The drug of affluence

Whilst Karl Marx may have had some searing insights it appears that he was wrong when he confidently  declared that religion was the opiate of the (European) masses.  It is clearly affluence (and the dream of affluence) that has been the West’s narcotic of choice, not religion.  It is also clear too that our dependency on the affluence drug and it’s imminent withdrawal (see Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Portugal etc) is a major threat to our Western way of life and social structure.   If you want to appreciate how big a threat the drug is to our own Western civilisation one only has to look back in history to the demise of the other great civilisations (Grecian, Roman, Mayan, Egyptian etc) and chart their rise to greatness and their rapid decay.  Without doubt the collapse of these great civilisations is associated with an inability to continue to generate ever greater levels of affluence for a society that then simply implodes on itself.

So, at the risk of being called a Jeremiah (the Old Testament prophet who was renowned for his doom and gloom utterances), I will say again that UK plc has a big problem as we are deeply in love with the drug of affluence and to date this is a problem that we haven’t really faced up to.  Throughout history, wealth, sex, power and influence have always been the drivers of the ruling classes.  However, since the rise of capitalism, social mobility and the emergence of the aspiring masses, the drug of affluence has cascaded down to all levels of society and evolved into mass addiction.    In the UK we have the highest levels of personal debt within Europe – this is not good.

Affluence has powerful effects – it compels us to insist on our rights to health, wealth and happiness.  It creates a belief that we are entitled to the good life.  It strips us of our ability to think and act for the long term and instead creates a dependence on instant gratification and material things to validate us as human beings.  Moralising aside, in a Capitalist system, none of these are particularly bad things in themselves; however, affluence has side effects.   The side effects of affluence, including debt, a sense of entitlement and a general lack of responsibility, are relatively mild whilst we are all taking the drug and climbing the social ladder.  However, the problem comes when the supply of affluence dwindles and we are forced to withdraw from the drug and we experience a mass come-down on epic scales.

When affluence is no longer available, the consequences for a hooked population are dire, and misery, panic, selfishness and brutality ensue.  Like a child deprived of a favourite toy, the population of a nation deprived of affluence can quickly turn nasty, with some very unpleasant results.  It has of course been fascinating to watch the debates across the globe of whether it is better to go “cold turkey” like the UK intends to do under David Cameron’s coalition government or whether it is better to go for the “slow withdrawal” method favoured by Barack Obama in the US.  Either way the misery associated with facing up to drug addiction will be very real.  My hope is, that as we look for ways to cope without affluence, that we don’t get hooked on the equally potent cocktail of anger, recrimination  and blame – let’s hope that this time we can each take our personal responsibility to “do the right thing” seriously, even when it means that we personally will miss out.  To date the response of the Greeks and the public sector unions in the UK does not fill me with great hope.

Here endeth the lesson – sorry for being so moralistic but it probably needed saying.