The Theory of the Leisure Class, by Veblen

[p037] The Theory of the Leisure Class, by Thorstein Veblen (New York: The New American Library. A Mentor Re- print. 3s. 6d.) THIS YEAR is the centenary of the birth of Thorstein Veblen, one of the most impudent iconoclasts of all time. The centenary is fittingly celebrated by the issue of a cheap edition of his most important work, The Theory of the Leisure Class. Veblen was no friend of the Establishment, no conscience- stricken Fabian statistician and no sycophant of Stalin’s. It is no accident that his work has received only perfunctory attention during the recent past from both bourgeois sociologists and ‘Marxist’ economic historians. Bourgeois scholars usually pre- sent Veblen as an eccentric cynic and discuss only the more amusing or startling of his views—or those which at first glance appear politically innocuous. They rarely state explicitly 160 that behind Veblen’s ponderous. prose, behind his tongue-in- the-cheek seriousness or even pomposity, there lies an incisive, merciless assault on all the values of the leisure class—an assault all the more telling for being delivered obliquely and in the involved vocabulary of the academician. The institutions and patterns of thoughts that have held Established Society to- gether throughout the ages are submitted to an almost sadistic sifting. Nothing is sacred. Kings and gods, priests and pro- fessors, flag-wavers and flunkeys are exposed in all their naked- ness. Everything is itemized, ironically inspected and dissected with ill-concealed delight: the affection of the ruling class for hunting and the design of their lawns,the pomp of their military ceremonial and the niceties of their table-manners, the con- sistency of their collars and the social graces of their wives, the behaviour expected of their servants and the education deemed apposite for their offspring. Veblen writes ironically on walking sticks, academic dress, pet poodles and grazing deer in the same manner as he derides both Popes and Caesars. There is an old French proverb ‘ridicule kills’. No wonder our universities usually steer clear of Veblen. The ambivalent attitude towards Veblen of those ‘socialists’ aware of his existence is a more interesting phenomenon. Veblen not only pointed out how the institutions and values of the ‘leisure class’ arose, but also described how these values tended to percolate ‘from above downwards’ throughout other strata of society—how they were most avidly accepted by those nearest to, but not of, the leisure class—and how they tended to be enthusiastically endorsed by those whose futile social aspiration it was to ape their ‘betters.’ In the process of dis-. semination, leisure-class values become somewhat modified if only to confirm the ‘exigencies of economic necessity.’ The whole mechanism is exposed whereby the values of those in power are transmitted into the ranks of the ruled, a mechanism involving the active and often conscious participa- tion of men. Veblen’s analysis illuminates the psychological attributes of labour bureaucracies from a new and most unusual angle. It is scarcely surprising therefore that a Labour leader, attending Court appropriately garbed, or performing some sacred ritual prior to receiving ribbons from ‘his’ Queen, should feel a trifle uneasy on reading Thorstein Veblen or that, dreaming of a Knighthood, some trade union leader about to call off a strike at the instigation of his ‘conscience,’ his church or his sense of ‘fair play’ should have little time for Veblen’s socially subversive doctrines. For these are the very people whom Veblen was writing about. Of greater interest still is the attitude to Veblen’s classic of ‘Marxists’ brought up in the Stalin school. Following the October Revolution, Veblen was considered essential reading for communists, despite the fact that he rejected Marxist categories and terminology. The communists in the West, working for the overthrow of bourgeois society, were quite willing in those days to make use of Veblen’s vitriol. But all this soon changed. As the Stalinist bureaucracy gradually crystallized into a new social formation it assumed, one by one, many of the attributes of previous leisure classes, The bureaucracy was rapidly to prove the most self-conscious and touchy of all parasitic social strata. It could not bear to look at itself in Veblen’s merciless mirror! Veblen was dropped like a hot brick. To-day many Stalinist intellectuals have not even heard of his name. It is Veblen’s main contention that all class societies (irrespective of the specific property-relations on which they are based) are characterized by the existence of a ‘leisure class.’ By this term he denotes not a load of loafers—but a social group who do not participate in the productive process but enjoy what he calls ‘industrial exemption’. The emergence of this group coincides with the transition from primitive savagery to the lower stages of barbarism. It is the result of (a) the development of primitive technical skills, which ensures to the community a material surplus above the subsistence minimum and provides the material basis for ‘industrial exemption’; (b) the division of labour, originally along lines of sex; and (c) an early invidious distinction between employments, according to which some employments are considered worthy and others unworthy. The worthy em- ployments are in the nature of ‘exploit,’ and consist in coping with the animate environment. Industry, the coping with inert matter is unworthy and only fit for women ... and later slaves. Labour became irksome because it was considered ‘undignified *; it did not become ‘ undignified’ because it was irksome.

