-
O Pakistan
May 14, 2013 | 4 comments
-
Where Is Joan Baez When We Need Her?
April 4, 2013 | 34 comments
-
We Are Family
February 20, 2013 | 14 comments
-
We Are All Mayans
December 28, 2012 | 24 comments
-
The Person of the Year Can Be a Thing
December 12, 2012 | 34 comments
The Nation's Pulse
Barbarism Is In, Civility Is Out
Once upon a time, you went to work on time, neatly dressed, with a smile and a shine on your shoes.
Every civilization ultimately comes under siege. Since the ancient world, barbarians from outside have entered not only the gates of city states, but they have transformed empires and societies. Our democratic capitalist system is no different, except that now the barbarians come from within, destroying the structures of civility with them.
Sometime and somehow, the notion of the enterprise as an integral part of society has yielded to that of the enterprise as a colossus, feeding 24/7 on the short-term passions of management and shareholders alike, realizing private profits but now receiving public support for vast losses. In good times, the gain is private for some, but in bad times the pain is public for all. We must indeed wonder about what sort of enterprise spirit and mutant work ethic we now have. Seeking scale to compete, some multinational companies have become so large that by certain measures they are bigger than the GDPs of some of the countries where they operate. According them the status of being too big to fail, we invite bad decisions and bad behavior. Against this backdrop of a gargantuan search for more profit, much has been lost, starting with norms of civility.
Once upon a time, you went to work on time, neatly dressed, with a smile and a shine on your shoes, perhaps carrying a dossier, briefcase, or lunch box. The idea was to do a great job, please people, provide benefit to society, and make a decent living for you and your family. That was in the days of Ozzie and Harriett, and Dobie Gillis — whom we now laugh at for their simplistic wholesomeness. There was also a time when people respected good manners and required them or encouraged them in others. But today, those with politeness are really not in our mainstream: They have no entertainment value. Rather, many view them as wimpy, lacking in machismo, or dinosaurs whose time has come and gone.
Now, you can breeze in from the Hamptons late, land on a helipad with a lap top dangling like a well-oiled Uzi, toting a black ballistic nylon backpack, wearing jeans and a short black raincoat, well-wired head bobbing to an iPod, while also barking a pizza order into a Bluetooth enabled smart phone, and scowl at the boss on your way in — and be proud to call it multitasking.
For some, this is the image of the so-called knowledge worker of today, perhaps more aptly called a data worker. Like a herd of wildebeest crossing the plains of Africa, they migrate from train station to office and back, talking into their devices — thinking they are doing us a favor by sharing their mundane conversations. This visual image has regrettably replaced that of the cotton gin, combine harvester, railroads, and blue jeans — erstwhile symbols of America’s purposeful citizenry, brawny determination, and brand ingenuity.
Also once upon a time, there were self-effacing folk, helping society with their wares and trades, along with like-minded others. They might someday be the subject of a Norman Rockwell illustration on the cover the Saturday Evening Post. They were the symbolic creators of the harvest and of material wealth, and the cornucopia that became America. They were the folks who put up red, white and blue bunting on the Fourth of July while others would do rodeo. In those days, the banker was often seen as your friend — an avuncular, kindly middle-aged man with a nice way about him - whose stone building had pillars and a vault. Even the Senate, once a chamber of dignity, is now a platform for posturing and photo-ops.
So what went wrong? When we should be beating plowshares back into swords, we have elected to beat them into iPods.
It is hard to pinpoint the cause of this — whatever “this” is. How did our glutinous, self-absorbed, consumption-driven Me culture of self-display come about — where the discouraging word “enough” is rarely heard in the city or on the prairies? We cannot just blame Bill Clinton, who might argue about the meaning of this “this,” and it’s not only about some on Wall Street who took excessive and unwise risks. Decades from now, historians will assess and label our uncivil times. They may write about runaway narcissism and acquisitive vulgarity — unless the historians are barbarians, too.
About the Author
Frank Schell is a business consultant and former international banking executive. He serves on the Dean’s International Council of the Harris School of Public Policy Studies, University of Chicago, where he is a lecturer, and on the editorial board of the Chicago-based National Strategy Forum, which focuses on national security issues.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (137) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Frank Schell
More Articles From The Nation's Pulse
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/09/barbarism-is-in-civility-is-ou
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Grant Bratrud| 3.9.10 @ 6:39AM
"A nation always begins to rot first in its great cities, is indeed perhaps always rotting there, and is saved only by the antiseptic virtues of fresh supplies of country blood."
-John Burroughs (1837-1921), "Phases of Farm Life"
That fresh supply is now cut off.
Alan Brooks| 3.9.10 @ 8:36AM
Frank Schell is a pro, but he missed just one thing:
"That was in the days of Ozzie and Harriett, and Dobie Gillis"
Do you remember the Dobie Gillis sidekick played by Bob Denver? what did he wear?
It started in the '50s.
Jamie| 3.9.10 @ 2:16PM
The days of "Ozzie and Harriett" were the days back in the fifties when good ol' Americans expressed openly their hatred of Jews, niggers, and fags. Even today, the rabid readers of American Spectator feel compelled to tell the world how much they despise faggots.
Those good ol' Americans from the fifties--especially the conservatives--were bigots to the bone and still are to a great degree.
You can have your fifties; I'm glad those dark times are in the past . . . i.e. for the more elightened among us.
Sam Vaughn| 3.9.10 @ 2:37PM
Jamie, seems like ignorance, hatred and uncivilized discourse has found it's way onto this board. Being a product of the fifties I see from your language that the only thing you know about the fifties is was you read out of progressive re-write of history. The fifties had it's problems but those with any living memory of having actually been there remember while it wasn't perfect what most of us aspired to is what you would consider boring and dopey. The were standards for behaviour that we all aspired to. Go back to the DailyKos. Perhaps your hatred and uncivlized behaviour will be welcomed...
