage to fall back on as religion’s influence wanes. I’m not convinced that in reality the line is as clearly drawn as that, but there’s still a power to the general observation, whether it applies exclusively to Americans or not.
I never gave a great deal of thought about why religion still has its teeth more deeply into America than to most other first-world nations, but this shallow culture hypothesis is an intriguing alternative to the more popular explanation that we were founded as a nation of religious outcasts. I haven’t failed to note how completely our gatekeepers fail us: American education is getting worse and worse, our politicians are overwhelmingly incompetent, and our press uncritically parrots anything they hear.
We have our fingers plugged into our ears up to the second knuckle and we refuse to acknowledge reality whenever it conflicts with our ideology, or whenever it makes us the slightest bit uncomfortable.
Global warming? I’m not listening...Torturing and killing people, spying on Americans, silencing critics in the name of freedom? I can’t hear you...
Reality is more complicated that “Jesus will make it all ok”? Not getting through…
There's a fascinating connection between this American emptiness and the NeoCon agenda, which is laid out in compelling fashion by the British documentary The Power of Nightmares (available for free legal download), which lays out the history of the neocon movement, and its core philosophy that America needs to fill its empty void with intense patriotism (preferably inspired by opposition to and war against an evil enemy) and conservative religion (preferably evangelical Christianity). Throw in some authoritarian submission and a pinch of anti-intellectualism to stifle any rational objection ("hey, this all sounds nice but it is flatly contradicted by reality" .. "DO NOT QUESTION THE LEADER!! WHAT ARE YOU, SOME KIND OF HIPPIE KNOW-IT-ALL PROFESSOR?!?") and you've got a pretty fucked up country.
I'm feeling pretty disturbed. I better go watch American Idol.
8 comments:
"Even more: in their mortality, the post-Christian senses his own mortality, for without the Kingdom of God as a goal, American life offers only addictive diversions interrupted by ever-sharper episodes of anxiety."
Not necessarily speaking on the post-Christianness, or our shallow history:
I was driving to work on the DC Beltway (and by driving I meaning rolling and braking) and I noticed a smoker (with Virginia plates on the Inner Loop) flick his butt and throw up one hand in frustration while furrowing his brow and mouthing something I probably didn't want to hear. This reminded me of a simple thought brough to light by Eric Brende, that most times we end up working for our horse...or car...or house...instead of the other way around.
The assumptions I made of this smoker aren't necessarily attributed to him, but for how many individuals is it true? He wants a good paying job to have money for a certain level of living. He lives far from his job so he can afford a nice house. To afford the house he sits in traffic for 1/8th of his day. To make that worth it he buys a nice car to show off. Traffic is murder on his vehicle, not to mention his stress level goes up every time he steps into his car. He smokes to relieve that stress, to relax. He probably downs cup after cup of coffee at work because by the time he got home last night it was 8:30pm and he and the wife were up arguing. Over? Him not being home. Working too much. He'll drink. He'll get fat. He'll suffer a few heart attacks before he finally releases his family from obligation. All because he doesn't really know how to be happy.
"Another reasonable complaint is that this bleak view of modern life isn’t limited to America, but Spengler’s observation is that many other nations have a deep cultural heritage to fall back on as religion’s influence wanes. I’m not convinced that in reality the line is as clearly drawn as that, but there’s still a power to the general observation, whether it applies exclusively to Americans or not."
I believe that America is a melting pot, as evidenced that we don't have a huge cultural heritage. And this is part of what makes us a great nation. By welcoming all cultures, we allow for many people to have great opportunities here. While America isn't neccesarily the greatest, it is still a great nation non-the-less. From the quote I used above, I cannot assertain your position on the following matters.
1. Do we have a cultural heritage?
2. Is having one a good thing?
1) Spengler's point is that we don't have nearly as deep a cultural heritage as many other countries, a point that shouldn't be too controversial given the relative youth of our nation and since we're such a melting pot.