[p038] With Veblen we enter a weird and fantastic world, a world moulded by the canons of conspicuous waste and populated by “marginal gentlemen of leisure,’ ‘ vicarious consumers,’ envy- ridden emulators, exploit-obsessed monomaniacs, ‘leisure- performing’ priests, ‘upper-class delinquents’ and other such fancy fauna, all of them, without exception, allergic to pro- ductive work! It is Veblen’s undoubted achievement to have shown irrefutably that this incredible set-up was in fact the world in which we live...and not the delusion of some misanthropic lunatic! A reading of Veblen will provide for instance coherent and consistent answers to such startling and apparently unrelated queries as: Why do women wear high heels? Why are well pressed trousers aesthetically satisfying? Why should the butler be well groomed and speak impeccably? Why are Greek and Latin deemed essential requisites to a gentlemanly education? Why do certain houses have a tradesmen’s entrance? Why are the drives of country mansions unnecessarily tortuous and why are their lawns clipped very short? Why should it be derogatory for the Queen to go fishing cod while she could with impunity indulge in a fox-hunt? But Veblen’s theories also provide guidance in deeper waters. How, for instance, did the antithesis in class society between manual and _ intellectual labour arise? Why, psychologically, are war and patriotism so dear to the hearts of the ruling class? In consumption—or is emulation—the real motive force of acquisition and accumula- tion in a class society? And why, finally, do ruling-class values exert influences so far in excess of what the numerical strength of such strata would justify? Any theory which claims to have the answers to such questions obviously deserves serious study by all who would change the structure of society. In regard to Veblen such a study will prove both entertaining and well worth while. And yet for ail the deftness with which he castigated the cultural pretensions of bourgeois society, Veblen was no Marxist. He was, it is true, influenced by the concept of historical materialism, but he remained a typical product of the left liberal economic school which flowered in America at the turn of the century, a school which sharpened the weapons of social criticism but refrained from wielding them in the interests of. labour. Veblen was not, Mills tells us, ‘what the nineteenth century called a decent man. He was a sure-footed old man who hated sham, realistically and romantically pro- testing against it in his manner of living as well as by his lifz work . . . one of those lean, masterless men, who are hated by plump flunkeys.’ Although his ferocious wit punctured many a_ bubble, Veblen could not himself see beyond the horizons of the “pecuniary culture. He was aware of social inequality but saw no real struggle between the classes in society and no fundamental conflict in their interests. In fact it is doubtful whether he would have accepted the concept of ‘class’ in the Marxist sense. Within the limits of their means, the bourgeois and the proletarian of Veblen’s world both indulged in conspicuous consumption. Both lived in the same society and both subscribed to its antiquated notions about ‘ prowess’ and ‘emulation.’ Veblen saw the worker competing with his fellow-workers for ‘ pecuniary repute’ and ceaselessly striving to attain unattainable ends, those ever-receding standards which would permit him to see himself as just a little better than his fellow-men. The ultimate proletarian objective, according to Veblen, was to enter the leisure class, not to abolish it! For Veblen failed to see that the working class would transcend the limits of ‘pecuniary emulation’ and through the abolition of classes give new values to society as a whole and direct human purpose along new and rational channels. The “Theory of the Leisure Class’ is a work of considerable scope. It is far more than ‘a criticism of the nouveau riche’ in late nineteenth century America . . . which is most of what Wright Mills appears to have seen in the book. It is one of the foremost indictments of all societies based on private property, and a savage satire of the ludicrous effects this institution can have on human behaviour. As an interpreta- tion of social inertia, of proletarian conservatism, of the transmission of ruling class ideas into the ranks of labour and cf the ideology of privileged bureaucracies, it deserves a serious study by revolutionary socialists, a study it has not as yet received. As an adventure into the field of aesthetics and into the anatomy of snobbery it is interesting and amusing. But as a guide to political action Marx and Lenin undoubtedly had more to say. GRACCHUS Printed by Plough Press, Ltd., r.o. 18U, Clapnam High St, ~NEW PARK PUBLICATIONS LTD. THE NEW COURSE LEON TROTSKY The documentary his- tory of the earliest struggles against the rising Soviet Bureau- cracy. pp 112 Demy 8vo 3/6 THIRD INTERNATIONAL ARTER LENIN INQUIRIES LEON TROTSKY SR Tiluminates the differences MACaulay — between Leninism and 7029 Stalinism. Includes the political programme of Trotsky against the regime of Stalin. pp. 416 Cloth 28/-. Paper 18/-. LITERATURE AND REVOLUTION LEON TROTSKY -Trotsky’s celebrated work on the relationship of Socialism to Art discusses early schools of Soviet Literature and ‘the concept of ‘proletarian art’. pp. 256 25/- 266 Lavender Hill, London SWI London, 8.W.4 and published by New Park Publications, Ltd., 266, Lavender Hill, London, S.W.11.