Jamie| 3.9.10 @ 4:52PM
I, too, lived through the fifties, Mr. Vaughn. Why don't you ask Jews, blacks, and gays--those who lived during the fifties and experienced first-hand the "standards of behavior" you recall while looking back through the rose-colored lens of your Sears and Roebuck glasses.
The blacks will tell you about segregation and racial degredation; the Jews will tell you about the hateful "jew jokes," their being kept out of certain clubs and communities; and the gays will tell you about hatred so vehement that it nearly killed them. Of course, many gays did commit suicide during your halcyion, idyllic days of glory.
But you don't give a hill of beans about that, do you?
Simon Templar| 3.9.10 @ 5:08PM
You are a liar as well. It is so obvious that you did not live through the fifties. No one here who actually lived it denies that there were many social issues and forms of discrimination. You are not getting it. Your characterization of the era was ridiculous, extreme, and full of the typical language and rhetoric with which most of us are quite familar and have heard from the left wing historical revisionist. Sounds like you copied it right out of a left wing track.
Catherine Daniels| 3.9.10 @ 5:22PM
Mr. Templer,
Please try to be more civil and reasonable. Why the out-of-control, shrill tone. This is rude and uncivilized.
Jamie made a few valid points about the treatment of minorities during and before the 50s.
Surely you do not deny that blacks were mistreated during this time! Try to exercise some control of your reasoning.
It's commenters like you that give conservatives a bad name. Scroll down to see my comment on another of your posts.
Simon Templar| 3.9.10 @ 5:45PM
No, Jamie started on a diatribe about how wonderful and enlightened he and his liberal friends are and how horrible America was in an era that most of us doubt he ever lived. He then when on to insult and accuse the readers here that they are racist and desire to hark back to an era in which they would like America to return. We found this not only objectionable but false and offensive. So, we told him so. Now, is that better?Did I meet your standards? Now, is everyone feeling better? Did we start a new relationship? Did we now return conservatives back to that lofty realm of intelligence and civility? I think not.
Simon Templar| 3.9.10 @ 5:53PM
By the way, It's commenters like you that have allowed such discourse from the left togo unchallenged and excused for nearly a century bringing us for the most part to this place in history where they are about to realize most of their utopian sick dreams. In the immortal words of William Buckley, " Call me a Nazi one more time and I will come over there and punch you in the face."
Carl Lebowski| 3.9.10 @ 6:19PM
The above Simon Templar is referring to the night Gore Vidal called Wm Buckley a Nazi.
Mr. Buckley then called Vidal a queer.
Buckley and his wife--two miserable, malicious, over-the-top elitists-- died a few years back of lung diseases brought on by incessant cigarette smoking.
Vidal, a literary lion who does not smoke, is living happily here in Los Angeles. Viva Vidal!
Thorvald| 3.9.10 @ 7:00PM
1. Ask Mr. Vidal, since you're so close, what he thinks of Mr. Obama.
2. Vidal sued Buckley, but settled, since the truth is an absolute defense against slander.
3. While we were so "evil" here at home, what was International Socialism doing? Oh, just murdering millions and millions and millions of its citizens. Any peep from the lefties, then or now?
Olivia R.| 3.9.10 @ 7:22PM
I beg to differ.
The Buckleys did not die merely from lung diseases brought on by "incessant smoking."
The deadly toxicity of their minds caused their cancer cells to mutate and matastacize all over their wretched bodies. Cancer! This was their killer.
Read the autobiography of their son, who was often estranged from his parents because he could not stand the contempt they had for each other. They truly were a miserable pair.
victor| 3.9.10 @ 11:42PM
Carl:
"Gore Vidal called Wm Buckley a Nazi.
Mr. Buckley then called Vidal a queer."
While Buckley was certainly no Nazi, Vidal was most certainly a queer.
Not sure how happy he since his "other half" died some years back.
Vidal will stand before God one day and have to answer for his life.
Carl| 3.10.10 @ 7:58AM
Victor, calm down! Your anger will cause YOUR cancer cells to spread if they haven't already. Please . . . just try to control your vitriol, man.
The venomous Mr. Buckley may not have been a Nazi, but his mindset was about as close as you can get. And he certainly could have played one on the silver screen. That face! Those evil eyes! That forked tongue! The pretentious diction and show-off vocabulary! What a pompous ass!
To learn more about the lovely Buckleys, read their son's book. Christopher Buckley airs some of the dirty laundry, but keeps most of it hidden deep in the bottom of the soiled basket.
As for Gore Vidal, he is a more important figure--politically and literary-- than Wm F. Buckley (dead, you know) will ever be.
Sadly, Vidal's lover died last year, but there is one thing for sure: Vidal and his male lover had a much more loving relationship than William and Pat.
Victor, read Christopher's book, you old curmudgeon you! And stop being a hater. As the song goes, "Put some love in your heart."
Viva Vidal!
Jamie| 3.10.10 @ 10:50AM
Victor,
You have proven my point about American Spectator readers' bigotry. You say that "Vidal was most certainly a queer."
The wording of your post reveals your antigay hatred. I am stating the obvious in an calm, civil tone.
In case you read this post, Ms. Daniels, please note that I am polite in my response to Victor's malicious comment about Gore Vidal.
PolishKnight| 3.10.10 @ 11:33AM
Jamie, the left only replaced hatred for jews and blacks with that for whites and males (and especially white males) and even turned up the volume. It's not only hypocritical but paradoxical that they worship socialist Europe which is full of white males! It's a silly marxist religion with it's own notions of apocalyptic ending to avoid a plausible future (the earth is warming! That's why it's so cold! Drink the cool aid and get on the comet!)
victor| 3.9.10 @ 8:42PM
Simon:
"the left wing historical revisionist. Sounds like you copied it right out of a left wing track."
