The world is moving so fast. Its pace is matched by its
exponentially increasing size and complexity. All together it’s not an easy
task to make sense of it all. A huge amount of observation, study and
contemplation is needed to even get a little bit of understanding happening. I
think I’m just beginning to understand the 1970s, and I wonder whether this 40
year lag between events and any substantial form of true awareness – about what
the heck is really going on – is normal. If so, this would explain, to some
extent, why the people who are protesting the state of the world, and who are
wanting positive change, are having such a tough time of it. The current crop
of change agents (the awkward but so far best attempt to describe themselves)
have strong and honest gut feelings that the world is upside down, but without
the luxury of 40 years of hindsight and consequent wisdom they struggle to
explain, in any simple and convincing way, that the world is actually broken
and that we are madly accelerating to an unimaginable, but certainly
unpleasant, future.
Most of us, even with the “something’s not quite right”
nausea kicking in, find that it’s much easier
to be pragmatic, to not ask too many questions, and to commit oneself to
playing the game of life as hard and as clever as possible. The fear of
drowning – in measurably rising waters – feeds our frantic struggles to stay
afloat and dulls our curiosity to wonder “why is this so?” The frequent lament
that it is the conservative controlled mainstream media that keeps us toiling
in the dark, by selective editing and downright lies, is becoming a tired old
excuse when deep down we know that the truth – when eloquently and sensitively
articulated – will spread faster and permeate deeper than any sensationalised
headline, titillating celebrity gossip, or cute internet meme that goes viral
for a day or two. At least that is my
opinion. I propose that, as yet, no one or no group has been able to voice, in a
universal and profound way, the what, why, who, when, where and how of the
current state of human affairs. With the ever-increasing pace required by us
all to maintain a foothold, even for basic needs like a roof over one’s head,
it can seem unlikely that philosophers and artists of a new breed are waiting
in the wings to appear and shake us all fully to our senses.
In 1970 I was nine years of age, that’s about when I
consider myself as having some degree of consciousness, or some level of free
will, or whatever you want to call it. I had already rejected God and religion
as a source of knowledge or meaning, and was diving into “The Golden Book
Junior Encyclopedia”. It was an American publication and I – for a while –
could name the capital city of every state, and most of the state birds. Forty
years later, with a somewhat bigger picture view of the world, I can see that
the 70s was a time when humanity was really starting to pick itself up again
after two world wars. It has been argued that these devastating events
signalled the end of a long history of tyranny of one sort or another. By tyranny I mean the acutely hierarchical
societies which evolved from flawed human beliefs and ideologies built around
concepts of religion, or bloodlines, or brute force, or survival of the
fittest, or some nasty combination of two or more these crazy or corrupted
ideas. The rise and fall and rise of hierarchical civilisations appears to have
dominated the world for most, if not all, of recorded history. One of the most obvious and abhorrent
features of any tyranny is that primarily each and every individual’s status,
role and destiny, is largely pre-determined at birth. Gender, race,
nationality, religion, genes, and family history are some of the attributes one
is born into and, these often permanently recorded labels are extremely hard,
if not impossible, to change, lose or deny. Most civilisations have tales of
heroes who rise above their lowly rank to conquer the oppression of the state,
but for the masses these myths typically serve to instil a false sense of
natural justice in obviously corrupt and dysfunctional societies. It was about 500 years ago that some big
thinkers started to get some well-ripened public attention and sympathy after
the centuries aptly named the “dark ages”. Slowly but surely the enlightenment
managed to wake up the Western world to the injustices that became inevitable
when we structured society as a rigid pyramid of hierarchy, from an absolute
authority on top of everything, all the way down to the very lowest class of
human; secular humanism was born. Since then, tumultuous periods of high drama
and massive change ensued. An optimistic view of the world today can quite
confidently report that, by and large, many of the injustices of the past such
as slavery, racism, sexism and poverty, if not totally eliminated, are well on
the way to becoming history, once and for all. On closer examination though, it
can equally be argued that the rise of secularism, the increasing freedom of
the individual, and the equality of both wealth and opportunity for all peoples
actually peaked in the 1970s. And the decline of these conditions has been
steady ever since.