[p039] With Veblen we enter a weird and fantastic world, a worid moulded by the canons of conspicuous waste and populated by *marginal gentlemen of leisure, ‘ vicarious consumers,’ envy- ridden emulators, exploit-obsessed monomaniacs, ‘ leisure- performing’ priests, ‘ upper-class delinquents’ and other such fancy fauna, all of them, without exception, allergic to pro- ductive work! It is Veblen’s undoubted achievement to have shown irrefutably that this incredible set-up was in fact the world in which we live...and not the delusion of some misanthropic lunatic! A reading of Veblen will provide for instance coherent and consistent answers to such startling and apparently unrelated queries as: Why do women wear high heels? Why are well pressed trousers aesthetically satisfying? Why should the butler be well groomed and speak impeccably? Why are Greek and Latin deemed essential requisites to a gentlemanly education? Why do certain houses have a tradesmen’s entrance? Why are the drives of country mansions unnecessarily tortuous and why are their lawns clipped very short? Why should it be derogatory for the Queen to go fishing cod while she could with impunity indulge in a fox-hunt? But Veblen’s theories also provide guidance in deeper waters. How, for instance, did the antithesis in class society between manual and _ intellectual labour arise? Why, psychologically, are war and patriotism so dear to the hearts of the ruling class? In consumption—or is emulation—the real motive force of acquisition and accumula- tion in a class society? And why, finally, do ruling-class values exert influences so far in excess of what the numerical strength of such strata would justify? Any theory which claims to have the answers to such questions obviously deserves serious study by all who would change the structure of society. In regard to Veblen such a study will prove both entertaining and well worth while. And yet for all the deftness with which he castigated the cultural pretensions of bourgeois society, Veblen was no Marxist. He was, it is true, influenced by the concept of historical materialism, but he remained a typical product of the left liberal economic school which flowered in America at the turn of the century, a school which sharpened the weapons of social criticism but refrained from wielding them in the interests of labour. Veblen was not, Mills tells us, ‘ what ihe nineteenth century called a decent man. He was a sure-footed old man who hated sham, realistically and romantically pro- testing against it in his manner of living as well as by his life work . . . one of those lean, masterless men, who are hated by plump flunkeys .’ Although his ferocious wit punctured many a_ bubble, Veblen could not himself see beyond the horizons of the “pecuniary culture. He was aware of social inequality but saw no real struggle between the classes in society and no fundamental conflict in their interests. In fact it is doubtful whether he would have accepted the concept of ‘class’ in the Marxist sense. Within the limits of their means, the bourgeois and the proletarian of Veblen’s world both indulged in conspicuous consumption. Both lived in the same society and both subscribed to its antiquated notions about ‘* prowess ”* and ‘emulation.’ Veblen saw the worker competing with his fellow-workers for ‘ pecuniary repute’ and ceaselessly striving to attain unattainable ends, those ever-receding standards which would permit him to see himself as just a little better than his fellow-men. The ultimate proletarian objective, according to Veblen, was to enter the leisure class, not to abolish it! For Veblen failed to see that the working class would transcend the limits of ‘pecuniary emulation’ and through the abolition of classes give new values to society as a whole and direct human purpose along new and rational channels. The ‘Theory of the Leisure Class’ is a work of considerable scope. It is far more than ‘a criticism of the nouveau riche’ in late nineteenth century America . . . which is most of what Wright Mills appears to have seen in the book. It is one of the foremost indictments of all societies based on private property, and a savage satire of the ludicrous effects this institution can have on human behaviour. As an interpreta- tion of social inertia, of proletarian conservatism, of the transmission of ruling class ideas into the ranks of labour and ef the ideology of privileged bureaucracies, it deserves a serious study by revolutionary socialists, a study it has not as yet received. As an adventure into the field of aesthetics and into the anatomy of snobbery it is interesting and amusing. But as a guide to political action Marx and Lenin undoubtedly had more to say. GRACCHUS NEW PARK PUBLICATIONS LTD. INQUIRIES SS MACaulay 7029 THE NEW COURSE LEON TROTSKY The documentary his- tory of the earliest struggles against the rising Soviet Bureau- cracy. pp 112 Demy 8vo 3/6 THIRD INTERNATIONAL AFTER LENIN LEON TROTSKY Illuminates the differences between Leninism and Stalinism. Includes the political programme of Trotsky against the regime of Stalin. pp. 416 Cloth 28/-. Paper 18/-. LITERATURE AND REVOLUTION LEON TROTSKY Trotsky’s celebrated work on the relationship of Socialism to Art discusses early schools of Soviet Literature and the concept of ‘proletarian art’. pp. 256 25/- 266 Lavender Hill, LondonSWII Printed by Plough Press, Ltd., r.o. 18U, Clapham High St., London, 8.W.4 and published by New Park Publications, Ltd., 266, Lavender Hill, London, S.W.11.