Much as those who are minimizing the mess that Jimmy Carter left for Ronald Reagan.
No matter what you will say, they will say you are mischaracterizing that time.
And the revisionists have many defenders.
Flit Andersen| 3.10.10 @ 3:08AM
Seriously, man. You do hate this country. You hate what we used to be, you hate that we ALL haven't embraced The One. You hate that we never will. This country was never perfect - no country ever is - but we've striven to make it MORE prefect. And we did it without starving 8 million farmers to death, like YOUR buddy Uncle Joe did.
You want to be PO'd about something why aren't you PO'd about that phoney-baloney P. U. litzer prize Duranty was awarded for all those lies he delivered to the public via the NY Times?
Oh, but he's one of the good guys, right?
Tell us Jamie, how many millions have communist dictators murdered since 1900?
PolishKnight| 3.11.10 @ 10:34AM
Flit, it is rather interesting how the left hates the USA and bashes it's European foundations and ethnicity even as they worship, er, western socialist Europe.
What is wrong with that picture?
Riding the metro in DC, I heard a feminist protestor lament that Germany's healthcare was so much better than the USA and I should have asked her: "Why don't you move there then?" Indeed, the socialist paradises of Europe have a "no vacancy" sign out!
Dasboot| 3.10.10 @ 4:02PM
Yes, and it is funny now that we have come full circle and it is liberals who hate Jews. With the Anti-Semite in chief and all.
L. Banks| 3.9.10 @ 4:00PM
I would hazzard a guess you did not live in the fifties. I did and never saw or heard such hatred. My family lived next to a Jewish family and we had many friends who were Jewish. My school was fully integrated and I enjoyed walking down the halls listening to the harmony being sung there.
As for the dark ages, they are now and ahead. One of the investigations on the problems Toyota is having with its electronics is interference from solar flares. This will impact a lot of "stuff" in the future and I can't imagine how these electronic dependent people will live. If we really have a major earthquake like Haiti or some other disaster that wipes out our infrastructure, how will people survive with no earth skills?
The fifties were a time for family and friends without the electronic distractions. My parents and brothers and sisters enjoyed our time together and we entertained ourselves and were involved with clubs, church and other social activities. Most employers are seeing first hand the lack of social skills the younger generation possesses because of the way they immerse themselves in their electronics. Many have developed classes and courses to teach social skills - a sad commentary of these times.
Simon Templar| 3.9.10 @ 4:52PM
Jamie boy...I could write a whole book on your little drivel of your 3 paragraphs. It is so chalked up through and through with marvelous falsehoods, distortions, and got to say, excellent brainwashing and historical revision. Couple that with your built in arrogance about being so enlightened and cock sure about things you do not have a clue about... and you got the makings of an absolute great brave new world radical leftist. No, I am not going to be polite about your youthful ignorance and complete acceptance of the load of crap you swallowed without ant critical thinking from your wonderful post sixties teachers. I will cut too the chase here..if there is a shred of curiosity and perhaps a brain cell of original thought in your head left..then I strongly sugggest you read, Liberal Fascism, by Jonah Goldberg. If you do read it, you are welcome to come back here and we can have an adultlike, informed conversation. Be forewarned though, it might really cause your small world to become very unsettled. Do you have the balls to read it?
Catherine Daniels| 3.9.10 @ 5:07PM
Mr. Templer,
Your tone is rude. Your remarks illustrate the incivility Schell is lamenting. As a conservative, I ask that commenters use a civil voice when criticizing another's ideas.
There is no need for the "bully-boy-pulpit" approach that characterizes so many of my fellow Spectator readers.
It embarrases me to read this type of letter. If we conservatives want to be perceived as intelligent, then we must speak with calm, intelligent voices.
Simon Templar| 3.9.10 @ 5:21PM
I tend to get quite irritable and offended when someone calls me a racist and do not find it civil, appropriate, or smart to respond in a calm manner as you suggest. The days are over where conservatives are required to remain civil as you call it when the very foundations of their nation are being attacked, the opposition uses every dirty trick in the book, and the same rules of discourse and respect for the truth are not equally applied. No.. he is a punk, as Breitbart would call him. It is he that needs to curb his rhetoric and you who need to grow up. The truth is sometimes quite sharp and offensive..particularly when it is in response to a concerted effort by some to destroy it and replace it with falsehoods. The readers here are quite intelligent and also very passionate....nothing that they should apologize for or need to have to defend.
Jamie| 3.9.10 @ 5:51PM
Thank you, Ms. Daniels for trying to inject respect and civility on this page.
I must confess that I could have expressed myself more politely, and when, and if, I post another comment, I will be more careful in my choice of words. I apologise for my tone, which was a little arrogant, but I think you would agree that I spoke the truth.
I agree that if we conservatives (I'm a fiscal conservative) want to be perceived as knowledgeable we must "speak with calm, intelligent voices."
Thank you again for reminding us to be more civil.
Ironically the title of the above article is "Barbarism is In--Civility is Out." By the barbaric voices in some of these comments (including mine, I regret to say), it looks like barbarism is characteristic of the minds of many Spectator readers. I hope I have been polite in my apologies.
Simon Templar| 3.9.10 @ 6:06PM
Is that you CopyLeft? Toddard? You devils! :)Neither of you are conservatives let alone fiscal ones. Get off the blogg! "It looks like barbarism is characteristic of the minds of many Spectator readers, says the whiner"...Yeah..we are barbarians for truth and the American way! Get lost in a very civil way! I prefer honesty and truth.
victor| 3.9.10 @ 11:32PM
Jamie:
"(I'm a fiscal conservative)"
That means you're a libertarian, not Conservative.
A libertarian is a Conservative without morals.
We should be "civil" while the fringe trolls of the left and the right are at the gates breaking our windows?