The 1970s can also be viewed as the decade when our
understanding of ourselves, as a species interdependently connected with the
finite earth and its other inhabitants, blossomed. In the 1960s the public was
exposed to both photographs of earth from space and a series of environmental
catastrophes. The evidence of our place
in the universe and our impact on the environment was so compelling and
irrefutable that it was taught in public schools. I myself, with a youthful and innocent trust
in the public education system and the popular notion of Australia being pretty
damn lucky, eagerly looked forward to the modern life on offer, and consequently
dived right in to participate in just about anything and everything on offer.
The promise of science and technology to give us unprecedented comforts and
increased leisure time in this life, without having to wait for some post-death
paradise, was a pretty easy sell. The optimism of the era was reflected in a
confidence and belief in ourselves that we had the capacity as intelligent and
industrious beings to find new and better ways to eke out a harmonious
existence on this, our only planet.
The vision of the future on offer back in my high school
days has spectacularly failed to materialise. On two measures alone – the
distribution of wealth and the health of the environment – we have collectively
failed. Sure, there are good news stories – on the material or money side of
things we hear tales of rags to riches, the triumphs of modern medical science
and the adventures of ordinary people creating and ticking off bucket lists. On
the environmental front, small wins against big corporations, advances in solar
technology, and successful breeding programs in zoos, are examples posted
occasionally on the telly or in the daily rag. This is mainly a sedative for a
public waking up to alarm clocks and commuting to “jobs”. Any serious analysis
clearly shows that the exceptions are not the rule. The so-called winners love
the world, thank God, and preach that anyone with hard work and determination
can achieve their wildest dreams. Excuse me while I just step outside to vomit.
The celebrities of the modern world have come up with all sorts of mythologies
to justify the human race to succeed at all costs. They aren’t often asked, but
when they are they invariably invoke some flawed logic or metaphysics to ignore
the widespread atrocities still being committed by the successful upon the
earth and its inhabitants. And worse than that, they encourage the rest of us
to follow in their footsteps.
What has gone wrong? With the eradication of the old-style
tyrannies, has a more subtle but equally devastating hierarchical tyranny risen
up to coerce us all into a diabolical trajectory toward self-extinction? (If
you think I am being a bit dramatic here, pull out your Year 11 Biology prac
book and look over the bacteria population experiment in a petri dish of
nutrient agar). Has all serious collective dialogue about the human condition
died, just as God died with Nietzsche? Has this vacuum left only the
possibility of an individualistic free for all? Have the historical failures of
large collective efforts permanently replaced the notion of “we” with “me”?
Have we taken the notion of liberty, enshrined in the classic enlightenment
documents, too far? Has the power and experience of working together for the
common good devolved into a world of over seven billion emperors and empires of
the self? The distrust and disdain for our most basic collective power base –
democratically elected governments – as demonstrated by the popular and
brag-worthy pastime of beating the taxman, is symptomatic of a world of
individuals out there acting purely for themselves. How ironic that a species
that evolved successfully largely due to social cooperation has culturally
evolved into a society of “every man for himself”, or “dog eat dog” if you
prefer, that is destined to annihilate itself. The modern affliction of
ignorance of our own humanness is not the basis upon which some vision of a
successful life ought to be built.
If my personal 40-year lag in getting some sort of handle on
what the world is really like is the norm, then maybe our species with its
current breakneck rate of acceleration is doomed. Humans are adaptable and we
will no doubt cling to survival for as long as possible. Psychologically, we
are good at washing our brains so that we don’t go stark raving mad at the
horror of it all. Drugs, religion, sex, celebrity, fashion, technology, and the
relentless pursuit of money, are some of the major distractions that keep us
half asleep at the wheel while stomping down firmly on the gas. The latest
panacea being touted as the most likely salvation for naughty humanity is for
the internet (along with burgeoning catalogue of sleek and shiny devices) to
hook us all up to some utopian world of social media. Is the World-Wide Web
really liberating us from mindless participation in a global economy that
benefits the very few and is fuelled by the destruction of the earth’s life
support systems? Or will it be 40 years before we can really understand how the
advent of the internet did not, as predicted, save the world, but was just
another distraction that further divided us, rather than uniting us as a force
to conquer the latest tyranny – the tyranny that we haven’t even got a name for
yet?
PS: I am working a bit more conscientiously on understanding
the 80s and 90s in an attempt to reduce my 40-year hindsight time lag. Join me
if you so desire!
No comments:
Post a Comment