Why do the masses of ordinary citizens pay such a feverish mind to an international event so seemingly obscure as the royal wedding uniting Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, with Catherine “Kate” Middleton? What is so special about the dress of Kate’s younger sister and maid of honor, Philippa "Pippa" Middleton, that the multitudes can’t seem to tear their eyes away?
More simply put, why do those from a lower station crave obsession with those who appear to be upon the summits of human life? After all, it would appear that the advantages of nature or of fortune have contributed very little over the centuries to the promotion of happiness. Surely neither the splendor of their rank nor the extent of their capacity has often given any just occasion to envy.
To some, apparent superiority has a tendency to incite great designs and even greater imaginations. But these are naturally susceptible to fatal miscarriages. To others, the general lot of mankind is misery. That the misfortunes of those whose eminence draws upon them universal attention have been more carefully recorded should not be a particularly vexing phenomenon.
Perhaps their misfortunes were more carefully recorded only because they were more generally observed. Perhaps, too, their misfortunes have in reality been only more conspicuous than those of others, but not more frequent, or more severe.
Some barriers are not physical. Rather, they are psychological. The human emotion of fear is of the latter variety, used by those in authority to assure conformity to a desired behavior. Envy is also a very powerful psychological barrier, as is arrogance. The rich look down from the summit upon the poor with arrogance; the poor, in turn, look up from their lower station on the rich with envy.
During the early days of industrialization in the late 19th century, Theodore Roosevelt made an astute observation within his analysis of labor-ownership strife and the arrogance of capitalism. Exhausted from his attempts to balance the competing social forces he sought to mediate, T.R. described the situation thus: “Envy and arrogance are the two opposite sides of the same black crystal.”
To Alphonso X, the Learned, King of Spain, as far back as the 13th century, general credit is given for having said that “Had I been present at the creation I would have given some useful hints for the better ordering of the universe.” One then might ask: Better ordering to suit whom? The learned king no doubt had his own happiness in mind. His own best interests first. His people’s second.
In what has been labeled “an expression of the American mind,” the 1776 Declaration of Independence, authored by Thomas Jefferson, states that among the “certain and inalienable rights” which all men possess are “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” The word “happiness,” however, is without definition. Neither is the word “property,” the ownership thereof, or “bank” anywhere mentioned. Nor is a particular economic system contemplated in the 1789 US Constitution.
What, then, is the pursuit of happiness? To answer this question, the ordinary citizen should recognize that arrogance and envy are antagonists in the predictable “science of human nature.” This vantage point is provocative yet neutral.
-Michael D’Angelo
More simply put, why do those from a lower station crave obsession with those who appear to be upon the summits of human life? After all, it would appear that the advantages of nature or of fortune have contributed very little over the centuries to the promotion of happiness. Surely neither the splendor of their rank nor the extent of their capacity has often given any just occasion to envy.
To some, apparent superiority has a tendency to incite great designs and even greater imaginations. But these are naturally susceptible to fatal miscarriages. To others, the general lot of mankind is misery. That the misfortunes of those whose eminence draws upon them universal attention have been more carefully recorded should not be a particularly vexing phenomenon.
Perhaps their misfortunes were more carefully recorded only because they were more generally observed. Perhaps, too, their misfortunes have in reality been only more conspicuous than those of others, but not more frequent, or more severe.
Some barriers are not physical. Rather, they are psychological. The human emotion of fear is of the latter variety, used by those in authority to assure conformity to a desired behavior. Envy is also a very powerful psychological barrier, as is arrogance. The rich look down from the summit upon the poor with arrogance; the poor, in turn, look up from their lower station on the rich with envy.
During the early days of industrialization in the late 19th century, Theodore Roosevelt made an astute observation within his analysis of labor-ownership strife and the arrogance of capitalism. Exhausted from his attempts to balance the competing social forces he sought to mediate, T.R. described the situation thus: “Envy and arrogance are the two opposite sides of the same black crystal.”
To Alphonso X, the Learned, King of Spain, as far back as the 13th century, general credit is given for having said that “Had I been present at the creation I would have given some useful hints for the better ordering of the universe.” One then might ask: Better ordering to suit whom? The learned king no doubt had his own happiness in mind. His own best interests first. His people’s second.
In what has been labeled “an expression of the American mind,” the 1776 Declaration of Independence, authored by Thomas Jefferson, states that among the “certain and inalienable rights” which all men possess are “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” The word “happiness,” however, is without definition. Neither is the word “property,” the ownership thereof, or “bank” anywhere mentioned. Nor is a particular economic system contemplated in the 1789 US Constitution.
What, then, is the pursuit of happiness? To answer this question, the ordinary citizen should recognize that arrogance and envy are antagonists in the predictable “science of human nature.” This vantage point is provocative yet neutral.
-Michael D’Angelo
Mike,
ReplyDeleteDid you read about Apple in China - riots trying to get the new iPhone. They had to pull the product from the stores and now it is only available online. And then there were the "Air Jordan" riots here in the US and other skirmishes for holiday sales. What are the implications of this kind of behavior oh wise one?