Keeping up with the Johnsons.

 Marx had a scientific theory. In his age it was believed that the world is going to only get better and better until it reaches the optimal state. He stated with scientific accuracy (or so he believed) that this optimal state is communism and collectivism.

Well, that failed. Though I blame Lenin for communism's failure more than Marx. Leninism was economically 100% fallible. Relatively most successful was communism on Cuba, free of soviet influence... but I'm going of the topic now. Back to what I wanted to talk about;

Believing in an ever-improving political system would nowadays be considered naïve at least. The illusion shattered to pieces with the ascension of Soviet Union - or maybe with the Great Depression? Who knows.
Both important and interesting is though the "new" anti-utopian thinking that came in years 1930-1950.
Two names:
Orwell
Huxley.
Two books:
1984
Brave New World

Both depict dystopian future worlds. And both are becoming or have become at least partly true, I'm afraid.
1984 is about communism, collectivism, socialism. Well, that happened. But we're over that now, right? Communism happened, but now it's gone, yes? We can have capitalism and all rejoice, true?

Well, that's where Brave New World gets in.
Is consumerism any better than collectivism?

Lots on lots of years ago, culture was only something educated people would enjoy. In consumer society, everyone wants to "keep up with the Johnsons". They have culture? We want it too! How did we come to this?
Well, we are always being told how quality of life keeps improving everywhere (sounds exactly like communist propaganda), especially in the 1st world. What political scientists really mean by "quality of life" is comfort. Actual quality of life is not measurable anymore. It used to be measurable - back in the days where even in rich countries satisfying one's physical needs was not a sure thing. But no one suffers nowadays from material crisis. A lot of people likes to say they do, but really, no one in 1st world countries does.
So, what is there really improving? Education? No, not really. People aren't generally smarter than they were 30 years ago. Wealth? Yes.

What does a human being do, when they have surplus of time? (Which is a direct result of being rich. You don't need to work so much, therefore you have more free time. We have a paradox now that rich people generally work more than poor, but look at it historically - poor farmers used to work 12 hours a day. Nowadays you can do just fine without working at all).
Time starts losing value to them. But that's just a minor problem. While wealth increased, variety of important goods money can buy didn't improve little bit. Purchasing power theoretically got better. Now you can buy more food for the same relative wage than years ago. But this doesn't really apply to education, or even healthcare. Healthcare is always getting better - but its accessibility is not.
Bottomline is; not even the ever-increasing wealth can buy anyone self-improvement. But even though no one can really buy anything valuable, the money still needs to be spent. Voila, consumerism! Action movies? Check. Repetitive and intellectually inferior pop music? Check. Mainstream videogame shooters? Check.

All of these only drive us away from the really important things. I admit, I am guilty of it myself. I could go out more, if I played less videogames. But I've grown up in an environment that taught me to appreciate the damn things. It's got a tight grip on me. I used to jump around the Stormwind square in World Of Warcraft even when there was nothing for me to do. Why? I keep asking that myself.

Consumer society is much more pleasant than any other society. But that only makes it more dangerous. There is a difference between something truly beautiful and only pleasing.
Democracy gives many rights. But just as many obligations. Everyone needs to accept their place in the world but also try to improve it. Making "simple culture" for the uneducated, telling them their empty ranting is just as important as an educated opinion - that's wrong. Holst (the music composer) once said that only few can master the art of music, but to find that few, one must give music to everyone. True. But please - if you can't understand something, just accept that it's more likely your fault than that thing's fault. Making things dumber helps everyone and no one at the same time. You know what also helped everyone and no one at the same time? Communism.

POINT MADE.