About Andrew Cusack
Writer, web designer, etc.; born in New York; educated in Argentina, Scotland, and South Africa; now based in London. read more
News
Blogs
Reviews & Periodicals
Arts & Design
World
France
Mitteleuropa
Knickerbockers
Argentina
The Levant
Africa
Cape of Good Hope
Netherlands
Scandinavia
Québec
India
Muscovy
Germany
Academica
Without family & faith we’ve lost our way
by JOHN HALDANE
THE SCOTSMAN | Friday 1 September 2006
DR JOHNSON’S memorable observation that “nothing so concentrates the mind as the prospect of imminent hanging”, has provided a formula for highlighting other attention-focussing threats. Currently, for example, the minds of Scotland’s MSP’s may be said to be concentrated by nothing so much as by the prospect of next year’s Holyrood elections.
It is reported that Labour and the SNP are each holding strategy discussions to prepare for May’s poll. The latter in hope of victory, the former in fear of defeat. Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats try to look principled while yet pondering the best bet for coalition partners; Conservative MSPs are under attack from within their own party for their mediocre performance; and Scottish Socialists are breaking apart and regrouping in smaller cells. Concentrating the mind is rarely easy, often uncomfortable, and sometimes destructive.
So much for the politicians, what of the electorate? or more aptly, in times of declining voter participation, what of the people of Scotland? It is clear that here, as in the UK more generally, people have little confidence not only in politicians but in politics. Apart from cynicism encouraged by decades of scandals which, whatever their differences, give the general impression of exploitation of office; there is the feeling that most policies simply fail to make life better.
Currently the parties are talking about expenditure and delivery, promising more for less, or just more. But it should be evident to anyone who has eyes to see, that our deepest and most pervasive problems as a nation are not economic, or ones of inefficiency in the delivery of education, health and welfare services. Rather, we are, to use a Victorian sounding phrase, a ‘demoralised society’.
In recent usage, ‘demoralised’ has come exclusively to mean fed-up and pessimistic, as in ‘of low morale’; but in its older meaning it referred to a process of moral corruption. These two meanings are in fact related, since those of low morale are more vulnerable to corruption, and those who have been corrupted often come to take a dark view of life. If you have a low opinion of yourself or of human existence in general, then there is little to lose or even to live for. And if you have slipped into the mire it is easier also to fall into despair.
Returning to Scotland after several weeks spent in the US, I am once again struck by the extent of this country’s demoralisation – in both senses, though here I am concerned primarily with our moral condition. General standards of public civility are low; indeed it would be more apt to say that incivility is growing. Public drunkenness, intoxication and aggression are common. The idea of personal modesty in matters of dress and conduct is obviously unfamiliar. Sometimes people speak of culture having become eroticised, but that is a sophistication unavailable to a society that is simply and crudely sexualised.
Recently Marco Niada, a journalist on the Milan based paper Il Sole 24 Ore (similar to the Financial Times), wrote a piece on the state of life in Scotland focussing on the discrepancies of wealth and lifestyle within a single mile in Glasgow. He began at Prince’s Square in Buchanan Street, described in the Glasgow Guide as “a uniquely elegant and entertaining shopping experience”, and walked from there down to Argyle Street and along to Glasgow Cross. Within a few minutes Dolce and Gabbana, Gucci, and Prada displays had given way to Pound Stores, and then to boarded windows. A little further and conspicuous affluence had yielded to an evident abyss. In the mid of day, he and his male companion were approached by a girl in her early teens, who first asked for a light and then offered them ‘business’.
The others in sight were hanging around aimlessly, many likely to be the beneficiaries of a society that has sustained their parents and their parents’ parents in chronic unemployment, without giving them any sense of individual or social purpose. Welfare support, which was once intended to sustain people through circumstances of financial difficulty, has itself become a form of existence. It is rather as if having once been taken to the doctor one then comes to live as a patient in the surgery waiting for the next consultation.
Niada chose to visit Glasgow because its difficulties have been widely reported, but he could as easily have seen the demoralised condition of our nation in many parts of Aberdeen, Dundee or Edinburgh, and seen less extensive but no less real personal and social disorder in most towns throughout Scotland.
By contrast, and special cases acknowledged, American centres of population show little signs of such human decay. The reasons are not hard to find. The United States honours the family and community, not just in name but in practice; and to a large degree its people organise their lives around religion. Like the two aspects of demoralisation these factors are not unrelated. ‘Religion’ for Americans is a public, familial, and communal practice; and the idea of the family held together by love, through times both good and bad, is revered as almost sacred.
The state is no substitute for the family or for real community. Serious politicians know that and are rightly wary of moralising. Yet they can do more than restrict their social contribution to offering increased public expenditure and efficiency. They can encourage, through public acknowledgement of their virtues, those institutions such as family and church that do have moral authority and the power to remoralise the lives of individuals.
As it is, most politicians are conspicuous in avoiding such encouragement and many advocate or support policies that serve to undermine them. In the nineteenth century, following the influx of people into the cities, and the squalor and corruption consequent upon that, efforts were made to address the moral as well as the material needs of the people. That is necessary once again. Politicians as a class are themselves unfit to provide it, but they could assist others in their efforts, or at least not impeded them with mindless policies that only serve further to erode the bonds of family and faith.
John Haldane is Professor of Philosophy, and director of the Centre for Ethics, Philosophy and Public Affairs at the University of St Andrews.
