|
|
|
January 8th, 2007
10:04 am - Who is the leisure class?
Two years ago, I travelled through Mindanao, the war-torn southernmost island of the Philippines. Villages there were populated with modest wooden huts made with coco lumber and leaf roofing. Then all of a sudden, appeared a walled compound. Within the brick walls, were several buildings, each three stories high. The buildings were brand spanking new, and constructed with brick with ceramic tile roofing. Armed men surrounded the premises.
"Who lives there?", I asked. Some governor or someone in some elected position of power, it seemed. Though the person was elected, it seemed that he got there through terrorising his electorate. Votes were counted by each village. Villages that didn't vote for him were burnt to the ground. Needless to say, on paper at least, he was an exceedingly popular governor.
This was one of my first experiences of conspicuous consumption. But certainly not the last. What is conspicuous consumption? Norwegian American sociologist and economist Thorstein Veblen coined the term over a hundred years ago to talk about the 'leisure class'.He argued this was due to barbarism and conquest of some tribes over others. Once conquerors took control, they relegated the more menial and labor-intensive jobs to the subjugated people, while retaining the more warlike and violent work for themselves. It didn't matter that these "menial" jobs did more to support society than the "higher" ones...
To Veblen, society never grew out of this stage; it simply adapted into different forms and expressions. For example, he noted that during the Middle Ages, only the nobility was allowed to hunt and fight wars. Likewise, in modern times, he noted that manual laborers usually make less money than white-collar workers. The example I provided above from Mindanao is a glaring example of conspicuous consumption. A big mansion in a walled compound with a private army, whilst the villagers (his electorate!) live in grinding poverty. This is notable because of the clear link between the villagers and the governor, and of course, the geographic proximity.
Yet, driving through the over-big beach houses of Mandurah in Western Australia, I cannot help but wonder if the distinction between the leisure class and the underclass is now a globally divided one. Are not the majority of us a leisure class in comparison to the underclass in the developing world?
Current Location: Mandurah, Australia
|
Comments:
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/22779270/639149) | | From: | ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) indriya |
|---|
| Date: | January 8th, 2007 01:54 am (UTC) |
|---|
| | | (Link) |
|
Yep, Australia is mostly leisure class, for sure. And most of western Europe. I think in some developed countries, where there is a greater divide between rich/poor (eg. perhaps the USA where, if I recall correctly, around 50% are below the poverty line), there is still some obvious differences within... staunch capitalism, lack of unions, lack of enforced minimum wage, etc, might be the culprit there... However that western definition of poverty isn't quite the same as in Africa, the Middle East, or Asia...
Yeah, I agree. I agree that the Western world is not uniform in its intra-country egalitarianism. At least in Australia, we seem to feel some embarrassment to live side-by-side (intra-country) with poverty. I like that. Now if only Australia felt more embarrassment at the global divide of rich and poor.
*steps down from soap box*.
Yeh, lucky we all get to save some face because the abordiginals live in remote Orstraya..... ;-)
When I was flying, I stayed in Harare Zimbabwe before Mugabe let loose with his recent economy-destroying policies. There were two conspicuous consumption examples there:
1) Mugabe's residence typified your Phillipines example
2) There was a cafe where the prices were reasonable for wealthy, usually white, Zimbabweans but were exorbitant and out of reach for the poorer, usually black Zimbabweans
Regarding Mugabe's residence... ironic, really, for someone who undertook land reform under the guise of giving land to landless peasants.
Ah, he was showing himself as an example mate! A shining example to all of those landless, yet aspirational peasants ;-)
Yes its interesting how there are establishments in these countries that you know the poorer people will never access because they simply can't afford to. I thought this when I was visiting the V&A Waterfront in Capetwon - expensive cafes, expensive shops mainly frequented by rich, white south Africans. Whereas in Australia I really can't think of anywhere that's like that (well on such a large scale). At least most Australians can afford a coffee or a piece of cake at expensive places!
We're not only conspicuous consumers, we're also eating their lunch.
| From: | (Anonymous) |
|---|
| Date: | January 8th, 2007 03:34 am (UTC) |
|---|
| | | (Link) |
|
You're right. The system of transnationals and globalisation seems to maintain a status quo where consumers in the west (for the moment) benefit and everyone else gets their village metaphorically burnt to the ground if they complain.
