Egypt, Twitter, and the Collapse of Top-Heavy Societies

Fri Feb 11 11:22:03 CST 2011

Of course, as Americans, we can do worse than at least glance at
Maslow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs
Maslow's hierarchy of needs is full of holes as a universal
descriptor, but it holds enough water to build from. It has been the
starting point for a number of more careful studies regarding human
needs that came later, most notably in the 80s. I won't go into all
that, as this is not the venue, I think for a basic psych class. One
can take Psych 101 at any college and acquire a pocket full of names
to look into.

You can go back to the Classical Greeks, whose philosophical inquiries
were motivated by the question of how people should live. Much of
western politics is the bastard child of their response to how people
should live together coupled with the beslutted version of
Christianity developed by the sleazy cream of the decaying Roman
Empire (remembering of course that Christianity is an oriental
religion.)

When we talk about American politics, we are talking about a very
loose union of individualists. One thing seems eminently clear from
any study of American history: those who rise from the "bottom"
Michael F mentioned earlier, can rise to varying levels according to
their luck and drive, until they reach a certain point, where it moves
beyond luck and into the care of brotherhood. The new extended family
includes the people of one's income bracket. Greed is the motivator,
in part, during early stages, but it comes also to do with
competition: as brothers will wrestle to test their strength and
cunning, the wealthy compete to test their ability to out-earn their
peers. But there are rules of convention, breaking which might result
in precipitous falls into the upper-middle class, where the taxes are
most burdensome (you are right about that, Michael.)

But that pesky bottom remains. The vast majority of Americans scut
across it like tailless kites pulled by unruly children. The unruly
children, of course, are the marketers of the mass "communication"
industry. Zizek, in The Ticklish Subject talks about the subversion of
the Oedipus complex in the contemporary west, in "risk society"
theory. He offers some interesting, relevant points, and, though I do
not always agree with him, what he says has merit regarding the
continuation of narcissistic adolescence into early middle age. My
point here is that the whole thing is, as Michael F insists, a bloody
fucking mess of individuals taking advantage of each other in the
"competitive spirit" of capitalism increasingly insufficiently
moderated by collective national needs. As the wealthy diverge more
widely from the poor, the advent of hunger, homelessness, and disease
waxes in the country, though not in the news. Do a little research
into the number of Americans who die of hunger every year. The numbers
do not foster the kind of patriotism the "Christian" right waves.

Needs? I think food, shelter, safety, education, health and employment
are indispensable. No nation can survive for long when the majority of
people lack these basics. Do some people benefit unduly from programs
that offer these basics? Sure. Do some people benefit unduly from the
absence of these programs? Sure. Which leads to the healthier nation?
One could do worse than ask the Canadians.