If we have a cultural heritage it is our commerical mega-brands and our hollywood and our sports teams. It is mass market commercialism, not the elusive home-grown "authenticity" Spengler describes. I suppose we have some shallow pockets of home-grown authenticity on a regional basis.
2) I'd prefer more of the latter kind than the kind we really have, though I'd probably prefer to see it built more on a rational foundation, not like the superstitions he describes ("Americans do not have close at hand the Saints Days of Italian villages incorporating heathen practice predating Rome, or the Elf-ridden forest of the German north celebrated in Romantic poetry").
Aha, a little back-and-forth and I'm suddenly a feature on your blog, I like where this is going.
Anyway, I wanted to make clear that the intent of my comments was not to make a point that America is the Wringling Bros. of nations. I would never make that argument, but based upon my reading I do believe it's a pretty good fucking place to be.
Now I'm going to get on the metro tomorrow and pray there's not yet another fire at Farragut North tomorrow morning.
As far as the quote that is featured as the title of your post, is it implying that religion fills in for a lack of cultural heritage, so that people with deep cultural heritage don't have as much use for religion? How would this explain Islamic fanaticism throughout the Middle East, a region dominated by the same people for the past 1500 years? Lots of cultural heritage, lots of religion.
As for our failing education system, I'm continually intrigued by the duality of statistics that keep saying American math and science scores are abyssmally (sp?) low yet American innovation is world-leading. This doesn't mean our education system kicks ass, but it's certainly interesting to think about.
and I'll add that, as we found out, the heart of my criticism lay in the brash titling of those posts, which was contrary to your usual reasoning critical style.
Does the word verification only work half the time for anyone else, or are my rods and cones on permanent vacation? Damnit, again!
As far as the quote that is featured as the title of your post, is it implying that religion fills in for a lack of cultural heritage, so that people with deep cultural heritage don't have as much use for religion? How would this explain Islamic fanaticism throughout the Middle East, a region dominated by the same people for the past 1500 years? Lots of cultural heritage, lots of religion.
I read it more to mean as our understanding of the world advances, religion and its false answers can start to be left behind, but that leaves a lot of people without the comfort religion provided them. So they turn elsewhere for comfort, and Americans have nowhere to turn but addictive diversions. I would cautiously interpet that as you say - that people with a deep cultural heritage have less need for religion, but that is one of many variables that factor into degree of religiousness. Degree of freedom of press, educational standards, government type would also seem important. Furthermore, people whose culture is very deeply tied to the predominant religion in the area are going to have a harder time separating the two, I would think.
But anyway, if this makes sense, I'm not really reading this article for its conclusions, but for its observations. I wouldn't necessarily link the observations the same way as he does. It has some interesting tidbits, but is obviously far from a well-supported argument for anything really.
As for our failing education system, I'm continually intrigued by the duality of statistics that keep saying American math and science scores are abyssmally (sp?) low yet American innovation is world-leading. This doesn't mean our education system kicks ass, but it's certainly interesting to think about.
Do you interpret this any way other than that our base is rotting even while our topmost level is still fairly healthy? I'd assume that an influx of forgein talent accounts for a large percentage of top "American" academic talent. While it is good that we can still attract such people, I have to wonder how long that is sustainable if we can't grow our own. (Of course if my idea of what our demographics look like is wrong, ignore this.)
have you read Diamond's "Collapse"?
I haven't. Still haven't finished Guns, Germs, and Steel. Haven't successfully read any nonfiction that I can think of since Diamond's "The Third Chimpanzee" for an honors seminar freshman year. Sometimes I hate school and the fact that it keeps my brain so wrapped around having to learn that I can't read for fun anymore. Anyway, if you've read Collapse, let me know what you thought of it.
I read Collapse and would highly recommend it. It is very much a worthy followup to GG&S. 3rd chimp was a funner read than either though.
The problem with Collapse is it makes you want to forget everything you just read.
Post a Comment