Sunday, September 21, 2014

Nationalism and social class

Razib Khan writes about the recent Scottish referendum where the more affluent seemed to be most opposed to the cause of independence:
But a nation is more than the sum of utils. Would anyone ask that soldiers should sacrifice their lives for productivity gains? Should Britain have yielded to Germany in 1940 because of rational calculations? Or more to the point should the Scots have bowed down before bourgeois, when it seems clear that the odds beforehand were against them? What the global elite seems to not comprehend when facing ‘irrational’ nationalism is that their opponents do not share their premises. In the developed nations of the West there is a sense of ennui due to the lack of motivating spirit. The goal of economic well-being above and beyond basic needs has long been met. Now it is on to the bigger house, the bigger car, and so forth. This rush toward competitive consumption results in short term happiness, but it is often ultimately empty. The cosmopolitan elites may be wealthy in money, but they are also often wealthy in life satisfaction because of the nature of their careers, and the experiences which they can indulge in. They do not comprehend the vacuousness of the lives of the middle to lower classes, because they live lives with verve and excitement. But at some point they will have to face the reality that the 90 percent do not exist purely as means to the ends of the 10 percent. If a system is not sustainable, it will not be sustained.

1 comment:

Luke Raines said...

I wouldn't put too much faith in Razib's new found love of the white working class. He is just afraid that what is happening in places like Rotherham makes South Asians like him look bad and that this will make it more difficult for people who look like him to migrate to Europe and the United States. At the end of the day, Razib only cares about himself and for people who look like him.