The Nature of Capitalism and Aristocracy

I can't remember when I first thought about this, but not too long ago I remember wondering why our current American society seems to have a rather noticeable lack of interest in philosophy or culture. I think it's a pretty common observation that the average person doesn't really seem to care too much about greater meaning or purpose, and it seems like when you compare now to the older Victorian or Renaissance eras, people were a lot more "civilized", so to speak, back then. If so, then why is it that the so-called advancement of culture nowadays has led to, well, a regression in culture?

I think the answer is two-fold. The first part came to me through the ideas of Edmund Burke, a Revolution-era British guy and oft-considered originator of the Conservative movement. I don't know how exactly I made the link (the pathways of my mind are still largely a mystery to mankind) but I recall that one of the major points of his ideology was that of the "natural born aristocracy." He believe that government should be controlled by a more or less elite and established group people who would have the time and resources to learn the ways of government and leadership, and thereby to lead us in the best manner. So, in cruder terms, they rich should lead because they have nothing better to do.

While I don't believe that this is the best idea in the world, I think perhaps it's not entirely unfounded. It does seem true that when you look back to older society, those who seemed so culturally minded were in fact the aristocratic class, as they didn't have to worry about things like not starving, whereas the peasantry class, well, did. So, when you look at it like that, it seems like perhaps things aren't so much different. But yet, it's still not the same. Even among those you might call the aristocracy now there seems a lack of interest when it comes to the fine arts. I think this second factor is in reality due more to economics than anything else.

Point number one: we have a far different aristocracy now. Whereas in the past the elites were those who were established hereditary or monarchial leaders and therefore had no real threats to their security, the current leading group is that of entrepreneurs, those who have reached their position through business savvy instead of family relation. They stay ahead of the game by focusing on business instead of philosophy, and as a result the Victorian ideal is lost, as are Burke's leaders.

Point number two: I remember once reading an article that wondered out loud about the music interests of Americans, and specifically why classical music has gone out of favor while things like rock, pop, and country are all the rage. My answer is that classical music was never really the "music of the masses", but that in the past the values of the higher classes were considered somehow "better" and that classical music was included among that. Nowadays, with most ideas pertaining to aristocracy gone, that idea has gone with it. Also, in general, capitalism seems to have that Darwinian tendency to destroy culture anywhere it goes, leaving a wake of advertising and apathetic buyers. It would seem that aristocratic culture (and philosophy with it) just doesn't sell as much as "Save A Horse, Ride A Cowboy".

This all leaves us with the question of what we can do to preserve philosophy for the future generations. Although it could be asked "Why bother?", I would say that keeping some sense of philosophy (and culture with it) is quite important unless you want America's children to become a bunch of Ritalin zombies (which, to a degree, is a point I defended previously). The post-modern capitalist society seems to suffer from a serious lack of purpose, and it is high time we fight to do something about that.