Fat chance! I'll run them and you with a rapier when you get out of hand.
That being when you lie and falsify and revise history.
Your pals are doing just that on other articles.
K962| 3.10.10 @ 6:24AM
You "the enlightened one" weren't around in the 50's. I can tell that by the blather you spiel. In NYC we lived together as a "community" and there were no whiner such as you trying to create chaos. I played with Blacks and Hispanics and we were on the same baseball teams and went to church together. You dont know crapola
basur | 10.27.10 @ 7:21AM
Schaeffer's How Shall We Then Live tells you how this has come to pass.
Stuart Koehl| 3.9.10 @ 6:48AM
When was this mythical time, Mr. Schell?
Alan Brooks| 3.9.10 @ 8:38AM
Stu,
it was in the age of Maynard G. Krebs.
mujalan| 3.9.10 @ 10:35AM
It wasn't as "mythical" as you might suppose Stuart. I grew up in it. Of course no one would argue that it was perfect either. People in our community routinely left their houses without locking them. There was no need to. Today we lock our door anytime we are out. But people who were not yet born back then understandably just can't quite believe that it was ever like that.
Alan Brooks| 3.9.10 @ 11:18AM
Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
Though it is true, it is a platitude to say the '40s and '50s were better in some regards than the early 21st century, and vice versa. The black poverty rate was fifty percent back in the day.
And all that smarm.
JeffT| 3.9.10 @ 1:01PM
And the Black illegitimacy rate is 70% today, so what's your point?
Stuart Koehl| 3.9.10 @ 5:09PM
I grew up in that time, too--in Brooklyn, NY. Let's say we left our doors unlocked, too--but only when we were sitting on the front steps.
There is no golden age. There never was, and never will be, short of the Parousia.
Flit Andersen| 3.10.10 @ 3:14AM
We lived in a suburban neighborhood of one & two family homes and we left our doors unlocked all the time until 1963/1964. Day & night. Dad used to leave his keys in the ignition of his car, sitting in the driveway out in the open. Yeah, it was a different time.
Stuart Koehl| 3.10.10 @ 6:11AM
And my wife grew up in a small town in Texas that was much the same way. But it is still an error to extrapolate from such situations into generalities. The crime rate in New York today is essentially what it was in 1964 or so. At various times and places, crime rates were higher in the past than they are today. The Victorian era is generally regarded as a time of civility and propriety, yet it was also a time of extremely high violent crime, crushing poverty, and rampant immorality, There were more brothels than churches in 19th century London, and New York and Chicago were not too different in that respect.
Jeannine| 3.9.10 @ 7:57AM
Once upon a time people worked 9 to 5 & their jobs were safe. If you expect the employee to work "around the clock," don't expect them to be neatly dressed in a suit & careful in following office protocol. This may be extreme & I would like to think that there are many employers who treat their employees w/dignity. Otherwise this is capitalism in its "rawest" form.
Alan Brooks| 3.9.10 @ 8:54AM
Right, speaking of rawest; we shouldn't criticize an employee's clothes--
be glad they are wearing anything at all.
Not that nudity is wrong (you aren't allowed to be a prude these days unless nudity offends a progressive's family) but good luck doing work when the co-workers are naked.
Alan Brooks| 3.9.10 @ 11:21AM
new slogan:
"Don't Criticize What Your Employees Wear, Because They Might Remove Their Clothing Altogether."
Jeannine| 3.9.10 @ 12:26PM
Not too sure if you're agreeing w/me or being ironic but love the slogan anyway!
C. Vail| 3.9.10 @ 8:29AM
Why get down about people toting laptops and yacking on cell phones when all about are hordes of genuinely barbaric young men walking around with their butts hanging out of their pants? This is a direct, obscene assault on civility and must be stopped. The only way I can think to stop it is to pressure businesses large and small which serve the public to refuse entrance to such slobs by adopting, or rather expanding, their dress policies. We are all familiar with signs that read: "No shirt, no shoes, no service." It is right and proper to demand that such policies be broadened: "Shirts and shoes must be worn, and pants must be worn at the waist."
bob s| 3.9.10 @ 12:48PM
Or- "Just say No to Crack!"
Kenneth E. MacAlister Jr.| 3.9.10 @ 3:13PM
Employing bouncers wearing steel-tipped work boots will defintely work if they won't comply with the dress code you describe C. Vail.
Becky| 3.9.10 @ 8:43AM
When I think of my mother as a nurse, I see her in her white dress adorned with her pins, white cap, stockings, and polished white shoes. She looked professional, and from the deference she still gets from those that worked with her, it appears she acted that way too.
There is a connection between the clothes you wear and the way you act. I saw and noticed it in my own workplace, how casual Fridays slipped into casual everyday, and the informality and coarseness of the office became the norm. Some offices had to revert to telling employees not to wear torn, dirty, threadbare clothing and shoes that were intact, not held together with duct tape (the men had a contest to see who could wear their shoes the longest).
Stuart Koehl| 3.9.10 @ 8:52AM
It may have looked professional, but it did not really make her more effective at her job. The slovenly but comfortable scrubs worn by nurses today allow for greater range of movement, are easier to keep clean, and thus better at avoiding second-hand infections.
In jobs, form ought to follow function. You want people to work, or to look good? I personally don't put on a suit unless I'm going to a meeting, and meetings are the antithesis of work in any case.
When I supervise a team, I make it clear that they and their clothes should be clean and should not cause distractions, but beyond that I only care that they can do the work in a timely and cost effective manner. I don't see that wearing an uncomfortable vestige of a cravatte around one's neck, thereby cutting off blood flow to the brain, does that.
