The toxic effect modernity has had on the human organism goes largely unremarked as we focus instead on the more easily visible devastation around us. Thus, while it is readily and broadly acknowledged that modern development has poisoned the planet, the fantasy persists that it has made us, its human beneficiaries, into better, more enlightened, more tolerant, more moral beings.
We fail to see that the mutagenic effects of modernity have not spared us. Blinded by the progressive idea that our progressive notions are improvements over those of our supposedly primitive forebears, we hallucinate that our stuntedness, our degeneration, makes us tower above them.
Thus, although progressive thought openly revels in its unnaturalness, in its violation of traditional norms, in its disruption of gender, in its promotion of every form of intellectual and aesthetic aberration and deformity, it evades detection as being of a piece with the larger anthropogenic destruction of nature. We fail to notice that modern technological magic has inflicted its most deleterious effects on those closest to it, its inventors and practitioners.
In science fiction, which projects onto the future what is already in the past, mutation tends to be equated with physical disfigurement. Modernity’s most damaging effects, however, are spiritual. And of these, the least visible is the loss of the ability to judge spiritual disfigurement, to see our own degradation for what it is.
To support its self-regard, the elite needs to associate itself with whatever is uncommon. In the arts, for instance, the elite patronizes just those artists and designers whose work is inscrutable and even repugnant to everybody else. Thus the modern phenomenon of the avant-garde. But, elite snobbery expresses itself in moral as well as aesthetic taste.
Just as the elite patronizes the artistic avant-garde, it also supports what at any given moment pass for avant-garde attitudes, preferences, and lifestyles. The actual content of whatever ideas the elite embraces matters little because these ideas never serve the elite as anything more than fashion accessories. Outré ideas, ideologies, philosophies are easily embraced because easily discarded. The more perverse-seeming the idea, the greater its potential for displaying the elite’s extraordinary discernment. Thus, the same class of people who lauded Marcel Duchamp nominating a urinal to the status of art in 1917 today support a man nominating himself to be a woman and vice versa.
Progressivism has a longstanding association with snobbery, going at least as far back as the female-run salons of the 18th century that nurtured Enlightenment thought. In that particular instance, fashionable ideas did ultimately have unpleasant consequences for the silly blue bloods who entertained them, proving that the world is not entirely devoid of justice.
The mark of a successful–all too successful–elite is that it feels so secure in its position that it can indulge in displays of moral distaste for the very means and values that enabled its ascent.
This is what we observe today in the form of a white elite cheering on campaigns against “white privilege.” On the surface, this is evidence of either altruism or masochism. But it is neither. It only indicates how well-insulated the elite is from the consequences of its moral affectations.