January 14, 2019
Some time
back, I mused about the decline of our country. Though a dismal thought, it isn’t mine alone. I have referred to our ugly culture. Another term would be decadent, borrowing
from Jacques Barzun’s book, From
Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life. Barzun began with a definition of decadence
which was intended to be descriptive rather than pejorative: "All that is
meant by Decadence is ‘falling off.’ It . . . is a very active time, full of
deep concerns, but peculiarly restless, for it sees no clear lines of
advance. The loss it faces is that of
Possibility.”[1] He offered illustrations of “the difference between the 16C and
the 20th, between the dawn of a new culture and its close in
disenchantment.”[2] His
five hundred year span was from A.D. 1500 to 2000, when his book was
published. The beginning date may seem
arbitrary, serving his five-hundred year theme. He notes that it is the commonly accepted date for the beginning
of the modern era, but specifically points to 1517, when Luther posted his 95
theses, commencing the Reformation, as a turning point. Barzun points out that the spread of
Luther’s message was made possible by the printing press, developed around 1450
and in common use by 1500. Another
critical date is 1492, when Columbus sailed, changing the world forever.
A.D. 1500
is as good a date as any to signify the transition from the medieval to the
modern age, for the most part a step forward, certainly a step toward a more
vigorous, open, free society. Will and
Ariel Durant, in introducing their volume The Age of Reason
Begins, and referring to it and two volumes to follow, state that
the “unifying theme of all three volumes will be the growth of
reason.”[3] That hardly describes the present time. The era which began at the opening of the
sixteenth century did not end in 2000; we are not in a new and vigorous time,
but still are declining.
In the
latter part of From Dawn to Decadence, in his
analysis of modernism, Barzun’s use of "decadence" began to take on
the more usual negative connotation, but even the original definition describes
a dark scene: "The forms of art as of life seem exhausted, the stages of
development have been run through. Institutions function
painfully."[4] He quotes Andy Warhol: "Art is what you
can get away with." (A glance at the arts section of The New
York Times would demonstrate that an “artist” can get away with
anything). We could add, quoting
Richard Rorty, “Truth is what your contemporaries let you get away with
saying,” which could serve as a motto for Mr. Trump.
Everything
today seems to be Post-something else; no future is in sight. The greatest risk, climate change, is met
not with reasoned response but with denial, in effect ensuring that there will
be no future.
As to the
painful functioning of institutions, consider the current shutdown or virtually
any aspect of government in recent years.
As to the culture more generally, consider the state of political
discourse, of language generally, of ideas, manners, morals and music; consider
films and video games which provide vicarious violence, or the threats of
violence by “patriot” groups, or actual violence abetted by the flood of
unregulated guns.
Consider
the support by avowed Christians for an immoral egotist. Medieval Catholicism was challenged as
corrupt by Luther; Protestant “Evangelical” Christianity, as practiced in this
country, may be approaching a similar precipice due to its own corruption.
Is the problem, at least as to government, a
failure of democracy? Merriam-Webster
defines democracy as follows: “government by the people especially, rule of the
majority . . . .” President Abraham
Lincoln referred to “government of the people, by the people, for the
people.” The irony of democracy is that
government of the people works only if they are properly led. That may take some of the bloom from
government “by the people,” but it is inescapable. The right sort of leaders — honest, informed, committed to the
national welfare, not beholden to interests — are critical. The wrong sort bring disaster; if that were
not clear before, the advent of Donald Trump makes it so. “In a modern
democracy it is possible to fool most of the people most of the time: but at a
price.” [5] Whether the people of the United States have
declined in virtue and political judgment is a fair subject for debate; the
decline of their leaders is clear.
Whatever
the exact mix may be between bad citizens and bad leaders, the country is in a
dire condition. The present combination
of an ignorant, foolish, resentful authoritarian as President, a docile Senate
and a bigoted base is extremely, uniquely dangerous, but it did not arise from
nothing. Some components of the present situation are structural, such as the
undemocratic electoral college and the equally undemocratic Senate. Some are the result of political
manipulation, such as the gerrymandering of House districts. Economic inequality exists in part because
of the failure or indifference of government, and is made worse by tax cuts and
attacks on social programs. Much of
government has been captured by moneyed interests, abetted by the absurd
notion, imposed on us by the Supreme Court, that money is speech.
There are
danger signs in basic measures of national health. Life expectancy has fallen; infant mortality, women’s death in
childbirth and death rates among children all show either increases or poor
results compared to other advanced countries, or both. Homelessness persists in prosperous cities.
Perhaps
the recent election provides some slight hope of change, in the form of a check
on the administration’s worst impulses and investigation into its
misconduct. Trump acts like a man who
sees the walls closing in. For once,
let us hope that he is right. Being rid
of Trump wouldn’t usher in a new age, but it would remove one impediment to
positive change.
___________________________
1. From Dawn to Decadence, p. xvi
2. Id. at p. 132
3. The Age of Reason Begins, p. vii, Volume VII in The Story of Civilization
4. From Dawn to Decadence, p. xvi
5. Tony Judt, Ill Fares the Land, p. 173
No comments:
Post a Comment