Add a Comment   Back to OJB's Blog Search Page

It's All About Status

Entry 2336, on 2024-04-10 at 14:42:14 (Rating 4, Politics)

Most human institutions, and most individuals, are very defined and affirmed by status. People compare themselves with others, and are aware of their relative value compared with their friends and others in their society. Additionally, people in general like to strive for the highest status they can attain.

The complicating fact is, or course, that status can be measured in many different ways, and if someone cannot compete on traditional grounds, they might be tempted to find a different way to measure themselves which more suits their strengths.

And that is fair enough. Money is often used as a measure of status, yet many people with a lot are not necessarily worthy of much respect, because their only significant talent is just the ability to accumulate money. But that shouldn't be the only way to establish status, and others might be equally valid.

The problem is that instead of just rejecting traditional measures, or dismissing the idea of status completely, many dysfunctional people like to create their own way of establishing dominance, even though they might not even be aware they are doing it.

So have you ever wondered why so many people who virtue signal a commitment to a bizarre belief are stupid, ugly, poor, or ignorant? Clearly these misfits cannot attain status in a traditional way - like becoming rich, respected through their intellect or achievements, etc - so they have to invent a new way to do the same thing.

Now, I have to be fair here and say that there is no objective way to say which ways of measuring an individual's value are most valid, so maybe these alternatives are just as valid as any other, but no, we have established ways because they have proved valuable over time, and new ways are unlikely to be as good.

So all of that is a bit abstract, so let me give some examples of where traditional hierarchies have been overturned or even reversed - or maybe I should say when this has been attempted.

Communism was allegedly a way to eliminate status completely. All people were to have the same value and receive the same rewards. But it didn't work, of course, because the leaders took the majority of power, status, and material wealth. It failed in its aim, and arguably created a culture even more based on status than before.

But the fantasy of communism is egalitarianism and that might explain why so many people who are not doing well in our traditional Western societies, where status is based on merit as measured by financial and intellectual success, look to communist styled philosophies such as Marxism and postmodernism as an alternative.

So if you cannot be a great artist or accumulate enough money to own great art, why not try to destroy existing art under the pretence of protesting lack of action on climate change? That will give you status amongst the other misfits with similar beliefs.

And if you are hideously obese, why not try to attract attention by demanding your "rights" to two seats for the price of one when you fly? No doubt, other people with similar lack of self-control (in most cases) will admire your courageous stand against oppression, right?

And if you feel like you can't make any great contribution in traditional ways, and that you are near the bottom in social status, why not try to flip the narrative by making those at the bottom the most worthy? So you could pretend the religious, racial, and social minorities who aren't doing well are truly deserving of more, without making any effort on their own behalf, and that would make you look better too.

And people without jobs and who don't drive might like to hold up traffic in order to virtue signal whatever nonsensical belief they have, whether it is supporting Palestinian terrorists, or pretending their actions might stop climate change, or to support their sick religion. If you don't have a job or a car, why not make life as hard as possible for those that do, isn't that a good way to gain equity?

I do have to admit that I am being a bit unkind here. There are people who protest political and social issues who are actually quite functional in a traditional sense. But a lot aren't. Next time you see these people with their insane demands ask yourself: are they really just compensating for their own deficiencies, whether that is intellect, or knowledge, or experience, or physical fitness, or their appearance, or talent, or one of many other factors.

When you have no status, you can pretend you don't care, you can try to destroy existing status mechanisms, or you can demand a new world where you matter. But in the end, it is all about status.

Comment 1 (7632) by Anonymous on 2024-04-11 at 16:36:00: Invoke the lobster?

Comment 2 (7633) by OJB on 2024-04-11 at 19:20:21:

Well, I do like Jordan Peterson, but I find some of his more abstract thinking a bit overdone. The lobster thing is probably going a bit too far, but I think there is at least an element of truth there.

Comment 3 (7634) by EK on 2024-04-12 at 16:09:58:

I think status seeking and protest – socio-psychologically seen – are not that closely connected. Superficially, yes, the way you turn it. But better not seek status for this "insight" among social scientists.

Comment 4 (7635) by OJB on 2024-04-12 at 20:21:30:

There’s credible research showing no link between "virtue signaling" behavior, like protests, and status seeking? Really? That seems unlikely but I’m happy to look at the research.

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

Enter your name (optional):
Enter your email address (optional):
Enter the number shown here:
Enter the comment:

To add a comment: enter a name and email (optional), type the number shown, enter a comment, click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.