[p040] Deutseher wrote: In Isaac Deutscher’s review of The Re- volution Betrayed in the New Statesman of August 24 he wrote: ‘A new generation of the Soviet intelli- gentsia are grappling with the significance of Trotsky’s struggle against Stalin and with its relevance to the problems of the post-Stalin era.... ‘The intelligentsia of Moscow, Warsaw, Prague, East Berlin (vide Harich’s “testa- ment’), and perhaps even of Peking, are wondering whether they can learn any- thing from Trotsky. Do his writings con- vey any message to communists who are freeing themselves from Stalinism and try- ing to shape an alternative to it? ... ‘A classic’ ‘Of all Stalin’s opponents Trotsky alone has produced a systematic and compre- hensive critique. In The Revolution Be- trayed he offered the final version of that critique. ...In a curious way, it has been one of the most influential books of this century. Some of its ideas . . . have become widely popularized by a host of writers who have lived on crumbs... from Trot- sky’s rich table... . ‘The Revolution Betrayed remains a classic of Marxist literature....He dealt with his subject matter...as a detached and rigorously objective sociologist and analyst; as a fighter and exiled leader of a suppressed opposition and as a passion- ate pamphleteer and polemicist... . There is perhaps more to be learned even from Trotsky’s mistakes than one can learn — from the “correct” platitudes of most poli- tical writers. ... LEON TROTSKY What is the “fy Soviet Union 4 and where is it going? ‘Masterly’ ‘What gives to The Revolution Betrayed its weight as a document of our time is the masterly critical panorama of Stalinist society during its early and middle periods which Leon Trotsky drew here....An article in a weekly review cannot do jus- tice to the wealth of ideas that are found in this book, to the burning socialist faith 3 that informs it, and to its imaginative 4. force and literary élan.’ Pages 308 Price: 10/6 oneer NEW PARK PUBLICATIONS LTD will be glad to supply vou with books of all descriptions from the current Penguins and Pelicans to the socialist classics 266, Lavender Hill, London, S.W. 11. Telephone MACaulay 7029

[p041] Deutscher wrote: In Isaac Deutscher’s review of The Re- volution Betrayed in the New Statesman of August 24 he wrote: ‘A new generation of the Soviet intelli- gentsia are grappling with the significance of Trotsky’s struggle against Stalin and with its relevance to the problems of the post-Stalin era. ... ‘The intelligentsia of Moscow, Warsaw, Prague, East Berlin (vide Harich’s “‘testa- ment’), and perhaps even of Peking, are wondering whether they can learn any- thing from Trotsky. Do his writings con- vey any message to communists who are freeing themselves from Stalinism and try- ing to shape an alternative to it? ... ‘A classic’ ‘Of all Stalin’s opponents Trotsky alone has produced a systematic and compre- hensive critique. In The Revolution Be- trayed he offered the final version of that critique. ...In a curious way, it has been one of the most influential books of this century. Some of its ideas... have become widely popularized by a host of writers who have lived on crumbs... from Trot- sky’s rich table. .. ‘The Revolution Betrayed remains a classic of Marxist literature....He dealt with his subject matter...as a detached and rigorously objective sociologist and analyst; as a fighter and exiled leader of a suppressed opposition and as a passion- ate pamphleteer and polemicist. ... There is perhaps more to be learned even from Trotsky’s mistakes than one can learn from the “correct” platitudes of most poli- tical writers... . ‘Masterly’ “What gives to The Revolution Betrayed its weight as a document of our time is the masterly critical panorama of Stalinist society during its early and middle periods which Leon Trotsky drew here....An article in a weekly review cannot do jus- tice to the wealth of ideas that are found in this book, to the burning socialist faith that informs it, and to its imaginative force and literary élan.’ Pages 308 Price: 10/6 NEW PARK PUBLICATIONS LTD 266, Lavender Hill, London, S.W. 11. Telephone MACaulay 7029