Denise| 3.9.10 @ 12:36PM
Don't kid yourself about the scrubs. From the Wall Street Journal: "Hospital Scrubs Are a Germy, Deadly Mess"
http://online.wsj.com/article/.....62641.html
Stuart Koehl| 3.9.10 @ 5:10PM
If they are, its because hospitals are cutting corners on laundry, and staff continue to wear them even after being exposed to, well, staph. Ideally, they'd be made out of paper, and burned after one wearing.
Radegunda| 3.9.10 @ 12:07PM
You're right that clothes not only send a message to the viewer but affect your own frame of mind. When I work at home, I still dress up (partly) because it puts me in a "this is work time" mental state. And "dressed up" is not necessarily less comfortable than "dressed down."
Edward A. Schimmelpfennig| 3.9.10 @ 5:09PM
Radegunda, you have captured the essence of the matter. It is ironic that so many people today rush to the gym several days a week in order to stay fit -- but then look like peasants after getting into "street" clothes out of their lockers. People who weren't around in the late fifties and sixties have no idea how much more civilized behavior happened to be back then. True, we are a more tolerant and fair-minded society today, but the civilities that mark a more developed world are quickly vanishing. If you doubt the fact, just look at the parade of hand-held and ear-gripping devices that are present EVERYWHERE right now. It is not a pretty tableaux, and the machine is truly winning the battle ... which is not good for the human spirit.
Stuart Koehl| 3.9.10 @ 5:17PM
So, what's your point here? Back in 1942, the U.S. Army made its soldiers wear neckties--with their combat uniforms. Spats, too. Georgie Patton thought a spiffy uniform made for a good soldier. But even he did not put up a fuss when the uniform became more utilitarian (as uniforms always do in wartime, going back to the time of the French and Indian Wars.
Today's battle dress uniforms, around the world, are marked by their utter lack of spit and polish: they're baggy, they don't keep a crease, velcro has replaced buttons, shiny rank badges are now muted cloth patches, and boots are specifically designed not to take a shine. These uniforms are the normal dress for almost all of our soldiers, Marines and airmen. By your logic, ours should be a sorry military indeed, instead of the magnificent professional force that it is.
For that matter, it would be interesting to compare the button-down workplace with a country that has a more casual dress style--maybe Israel, where the first foreign minister had to buy a tie (and be shown how to tie it) before addressing the UN General Assembly for the first time.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.9.10 @ 8:48AM
The workplace, and therefore society, is mired in a false sense of equality bought on by affirmative action and E.E.O.C. Faults and outright stupidity are ignored. Managers who attempt to bring employees in line face either union complaints or outright claims of racism if the employee is a minority.
All this has lead to a societal abhorrence of "judgmental" people. Judgment is discouraged and therefore common sense is also thrown out.
The result is what we have now with mentally unstable people in the workplace who should be fired. However, that would lead to lawsuits.
Our society is now reaping what it has sown. When the government requires inequality in the forms of promoting one race over another the results are obvious and amazingly swift.
All collectivism leads to racism and the solutions would require the repeal of many laws which promote inequality.
When the government leads the way in uncivilized standards, why is it so hard to believe that the citizens will follow along?
Flit Andersen| 3.10.10 @ 3:01AM
I remember the phrase well, "Who are YOU to judge!"
As if nobody had a right to make a value judgment unless they were some flavor of Fed.
Ryan| 3.9.10 @ 8:53AM
Yay for pining for a time when we were living a facade in the 1950s.
That was an image of middle class white America on the television. Nothing more. What we got out of the 1950s was far worse.
We got adolescence - the extension of childhood upon who should have been young men through spoil and irresponsibility; the Cold War; segregation (the dark underbelly of the lily-white portrayal of the 1950s)...
Civility is a fine thing. It comes from being raised properly in a two-parent home. The way we dress and act are simply byproducts, not causes - something massively misunderstood then and now.
Radegunda| 3.9.10 @ 12:13PM
So the Cold War was caused by a "facade" of "middle class white America." Wow, deep.
And "the way we dress and act are simply byproducts" of ... of ... perhaps the way other people have dressed and acted?
But your post is so incoherent that I'm wasting time by replying. Except that "two-parent homes" is a good idea.
Ryan| 3.9.10 @ 2:26PM
No, the other way around. We were acting like all was well when the Cold War was working its way and the Soviets were oppressing their people.
It's a culture issue. What we think of ourselves (and others) is partially expressed by what we wear.
How am I wrong?
Pingback| 3.9.10 @ 9:03AM
Barbarians inside the gate | Worth Reading links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
firehawk | 3.9.10 @ 9:18AM
People with common sense know the trouble with this old world is spiritual but discussion of this spiritual component is verboten--unless you want to talk about Aleister Crowley's black magic or the idiot-fantasy of a movie like Avatar. "Where there is no vision, the people perish." The absence of God-fearing spirituality is what brings W.B. Yeat's "Second Coming" to life. Good and Evil are not words for human ethics and morality. Good and Evil are spiritual powers. If a person does not ACTIVELY seek to enter the Courts of spiritual goodness, the beast of Evil will consume that Soul one-thought-at-a-time. Evil becomes Good. Good becomes Evil. Light becomes Darkness. Darkness becomes Light. The world turns upside down.
Darragh| 3.9.10 @ 11:24AM
This is so utterly true of our culture today. There's some new movie coming out based on a popular young adult author. It posits the "bad" owls as with "St. Aggies"--the good decent owls are secularists.
Evil is Good indeed...our culture seems to be dying and as Yeats wrote, the gaze of a beast with a lion body and the head of a man is blank and pitiless indeed.
WilliamInWien| 3.9.10 @ 9:28AM
I think of our current situation as the LCD factor. The Least Common Denominator as applied to society. What is the least I need to do in any situation? Can I wear my sweat shirt out to dinner. I have seen sweat shirts at the opera! Least amount of effort in driving, signals are optional. As for multi-tasking, what is better: Doing one task well or doing two or more with mediocre results. Loud cell phone conversations in a doctor's office, in a crowded elevator and as soon as the wheels touch down on the tarmac. "Well, you know, like we just landed and, you know, I thought I would, like, call. Try diagraming such sentences! That is why they do not teach such skills in school any longer. OK! I am a relic.
