Kristian’s random ramblings
Sunday, June 24th, 200706252007 12:20 AM.
I’m currently in a text-discussion with Ardelle on the sociological evolution of faith, religion and what the next big step could be. I contend that all the great Axial Age philosophies / religions (Zoroaster, Buddha, Lao Tzu, Confucius, Jeremiah and the Greek rationalists like Socrates and Plato) were born out of the need of society to change its belief system to accommodate a burgeoning society.
These societies that created philosophies / religions were first developed in areas where there were surplus food (usually agricultural areas) that allowed the population to pursue other interests, some economical like trade, services and production, whilst others completely cultural like the arts. It was during this era when their pre-modern belief system came from an obsolete system of thought that chaos eventually ensued. After all, nations hostile in trade won’t be friendly in arms for long, causing tremendous tension in society, oftentimes breaking out in open fighting.
It was during this chaos that the Axial thinkers came forth to offer their solutions, which was often egalitarian (in an attempt to equalize unencumbered capitalism amongst the people) and highly spiritual.
Fast forward to the future and there’s a different system brewing. Communism had been proven ineffective (War communism actually, since the soviets failed to invest in more productive technologies, preferring military technology when their economy is but a fraction of the economic bloc controlled by the USA, a dangerous move that caused it to eventually implode due to economical malaise) and the ancient system of Capitalism still remains. The Axial sages’ dream to change the world to equalize and imbue it with justice never came around. As one Prince or Duke once commented about Confucius to one of the Master’s students: "I admire your master, though he knows the world cannot change he still tries to do so."
But therein lies the problem — how can a society, egalitarian to its core, be one that is geared for absolute progression? I don’t need to look into a communist system to see how a heaving bureaucracy work, I just need to look at a Capitalist system’s bureaucracy — the people working in it DOESN’T WANT TO CHANGE BECAUSE THEY’RE SO DAMN USED TO IT AND THEY’RE THRIVING WITHIN THE SYSTEM. It’s not really surprising that in an egalitarian society, the friction with which new, progressive items / systems bring go for naught as the Guards of the Old System wouldn’t want to change.
On top of which, all economic systems are subject to some sort of economic war or another; as such, political and, eventually, military war then isn’t too far off. By far, the most effective mode of survival is to gear a system up for progress (thus, be free economically) but at the expense of inequality; or a system can gear itself up for egalitarianism somehow at the expense of faster progress. Then there’s geographical, technological, cultural, political, etc. wildcards to take into account on survival.
Okay, I’m sleepy now and I know I’ve got a lot of holes in my arguments but I’ll edit this again…soon. haha.
*** Thus it becomes a question of whether a society should
It is not of another’s decision that Lady Fortune shouldn’t be with us but it is of the higher deity’s conspiracies and our own acts that she shall find us eligible.