Yup. Just waiting for the day China stands up for its people and says "hey wait a minute, we're not going to take your crap anymore - pay our people properly or p*** off out of our country you transnationals!"
Sadly though, the Western transnationals will just find another country (or ten) to exploit...
*burp* Exactly.
In the case of Mindanao, theit top export is fresh fruits. Mango, durian, etc. People with land pretty much get stuck having to grow those crops for export, because it's the only way they can afford to live... and yet, the poor farmers are the lucky ones, because at least they own some land.
What also amazes me is that these politicians or popular figures "help" people and rub it in the eyes of the masses and the media just loves it. And the billboard industry too --- it makes me sick to my stomach these rich and influential people making donations and then they put their names and faces all over it. And then they run for office, buy the public's vote and win, and after draining the public budget they build those high walls around their newly-built massive compounds and use the impression of power to intimidate and then to charm people come election period.
And as elections are coming this year at some point I did consider maybe I should just not vote at all. Showbiz celebrities have expressed interest in running again. Oh well.
I know... and yet they call it 'democracy'. If the political system in the Philippines is democracy, then democracy certainly is not much to aspire to.
What ever happened to charter change? I haven't caught up with politics in the Philippines.
Heh. I reckon if John Howard could he would burn down villages that didn't agree with him. Already he has everyone scared of him - even his own bloody party! I'm reading Margo Kingston's "Not Happy John" at the moment (started before the last election but go sidetracked) and it has a great quote in it that relates to this topic somewhat:
"You can judge politicians by how they treat refugees; they do to them what they would do to everyone else if they could get away with it" (Attributed to Ken LIvingstone, Mayor of London).
Nothing's happening to the charter change, the court dumped it. As usual, there are the protestors, that it's a potential violation of rights (people don't like the ida of going parliament) and that the Macapagal administration's trying to extend its term, etc. It's a mess, really, and it's not like things will change. Come to think of it, I don't think Filipinos are up for real change. Well, them anyway, am sick and tired of the politics here.
I would be sick and tired too. I had great hopes for charter change. I still feel it is necessary to achieve anything approaching democracy in the Philippines. So sad.
"For example, he noted that during the Middle Ages, only the nobility was allowed to hunt and fight wars.
Interesting that now the leisure class don't actually fight wars, they send the underclass to do this (in the US especially!).
"Likewise, in modern times, he noted that manual laborers usually make less money than white-collar workers".
Heh. Not anymore.... bloody 'cashed-up bogans'!
I wonder why anyone would want to fight in a war and not let others fight for them. Tis odd.
And oh yeah, speaking of bogans, I got introduced to a new term. 'Chogan' -- the Chinese bogan. That's what one of my brothers called the other. :)
Chogan - love it!!!
Hey, I sent you an email - I've changed my flight details without any financial penalty. Arriving now on the 26 January to commence on 29 January. I think that'll make things easier for all of us ;-) Now lets get that visa organised!
At last, a name that I can pin my embryonic suspicions on! I've never heard of Veblen before but I'm sure to check him out now. I tend to agree with his/your assessment. All you need do is compare the wages of teachers/social workers/etc with the wages of corporate wonks and other white collar workers. I have many professional/white collar worker friends earning very good money who seriously lack what I'd describe as life skills - everything from the ability to change a flat tyre to basic understandings of society, politics and geography. When I was a legal researcher some years back I saw first hand how so many high level legal academics, barristers and judges got their staff to write up their work for them. Some judges are known to merely dictate their judgment into dictaphones and get their staff to write it up, even find the legal authorities to support the judge's views.
| From: | (Anonymous) |
|---|
| Date: | January 29th, 2007 05:35 pm (UTC) |
|---|
| | leisure class | (Link) |
|
I live in the U.S. , not proud of it at the moment. I am currently living in a house part time that burned halfway down , but am well-off compared to many of the homes in the towns of the Indian reservation we live on. Go figure.
Hmmm... Indian reservation. I had no idea that they existed. |
|