AJ| 3.9.10 @ 9:48AM
Schaeffer's How Shall We Then Live tells you how this has come to pass.
Reinhard| 3.9.10 @ 10:14AM
This article is a waste of time and insults a hardworking generation. So, if I read correctly, not wearing a suit, using an ipod and a wireless headset makes you a barbarian. Idiotic nonsense. Perhaps Chicago has a different dresscode. I'm a consultant. I live in Scottsdale and work primarily in Manhattan and Philadelphia. I see no wholsale shift to "barbarism" as this article implies. No doubt Mr. Schell considers business casual the first great slide into the abyss.
I do agree with a previous post. What I've seen over my 30+ years in the IT field is a wholesale erosion by the corporate world in any respect for its employees. Every IT consulting firms parades the mantra that "our staff and it's experience are our greatest asset". True...as long as that staff is producing revenue. In fact they are not staff, they are merely RPUs...Revenue Production Units, and any interruption in the revenue flow results in the unit being "rightsized", "downsized", "RIFed", "adjusted". Pick your term for thrown to the curb.
So, to get back to my point, when business shows respect to those lining management's pockets, I'll be happy to reciprocate and dust off my ties.
mujalan| 3.9.10 @ 11:30AM
Rhinard,
I think there is enough blame to go around. I have been on both sides of the fence. For the last several years I have been an employer. During that time I believe that there has been something of a deterioration on the parts of both employers and employees. But the whole thing goes back to a general decay in our culture. And in that regard I believe that the author is correct. Frankly I also believe that it goes back to our society trying to cut itself loose from God.
PCC| 3.9.10 @ 11:00AM
This pathetic article should have been entitled, "Oh Why Oh Why Oh Why?"
Dave| 3.9.10 @ 11:13AM
I am just old enough to have memory of the good ole' days. I was raised by parents and grandparents who were products of the Great Depression. As a result, they grew up and worked hard and saved everything never once supposing anyone else, including the government, might take care of them. In fact, they lived in an age when it was red-letter stigma to be a welfare recipient. They taught and demanded of me all those "old-fashioned" manners like being reliable, productive, and honest. I walked through the living room last night where my 16-year-old son and one of his buddies were sprawled on the furniture watching an R-rated film that should have been rated X. I yelled at them "What the hell are you watching?" Not waiting for an answer, I told them "Turn it off." They did, without saying a word, and left the living room. My wife gave me a scowl, you know, the "Man, you're a grumpy old fuddy-duddy" look. That made me even madder and so I said (maybe yelled) to her "Hey, I could use a little support around here!"
I felt better after that. I'm proud to be my grandpas, and proud to be my Dad. Others will call it "Old, angry, white man syndrome." And I'll just say "You're damn right!"
tnxplant| 3.9.10 @ 11:17AM
Re "glutinous" (sticky, glue-like) - er, do you mean "gluttonous"(voracious, greedy)?
Petronius| 3.9.10 @ 11:23AM
Takes me back to a think piece Charles Murray did for the WSJ a few years back, called Prol Models. It was further echoed in the Spectator of London, July 15 of 2000, titled Rank Ignorance. And don't pass up Roger Price's last book, The great Roob Revolution, Random House 1970. I'm not saying Frank is late to the party, not knowing his age. But trying to repeatedly pin down the cause of our cultural rot will remain a parlor game unless and until we swear off egalitarian social philosophy totally and return to heads-up competition where talent and accomplishment alone win out in all aspects and institutions of life. This is why we are now in thrall to an army of self professed losers whose idea of "social justice" is inflicting their misery on us all, and they published it in The Nation: "America has to learn to lose". Our present leadership will not be satisfied until nobody else is either. That's their "vision thing"; an anthill commanded by the DNC.
The saddest fact is that the populations of western nations will never accept real conservative governance until we all hit bottom and there's no other way to proceed.
Ken (Old Texican)| 3.9.10 @ 11:33AM
Hi Young people.
There is no question in my mind but that you will remember these precise days as the "golden age".
...Or perhaps, "the days before the fall" if we cannot turn things around with you.
Clothes:
Do NOT make the man or woman...heh ...except in NY City and Washington, perhaps LA.
Demeanor:
A smile provokes a smile.
Cleanliness:
Is next to Godliness.
A handshake:
Ought to seal one's honor.
NO to a child:
Should be followed by a swat to the hiney if not obeyed. (then an explanation)
Elected:
Serve honorably.
Sworn in to American office:
Defend and protect the constituion.
Hire a person:
Pay him or her first....as agreed.
If we, (Americans), fall, the whole world gets very nasty, and very dark.
Young people, please help us restore the Union, before it is too late.
Thank you.
Margie| 3.9.10 @ 2:10PM
God bless, Old Tex! That was great. :^)
Occam's Razor| 3.9.10 @ 4:51PM
When are you going to run for office, Tex? I never disagree with you and you communicate in complete sentences, without a teleprompter!
Have a lovely week.
Yosemeti Sam| 3.9.10 @ 11:35AM
" ... So what went wrong? When we should be beating plowshares back into swords, we have elected to beat them into iPods...."
What went wrong?
Age old - hedonism!
Crops up in any civilization with pimps lurking
to cash in on the pied.
Exhibit A pimp - Hollowwood!
Richard| 3.9.10 @ 11:45AM
Becky, you are quite right. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that when one dresses well he will generally do better work.
Drew | 3.9.10 @ 11:47AM
I am pleasantly surprised to see that (with a few notable exceptions) most of my fellow American Spectator readers are united in rejecting the premise of this silly and curmudgeonly rant.
