Sectors can influence the general culture of a nation. Ronald Inglehart and the World Values Survey have identified two independent variables that define national culture: firstly, traditional vs. secular rational values, and secondly, survival vs. self-expression values (Inglehart, 2018). According to this perspective, the starting point for the cultural evolution of a nation comprises traditional values based largely on religion, and survival values due to the nation’s relative lack of wealth. At this starting point, the religious sector is the main influence on national culture, and this is still the case in many parts of the world. With industrialisation, the industrial and science sectors replaced religion as the main influence, and this resulted in a shift from traditional to secular rational values. More recently, in the West at least, there has been a shift from survival to self-expression values, with their emphasis on individuality as opposed to group cohesion. This is thought to have been brought about by the commercial and finance sectors and their concern for a lively consumer economy. Finally, we are on the cusp of another significant cultural change which will be brought about by the information technology sector, particularly with the introduction of artificial intelligence. There is much debate about where this will take us but, in practice, the destination is unknown.
Clearly, if influential sectors are led by individuals with dark personality traits, then there will be little concern for the wellbeing of society or the environment. Among the risks are the following.
- The risk of one sector holding undue influence over another, through its upper stratum’s membership of the establishment. For example, the ability of the religious and commercial sectors to influence the education of children in their own interest.
- The risk of one sector usurping the leadership of another and imposing its own ideology, e.g., the finance sector usurping the leadership of the industrial and commercial sector and imposing bottom line capitalism.
- The influence of a sector over government via its upper stratum’s membership of the establishment. This enables a sector to promote its own ideology and to influence government decisions in its interest. This can result in the promotion of the ideologies of powerful sectors and the suppression of more rational views. Examples include the gun lobby in the USA and the international oil lobby. Another example is the economic brinkmanship pervasive in the West today. This is evidenced by the steadily increasing wealth gap and levels of poverty, despite economic growth. This brinkmanship allows low wages and poverty to proliferate to a point where they begin to destabilise the consumer economy, but no further. However, because this leaves no resilience, economic shocks, such as the bank failures of 2008 and the COVID epidemic of 2020, do then impact on the economy.
- The potential for a sector to usurp democratic government, e.g., the replacement of a democratically elected government with the upper stratum of a military or religious sector, leading to a military dictatorship or theocracy.
- Competition and conflict arising from alliances between sectors and political parties. For example, the Spanish civil war was the consequence of an alliance of the catholic church, right-wing political parties, and the military on the one hand, and left-wing groups and parties on the other.
- Governments that suspend or create a false impression of democracy, engage in imperialism, and are corrupt.
These problems are rife throughout the world and, in the next article, I will offer some suggestions as to how to end them.
References
Inglehart, R., 2018. “Cultural Evolution”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108613880
Rational-Understanding.com 