Yet another blog/article about the British Royal Wedding....but with a different perspective.
It seems that people are starkly divided: they either hate the ostentatious reckless spending or they are adoring the luxuriousness of it all. Some people have asked, "how can they be so insensitive to proudly display their excesses in a world suffering from constant deprivation?" To be honest, I am sympathetic to this sentiment, but I am concerned about suffering whether there is a show of indulgence or not. There really is no need for this kind of deprivation. There will always be natural phenomenon that threaten our survival, but most of what threatens people these days is human-created, and that means we can fix them.
So, in light of the fact that these problems can be fixed, but are not, and the fact that many people are supposedly captivated by this Royal Wedding (although I'm suspicious of how interested people are because no one around me seems to give a damn), what could account for that interest? Is it truly a simple dichotomy of either you are interested because the suffering of others has no meaning to you or you are not interested because you care about others?
I think the issue is more complex than that. A lot of people feel the world is full of suffering and they just don't want to be exposed to it more than they are because they feel powerless to do something to rectify it. For example, if their friend were in danger or hungry, they would run to assist, but when the problem is structural, they see no way of alleviating that problem. They are sympathetic to the suffering of people around the world, but they cannot find a means of fixing that problem so they want to turn their attention to events that are celebratory.
It got me thinking, why do people care about anyone's luxurious life. Why does the general public care at all about the lives of the rich and famous when they do not share in it? In fact, why is there not offense taken at these few living it up on their backs and apparently enjoying every minute of it?
Perhaps the answer lies in the concept of the "mirror neurons." In the same way that a sense of sympathy and despair is invoked while seeing videos of children starving to death, perhaps there is a similar (although opposite) reaction when watching those who are pampered from abundance. There is an intellectual understanding that their lives are different, but for a moment, there is mirroring of the feeling of being lavishly cared for. Since the poor will most likely never directly experience those riches, they experience them vicariously, and that's really the best they can afford.
It seems that people are starkly divided: they either hate the ostentatious reckless spending or they are adoring the luxuriousness of it all. Some people have asked, "how can they be so insensitive to proudly display their excesses in a world suffering from constant deprivation?" To be honest, I am sympathetic to this sentiment, but I am concerned about suffering whether there is a show of indulgence or not. There really is no need for this kind of deprivation. There will always be natural phenomenon that threaten our survival, but most of what threatens people these days is human-created, and that means we can fix them.
So, in light of the fact that these problems can be fixed, but are not, and the fact that many people are supposedly captivated by this Royal Wedding (although I'm suspicious of how interested people are because no one around me seems to give a damn), what could account for that interest? Is it truly a simple dichotomy of either you are interested because the suffering of others has no meaning to you or you are not interested because you care about others?
I think the issue is more complex than that. A lot of people feel the world is full of suffering and they just don't want to be exposed to it more than they are because they feel powerless to do something to rectify it. For example, if their friend were in danger or hungry, they would run to assist, but when the problem is structural, they see no way of alleviating that problem. They are sympathetic to the suffering of people around the world, but they cannot find a means of fixing that problem so they want to turn their attention to events that are celebratory.
It got me thinking, why do people care about anyone's luxurious life. Why does the general public care at all about the lives of the rich and famous when they do not share in it? In fact, why is there not offense taken at these few living it up on their backs and apparently enjoying every minute of it?
Perhaps the answer lies in the concept of the "mirror neurons." In the same way that a sense of sympathy and despair is invoked while seeing videos of children starving to death, perhaps there is a similar (although opposite) reaction when watching those who are pampered from abundance. There is an intellectual understanding that their lives are different, but for a moment, there is mirroring of the feeling of being lavishly cared for. Since the poor will most likely never directly experience those riches, they experience them vicariously, and that's really the best they can afford.