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I disagree with the line about what a Pluralistic Society needs to do.
> But so what?
>
> And I prefer Pynchon on Hobbes......
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Michael F <mff8785 at gmail.com>
> To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Thu, February 10, 2011 5:37:57 PM
> Subject: Re: Egypt, Twitter, and the Collapse of Top-Heavy Societies
>
> "Seems pretty simple to me."
>
> In order for us to have a Pluralistic Society, we need to define the
> "common good", which a Pluralistic Society can not do: because
> "everyone" counts(including corporations and banks and radicals driven
> by -isms) therefore ties to any and all "values" that represent a
> "good" are negated.  Hobbes said it best(and I paraphrase), when
> everyone is right, war is the only outcome, and Hobbes (like Francis
> Bacon), without providing substancial evidence, went on and stated
> that "peace" had to be preached (or else!).
>
> Me personally, I don't believe a healthy society provides everyone the
> opportunity to eat: Bernie Madoff should starve, the gangbangers who
> shot a few kids at a neighboring school should starve, and the folks
> who chained up a teenage boy in a nieghboring town here in Northern CA
> should also starve(they aren't getting food from my platee!).  Living
> in the Bay Area in Berk and SF I see so many people who don't work,
> and government shouldn't pay for them to eat(?): it's taking money
> that could be going toward our public schools which are dying becuase
> outhere in CA we've decided to heavily tax businesses, which, as a
> result, has chased them away.
>
>
>
> Here's a favorite Frost poem(he had a whole bunch addressing the human
> issues posed by New Deal initiatives and the results)
>
> "Provide, Provide"
>
> The witch that came (the withered hag)
> To wash the steps with pail and rag,
> Was once the beauty Abishag,
>
> The picture pride of Hollywood.
> Too many fall from great and good
> For you to doubt the likelihood.
>
> Die early and avoid the fate.
> Or if predestined to die late,
> Make up your mind to die in state.
>
> Make the whole stock exchange your own!
> If need be occupy a throne,
> Where nobody can call you crone.
>
> Some have relied on what they knew;
> Others on simply being true.
> What worked for them might work for you.
>
> No memory of having starred
> Atones for later disregard,
> Or keeps the end from being hard.
>
> Better to go down dignified
> With boughten friendship at your side
> Than none at all. Provide, provide!
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Joe Allonby <joeallonby at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I need to eat and sometimes I've needed to find a place to live. As a
>> chronically employed person, I don't qualify for government assistance
>> in those areas, nor should I. But some people either can't find or
>> even perform employment that provides sufficient compensation to meet
>> those needs. Government should help them. Begging on the streets,
>> living in abandoned cars, prostitution, selling contraband, and eating
>> in soup kitchens are not productive alternatives.
>>
>> A functioning pluralistic society needs an educated populace.
>> Therefore: public education.
>>
>> Seems pretty simple to me.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Michael F <mff8785 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I enjoy reading philosophical discussion, and when it borders on the
>>> political with "reason" I'm even motivated to engage.  Please, Ian,
>>> what do you see as "needs" and how are they ignored by Modern
>>> politics?  I will agree Modern politics do ignore the basic needs of
>>> man, but on the same side of the issue Modern revolutions can only
>>> present Modern politics as a cure, which have historically been shown
>>> to be a precursor to chaos and societal collapse.  People are always
>>> "hungry", and people at the top are always taken care of first.
>>> Shouldn't this motivation to not be at the "bottom"?  Me personally,
>>> I'm not a religious man, and don't see myself as a martyr, Jesus-type
>>> figure.  Saving one's self should be top priority.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>> Gee, that's great. All your needs are well "fulfilled".
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Michael F <mff8785 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I'm 33 and in fine physical shape and spend my time working out and
>>>>> reading.  All the cosmetic procedures and emotional pornography(aka
>>>>> Reality TV) is for the masses, not me.  A few individuals can truly
>>>>> find out what they "need" and understand the concept of "Eros".  But,
>>>>> when left to the masses to decide on their own you end up with what
>>>>> the Modern World is and what Pynchon presents in his novels.  So, no,
>>>>> none of the "needs" of the massses relate to my personal "needs", and
>>>>> I don't like it when doofuses at California Universities and folks at
>>>>> MIT speak for my needs.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>> Uh, wow. Strange takes on needs. How's that workin' for ya?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Michael F <mff8785 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Our "common needs"?  American Idol on 7 nights a week?  Botox and
>>>>>>> gastrobypass paid for by the people?  I'm sure I'm missing a few...  I
>>>>>>> loathe the fact that "we" want gov't to respond to our needs.  I work
>>>>>>> with "the masses" out here in CA and I see daily what the people view
>>>>>>> as "needs", and to have anyone respond to those needs is a disturbing
>>>>>>> thought.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>> Yeah, my point exactly. Except for the evening out bit. As long as we
>>>>>>>> are busy fighting each other we will never unite to make government
>>>>>>>> respond to our common needs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 11:19 PM, Humberto Torofuerte
>>>>>>>> <strongbool at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I may just be speaking from my own bias as a vato from LA...but I'm
>>>>>>>>> pretty sure that in human history televised team sports have caused
>>>>>>>>> about as many riots as they've prevented.  So it pretty much evens
>>>>>>>>> out.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> um. Really? All the money is at the top, but the weight, steam and
>>>>>>>>>> impetus of all societies comes from the bottom. People go where the
>>>>>>>>>> food is, and only with a full belly will a soul cast a longing gaze at
>>>>>>>>>> the wispy summits where the glamor flashes. That has only begun to
>>>>>>>>>> change with advent of television, really, by the worship of which
>>>>>>>>>> every impoverished soul learned how delightful, sexy, and intriguing
>>>>>>>>>> the "lives" in "Dallas" and "Santa Barbara" are. What's happening in
>>>>>>>>>> Egypt is that too many bellies are lean, so television hasn't the
>>>>>>>>>> power to distract them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And, in honor of Super Bowl Sunday, I have to throw in my two bits
>>>>>>>>>> about team sports. How many fights will break out between Americans
>>>>>>>>>> today over who's better--the Steelers or the Packers? How many
>>>>>>>>>> arguments will erupt in normally sedated barrooms? How is it that team
>>>>>>>>>> sports do so much to divide the people against one another? If
>>>>>>>>>> Americans were less distracted by so many divisions, I wonder how long
>>>>>>>>>> it would take to fill the streets with the disaffected many.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Michael F <mff8785 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> This stuff kills me...  Every society ever has always been "top
>>>>>>>>>>> heavy".  They always will be.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Dave Monroe <against.the.dave at gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>http://unbridledspeculation.com/2011/02/05/egypt-twitter-and-the-collapse-of-top-heavy-societies/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, Christine K.!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Klaatu barada nikto
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Klaatu barada nikto
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Klaatu barada nikto
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> "Psyche pasa athantos." --Plato
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>

-- 
"Psyche pasa athantos." --Plato