Now, you can breeze in from the Hamptons late, land on a helipad with a lap top dangling like a well-oiled Uzi, toting a black ballistic nylon backpack, wearing jeans and a short black raincoat, well-wired head bobbing to an iPod
Really? Does that particular person exist anywhere outside of Mr Schell's fevered imagination? One may reasonably argue that some financial professionals are paid too much. But the image of the pizza-chewing, boss-diss'ing helicopter jaunting Master of the Universe just doesn't seem to jibe with reality.
Do some people talk too loud on their cellphones (a technology that simply didn't exist thirty years ago)? Absolutely. But its hardly evidence of the collapse of society or of the imminence of the apocalypse.
Nostalgia ain't what it used to be. But anyone who thinks that the days of Ozzie & Harriet were some sort of era of halcyon bliss don't know what they're talking about. Maybe Ozzie Nelson went off to work in a starched white shirt - but around him was society wracked with institutionalized racism, virulent anti-semitism, homophobia, violence, and sexism. And, since we're on the subject of nostalgia, I might point out that the top rate of Federal Income Tax in those days was hovering around 90%. Now THAT'S "redistribution of income" for ya'
Petronius| 3.9.10 @ 3:29PM
Read your own last paragraph Drew. Civilization is threatened because the high minded among us identify with and adore criminals, perverts, and parasites. Federal Judges gave them and you everything you wanted. The only way we can keep them from invading our lives is to accumulate enough wealth to escape what used to be livable urban neighborhoods. Like most people, I do not have the cash it takes to afford that. Ergo, the quality of my life is determined by the behavior of those who reside in my area. This months flavor with the weather improving is vehicle break-ins and burglary. Real Americans pay the price for their behavior every day, in treasury, property, and blood.
Retro| 3.9.10 @ 11:54AM
It sounds like many of you spend most of your time in your pajamas watching cable TV in your underground backyard bomb shelters surrounded by stacks of canned goods.
"Oh, boy, those pesky youngsters! It wasn't like that in my day, I can tell you!"
La plus ca change...
cuban pete| 3.9.10 @ 11:59AM
Human beings are symbol makers. I'm old and still work in the same field I have toiled at for forty years.
When I began you had to wear a white shirt, tie and suit( not a sport coat and slacks). As a young man I chafed at that but learned that by dressing in that fashion the people whom I served knew that they were being serviced by a professional who was going to deliver an appropriate product.
My work clothes just provided visual short hand to the client that the person helping them was serious. I suppose had I been dressed in a slovenly or "casual" manner eventually the person would have become aware that they were going to get good service, but I learned that a professional appearance sped up the trust development phase of the relationship.
A registered nurse friend of mine used to help out at a weekend clinic in very poor neighborhood.
The first time she showed up she was in full nursing regalia- cap, shoes,etc. The program director thanked her but said it wouldn't be necessary to dress like that and she could wear casual clothes. Alice said," No sir I want these folks to know they are getting a pro and I believe if I'm dressed like a pro that will give them comfort."
I'll never forget that and I'm sure the folks at the free clinic appreciated it.
Joe Gavin| 3.9.10 @ 12:07PM
For some understanding of these issues I recommend reading Gil Bailie's Violence Unveiled: Humanity at the Crossroads and the writings of Rene Girard (The Girard Reader). They clearly reveal the anthropological roots of the problem and the Judeo-Christian remedies.
Jeff Perren | 3.9.10 @ 12:30PM
Thank you for a fine article.
With respect, I believe this "It is hard to pinpoint the cause of this -- whatever "this" is. " is not correct. It isn't hard to put into a single word: Deweyism.
The philosophy of John Dewey - with its twin pillars of Pragmatism and Progressivism - is the single, fundamental cause of nearly every social ill from which the country suffers today.
It had antecedents, of course, many of them. But it ensured and accelerated the decay that started in the public education system and spread to the major media and to the political system.
Reject Deweyism, or at least begin to seriously question it beyond the political arena, and far more than half the problem will be solved.
firehawk| 3.9.10 @ 1:45PM
Delivered in 1947, C.S. Lewis' lecture "The Abolition of Man" is a devastating analysis of Progressive Education. BTW, "The Abolition of Man" is NOT one of Lewis' works in Christian apologetics. It is a skilled educator's analysis of the philosophy under-girding Progressive Education.
Jeff Perren | 3.9.10 @ 1:55PM
I've not read that one; thanks for the reference.
Seek| 3.9.10 @ 12:53PM
"Civility" too often means a demand for servility -- and by people whose behavior is anything but civil. There's nothing wrong with civility in theory, but something gets lost in translation when it comes to practice. "Hollywood" is not the problem. Making money from film is a noble pursuit; the problem lies with the criminal element.
Spartuchis| 3.9.10 @ 12:55PM
This article lost me at the mention of Ozzie and Harriet and Dobie Gillis. Those are fictional television characters, for Gods' sake, and holding up those images as a symbol of the nation's Golden Age is as moronic as basing one's knowledge about the nineteenth century on Little House of the Prairie. The TV was an idiot box then, and it remains one now.
PCC| 3.9.10 @ 1:23PM
Right on, Sparty.
Joseph A. Harriss | 3.9.10 @ 1:42PM
Well, there surely was such a time, or we wouldn't have Arthur Miller's Willy Loman, described as being "out there on a shoeshine and a smile." Not to mention Shakespeare's well-known advice, "Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy/But not express'd in fancy; rich, not gaudy/For the apparel oft proclaims the man."
Cordial Curmudgeon| 3.9.10 @ 2:10PM
As long as we're doling out blame let's not forget Casual Fridays. I would bet that it was on such a day that the sockless, denim-clad hipsters at Lehman Brothers put down their $5 cups of latte and decided to risk the fortunes of a 150 year-old firm on investments that had all the solidity of Confederate bearer bonds. As much as I dislike government interference, now might be the time for Congress to mandate that all bankers and brokers have to wear morning coats and top hats to work. People who dress like children handle money like children.
