The greatest political danger the United States republic will face in the coming decades is an alliance of libertarian economic and ethical logic (a means) with a progressive utopian vision of pleasure for all (an ends). The crowds loved President Obama's rhetoric - he talked about peace and harmony and well-being - but now they see what that costs, they don't like him. If the Democrats are smart, they'll scrap state socialism just like Tony Blair scrapped state collectivism. Who really cares about the poor, after all? Well, the poor care about the poor, and they have a vote in hand. So to keep their vote, what will be offered them in compensation for inequality of wealth and success? Equality of pleasure. Make pleasure the new dollar. Since the poor can produce sex just as well as the rich, give them sexual unrestraint, and everyone will be wealthy. The middle-class will have their money, and the rich will have their orgies. Everyone will be happy. High-five to J.S. Mill.
To this end, watch for signs in public education that children are being taught more and more about fulfilling their desire for pleasure, especially for sexual pleasure, and especially at the expense of the desire for public honor in the role of citizen or statesman. They will be taught to trade their rights as a citizen for their rights as a hormone factory.
Also watch for euthanasia defended on slighter and slighter grounds, so that a man who is merely chronically angry or depressed is given the option to kill himself. That will have the excellent effect, among other excellent effects, of staving off political dissent.
How should a virtuous person respond to all this? Invest in morphine production. You'll make a killing.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I'm fairly certain public school systems in California and Massachuttess have already taken this to heart, good sir.
Your post reminds me of Huxley's 'Brave New World'. Have you read it? You ought to. I'm one of the select few who considers his world state more utopian than dystopian.
Thanks Edmund, I have read it, yes. Do you mean you approve of the condition in Brave New World, or that Huxley approved of it? For I could show you that Huxley did not approve of it. And you must tell me why you think it utopian.
I grant that it describes a solution to one of the essential problems of politics, stability, and I think that Huxley feared that such a terrible equilibrium is possible in the future of our world, but I hate such a world, for it gives up on pretty much everything else that is essential to human existence.
And of course there is the niggling problem inside all these horrors - SOMEONE has to be in charge, and from the very nature of being in charge, this someone will have true knowledge. The entire devilry could be dismantled if only the Director decided to do it. And this instability even in the midst of such stability shows that the quest by governments for perfect stability is doomed, and should not be attempted.
No I certainly don't think Huxley approved of it. I mean that I think it is more of a utopia than a dystopia.
It's not the stability aspect that I approve of, but rather (and I would have thought this was obvious from me) the fact that almost all of the World State's citizens are happy. I brought the book up because of your statement about "a progressive utopian vision of pleasure for all".
"give them sexual unrestraint, and everyone will be wealthy."
This is exactly what is done in BNW.
Post a Comment