Search
Instagram: @andcusack
Click here for my Instagram photos.Most Recent Posts
- Silver Jubilee November 21, 2024
- Articles of Note: 11 November 2024 November 11, 2024
- Why do you read? November 5, 2024
- India November 4, 2024
- The Lithe Efficiency of the Old Constitution November 4, 2024
Most Recent Comments
Book Wishlist
Monthly Archives
Categories
An admirable piece by Professor Haldane, but I fear he idealizes religion, family, and community in present-day America, perhaps a bit much. Consumerism and sprawl have damaged not only America’s small towns and communities themselves, but even our sense of what community means — the “commons” if you will. And having recently watched a trailer for the documentary “Jesus Camp”, I once again fear for what religion has come to mean for many Americans.
I heartily agree, of course, that the state “is no substitute for the family or for real comminity.” Unfortunately, neither is the mall, the mega-church (which all too often operates like a corporation), or electronic entertainment and celebrity gossip.
An admirable piece by Professor Haldane, but I fear he idealizes religion, family, and community in present-day America, perhaps a bit much.
I respectfully disagree. The thing is that we think we’ve got it bad in the U.S. but things are much, much worse in the U.K. Viewed from the States, we recognize our litany of problems much more readily and easily.
Consumerism and sprawl have damaged not only America’s small towns and communities themselves, but even our sense of what community means — the “commons” if you will.
They have indeed, but I think Prof. Haldane is trying to say that ‘the family’ and ‘religion’ as institutions are generally much better off in the States than in the UK, which is definitely true. Liberal capitalism has been killing off small town life for decades now, and unfortunately the response of the Church in America has been a poor one. Little more than releasing a few occasional statements warning about the dangers of materialism. We could do with a combination of fresh thinking and a return to traditional principles (even if idealogues will tell us they are “un-American”).
And having recently watched a trailer for the documentary “Jesus Camp”, I once again fear for what religion has come to mean for many Americans.
I saw that trailer too. Rather freaky, eh? But these sorts of documentaries (or ‘opinion cinema’ as I think they should be called) often have an element of scaremongering to them. That said, it seems to me Evangelicalism is quite often little more than self-worship and self-expression painted in a thin veneer of religion. Which is not to denegrate the fact that quite often people will find God through the Evangelical churches and, the closer they get to God the further they distance themselves from Evangelicalism and move towards traditional mainline Christianity (id est, Catholicism and Orthodoxy). To a Catholic, it often seems that Evangelicalism and Social Liberalism are just two sides of the same revolutionary individualist coin.
I heartily agree, of course, that the state “is no substitute for the family or for real comminity.” Unfortunately, neither is the mall, the mega-church (which all too often operates like a corporation), or electronic entertainment and celebrity gossip.
Naturally, and Prof. Haldane is far from suggesting such. Big Government and Big Corporation are both creatures of which we should be ever suspicious, though I haven’t pressed the good professor for his views on that matter.
Many thanks for your good response, Andrew. Excellent points, and well taken.
I will confess, I’ve never been to the UK. Well, only as a transit passenger in Heathrow airport. That, several times. Once my flight was delayed and I was put up overnight at a nearby hotel. It was pleasant — the folks there kind and efficent, but without that ghastly obsequiousness of American “service” workers.
Unfortunately, it was only for a night. I wanted to go out, at least for a walk, but it was raining that night and I had developed a chest cold from the plane.
I admired Professor’s Haldane’s piece and indeed realize he is far from suggesting Big Government and Big Corporations (hard, at times, to tell the difference these days) enhance family and community(and religion) — I wished to make a point about some trends here in this country.
Goodness, I didn’t know ‘the family’ and ‘religion’ in the UK were in bad shape.
Sad.
Again, thanks for your insightful comments.
By the way, excellent term ‘opinion cinema.’ Fitting, indeed, for what passes as documentaries, these days.
I’m a bit of a film lover myself, and have recently been watching the moving films of Carl Th. Dryer: The Parson’s Widow, The Passion of Joan of Arc, Day of Wrath, Ordet, & Gertrud.
Next on my list will be some Robert Bresson: Diary of a Country Priest, Balthzar, and Pickpocket. Eventually I’m planning to watch some of the great Powell/Pressburger films such I Know Where I’m Going, The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp, and A Canterbury Tale.
Are you a film lover by chance?
I am not sure I agree with all of Professor Haldane’s bleak views, but it certainly has got me thinking. I quite like being provoked by more conservative people than myself. Speaking of which, I thought I would post after you were blasted by ‘William Riddle’ and ‘John’ recently.
I must first admit that I neither share your religious beliefs, nor do I subscribe to many of your views. However, I was saddened to see that two people equally at odds with your own values had the gall to write so venomously about you on your own website. William Riddle’s bile was particularly nasty. I would like you to know that, though there are a good few of us who disagree with you, I personally enjoy reading your thoughts and find them helpful in elucidating opinions of my own. What a sad state of affairs when we cannot tolerate differences of opinion without resorting to personal insult.
I don’t think I’d call myself a cinéaste per se but I do like a good film. Of course, good films are harder to come by these days, but as recent films go, Wes Anderson’s ‘Rushmore’ and Jean-Paul Rappeneau’s ‘Bon Voyage’ are tied for favorite.
Ah, both films you mention I’ve not seen.