FUNCTIONAL SOCIETIES 16/03/22
Those familiar with Marxist terms may recall the concept of the 'final analysis', could be illustrated by the state of modern societies. The argument examines status worth between the one who has money and the one who works. Rich vs worker (role) may also relate to commercial vs social.
In my previous article 'A Battle for the Soul', I have referred to the generation of wealth of society or economy different from accumulation of money usually in quick rich schemes.
We have quickly come to realise how the housing market is beyond reach of the ordinary folk even for one who holds down two jobs. And anyone who has money whether borrowed or by some other means, can invest that money and become a shareholder.
The corporation may apply some magic market mechanisms and the product of investment becomes hot property. The investor is accredited more money and becomes a rich person overnight.
And I'm saying that some rich persons are none other than those who influence laws of society, or criminals among drug addicts, powerful elites or gangsters and whatever; he/she has money. In light of that, you would have made up your mind that money accumulation by quick rich schemes including corporate shareholders have no status.
Status therefore refers to the one who works for his/her money hence labour. And labour is an essential function in the establishment of the market and society. Thus labour serves a stable contribution to the organisation of society.
The point is, quick rich schemes such as investments and monopoly of commodities have undercut the economic function of labour and in turn the disestablishment of the working class.
As a result, a chain reaction expects rising unemployment and having nothing to do may lead to depression, inflation, mental illness, drug and alcoholism, violence and crime. This in turn creates a demand on health and police resources.
In other words, money accumulation is a static organisation of society and static organisation is true to the social consequences described in the chain reaction above.
The unruly nature of organisation changes the style of civilisation from that of freedom and democracy to subordination, surveillance and control. The rich become an elite class; the poor becomes desperate consumers living in Poverty.
Is this greedy appetite for money accumulation leading to the ultimate demand for captured consumers in collateral for quick rich schemes? Does it explain the need to expand the consumer sector therefor invasion of smaller nations?
Status therefore refers to what one does to serve in the organisation of the economy or society. As we have realised anyone can be rich and own resources but we also found that being rich doesn't serve a functional role therefore has no status. It is what one does in the form of work.
The social also serves an economic function in the organisation of society. This is the binding relationship between the task or work and the end that it serves. We understand that money has no status and work has to have a functional purpose binding the stable organisation of society. Therefore, it is not the amount one earns in his/her task or job, it is what one does.
Some people are influenced by the highest job in the country such as Prime Minister, other people are influenced by religious leaders, still others by cultural icons or gangsters and symbolic images. They all have different earnings which is no longer related, but followers also have popular choices and opinions.
I know one foreign owned media outlet antagonises political leaders for its entertainment to appease followers and the political propaganda of issues to feed a fanatic demand.
However, the all-important variant is a stable contribution to the stability of society. So, if antagonising leaders is someone's fun that is drawing the ire of others, it is nothing more than political propaganda that doesn't contribute to stability of society other than inciting tension. Maybe it's time to reign in foreign abusive media.
I know it's not everyone's choice of jobs to keep our streets and facilities clean for the public. But imagine a city without facilities, is just as good as empty. These folks need recognition in pay.
I also place a fair amount of respects for community leaders of whom the community look up to for directions in times of need.
Those who volunteer their time to help others are true icons of status as their selfless work serves an example of community spirit in our midst.
This is what status is about. It is not a selfish accumulation of society's wealth for one's own keep, but the selfless work that transform and transcend the material status to community spirit.
So, if the modern rich quick scheme is the trend, then the worker has to be protected. And this could be achieved by integrating labour with the corporation ownership of shares that not only secures labour but also mobility to the middle class. Most of all, the upper echelons are no longer restricted to racial class, but open to diverse and progressive organisation.