Pingback| 3.9.10 @ 4:27PM
Frank Schell on Barbarism Versus Civility – The Dean's International Council links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
PCP Smoker| 3.9.10 @ 5:45PM
I go to work in kakis, long sleeves, and shined shoes. Get there turn on Rush, Levin, and other local radio stars on the ipod, get my work done and return home after 9 hours. Nice and easy and the work is quality.
The days of ties and jackets and greased hair and "mr. X and ms Y" and treating treating the boss with a subservient attitude are long lost and they should remain lost forever.
Why spend time on non-sense when one can be happy and productive?
Kenneth| 3.9.10 @ 6:38PM
When politeness and consideration for others is considered weak, one knows our society and culture is losing it.
Margie| 3.9.10 @ 8:07PM
Politeness and consideration for others is one thing, but I will kiss the ass of no one.
Kenneth| 3.10.10 @ 12:48PM
I agree Margie - to be specific.
Look good,feel good,be good.
Fem. movement has gone too far !
K ass and baby sitting adults is a no.
Maddox| 3.9.10 @ 8:24PM
The fifties was a time when the cold war was being waged in other countries. Today the cold war is being waged in our country by our fellow citizens.
It was wrong then to practice discrimination based on race or sex. Today it is wrong to even speak about those things. That can be used to label you as a bigot.
Then there was segregation by choice and there was a sense of community pride and heritage that inspired civility. Today there is forced desegregation that has brought us affirmative action and class warfare.
Then the principles of personal responsibility were valued and families supported themselves and helped those who could not. Today personal responsibility is being replaced by government support reducing the number of families with two parents.
Then proper dress was considered an indication of self respect and the individual was treated accordingly. Today causal and quirky dress is accepted and are usually indicative of what a person expects from himself.
The inventions and productivity from the fifties and beyond are what gave us the technology we have today. Will the same be said fifty years from now about today's accomplishments?
Morals, personal responsibility, and the pride that comes from accomplishment still exist in the hearts of most Americans. If we can use the lessons we learned about discrimination, hold onto the freedom that unleashed our exceptionalism, and teach those principles to today's generation, we can repair America's economy and return to greatness.
DatsunMark| 3.9.10 @ 8:54PM
We lost a large part of our honor as a society when we had a president who couldn't control his personal behavior, then had the media defend him/his behavior for political reasons.
KyMouse| 3.10.10 @ 10:16AM
I too grew up in the 1950s; and although I know that American society wasn't perfect, I do remember playing outside well after dark, unafraid of being molested. I remember when cuss words weren't a part of casual conversation (the only time I ever heard my father cuss was when he stood helplessly watching a dear neighbor's house burn, as we waited for the fire truck to arrive). And I remember that the black folks my father helped in his law practice were married to each other and lived in modest but decent homes. And I remember when the whole family could watch sitcoms and dramas together, shows such as "The Andy Griffith Show" and "The Lone Ranger." No, it wasn't a perfect time, but I wish today's kids could experience the best parts of it.
Margie| 3.10.10 @ 11:35AM
KYMouse~ Sunday nights around the t.v. watching Ed Sullivan, Bonanza. Dad went to Carvel's ice cream and got the whole family the sundae or banana split of our choice. Family dinner was every night at the same time. The kids played hopscotch and jump rope in the street with the neighbor's kids because hardly a car would pass by. This was more early 60's for me. Re-runs of Father Knows Best! LOL. Loved it.
Margie| 3.10.10 @ 11:29AM
Compared to today~the 50's were idyllic. Even the 60's. My niece and nephew are grew up with Pokeman, video games, computers at the age of 4, cartoon characters that are robotic and impersonal.
There is no comparison. I'm all for technology, but children (IMHO) don't get to be children anymore, they get shoved into adulthood way too soon. Unless they have parents to intervene in the ways of the world. Then they are fortunate, indeed.
PolishKnight| 3.10.10 @ 11:46AM
I have an answer to the author's lament trying to pinpoint the problem: Much of it is due to feminism and women's equality and the notion that women can "have it all" and earn a boatload of money and then leave when it suits her "work/life balance" and chivalrous conservative Don Quixote's in love with Dulcinea unable to hold them accountable.
Really. Without men the left would have won a long time ago and the elements of the right such as John McCain and Sarah Palin openly disdain and ignore us and then wonder why moderate Republicans promising goodies for women lose elections to more generous welfare state democrats.
Do you want people to come in on time? Perhaps having the roads not flooded with career women going to hobby jobs or dropping off their kids at daycare might free up some of the congestion that has clogged the motorways in most metro areas. Next time you're stuck in traffic, think of that observation!
I remember the film 9 to 5 portrayed the evil patriarchy of trying to sterilize the workplace and the women liberators allowed workers to bring in coffee cups and (tasteful) office interactions. Sexual harassment legislation appeared in the 90's not only due to feminist hatred of men overall, but also conservative career women who wanted to MAKE men treat them like "ladies" (without them required to live up to the standards of such.)
Yes, there are many conservative women who respect and treat men with dignity but the movement is plagued like with locusts with women with entitlement attitudes that bless the welfare state.
Pingback| 3.12.10 @ 7:26AM
Resistance Is Futile » The Pink Flamingo links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
ghdmanufactoryoutlet | 4.4.10 @ 3:22AM
gfrs
sunglass | 4.4.10 @ 3:24AM
sas
paulsmithoutlet | 4.4.10 @ 3:33AM
fdg
burberryoutlet | 4.4.10 @ 3:35AM
dgf
Pingback| 4.8.10 @ 6:18AM
Fourscared and Fourscammed | TechNexus.info links to this page. Here’s an excerpt: