Egalitarianism and the Persistent Desire for Status The new bourgeoisie could dress like nobility, and that could not stand! Aristocracies needed to preserve their identity and the elitist caste system. During the late medieval period, an expanding merchant class found themselves with more disposable income, while at the same time declining production costs made previous luxuries such as fine cloth more accessible to the commoner. Interestingly, increases in sumptuary laws ran concurrently with periods of economic growth. Sumptuary taxes were popular, as they helped to fill the king’s coffer while simultaneously guaranteeing only the nobility could afford certain luxuries. The wealthy were often exempted from such prohibitions, allowed to pay a separate tax to wear certain clothes, or never had the laws enforced on them. It is not surprising that clothing, one of the most visible indications of one’s position in society, would be a primary target of such regulation.
The aristocracy touted laws that ostensibly strengthened the moral fabric of society, but allowed themselves de jure or de facto exemptions. Rather, they would often be directed at the lower economic classes so as to provide clear status boundaries. To wit, sumptuary laws were not universally applied to everyone in a society. And the bootleggers often cloaked their true intentions in a veil of righteousness. (See also Chapter 6 of Virginia Postrel’s excellent book The Fabric of Civilization.)īut as Bruce Yandle would remind us, for every Baptist there is frequently a bootlegger – i.e., someone who personally benefits from a restriction that was based ostensibly on moral grounds. Similar restrictions were found in colonial Latin America, Tokugawa Japan, China, and the Islamic Middle East. The Puritans restricted the use of lace, gold buttons, and “ slashed sleeves” in the New England colonies. Some of these restrictions were promoted by religious officials who found the show of extravagance distasteful. Found commonly around the globe, they often targeted “luxury goods,” particularly clothing although such laws extended to food and even funeral services. Sumptuary laws were legal restrictions placed on the consumption of certain goods or behaviors that were deemed harmful to the moral fabric of society. Such a comparison may better explain some hidden motivations for invoking wokeness. However, a more apt comparison may be made to the sumptuary laws and taxes that were commonplace throughout history. Considering that these historical instances involved persecutions for “thought crimes,” there is much to learn from such analogies. Nothing New Under the Sun.īut are cultural crusades aimed at changing social behavior really all that new? Does history provide other instances of puritanical campaigns that may reveal other underlying reason for our current culture of wokeness? And what might this lesson have to suggest about ways to counter the increasing attacks on personal liberty that emanate from the new orthodoxy?Ĭontemporary woke campaigns have been likened to McCarthyism in the 1950s and witch trials in colonial America. Social media provides a conduit for quickly detecting thought and lifestyle infractions, shaming deviants into compliance or having them “canceled.” Wokesters quickly grab the moral high ground and ruthlessly denounce any deviation from the neo-orthodoxy du jour. Some will go so far as to glue themselves to the counters at coffeehouses so the prices of bovine and almond milk can be equalized for the sake of economic justice. The woke wear masks for your protection, not theirs. Rent control must be instituted so the homeless can find affordable housing.
Calls for increases in the minimum wage are to help the poor. Driving a Tesla is not about their saving gas money, but about saving the planet. The denizens of the woke house are quick to assert their insatiable desire to care for the voiceless, weak, and downtrodden. The woke drive electric cars, carry reusable grocery bags, insist on having others recognize their personal pronouns, agitate for defunding the police, support higher minimum wages, and insist everyone wear a KN95 mask in public. In fact, it can be downright cost prohibitive!įor those not hip to the woke, let me begin by noting that “wokeness” is similar to being fashionable, but with a strong air of social conscience and a desire to engage in the consciousness raising of others.Īlthough “woke” originally indicated an awareness of racial injustice, the term now encompasses progressive policy positions on many social and economic issues, including environmentalism, gender identity, homelessness, crime, income inequality, and even pandemic behavior.
0 kommentar(er)
