The Moral Superiority of the Poor

 

Ibn Khaldun

The great Ibn Khaldun theorized that, over time, all cultures become decadent. The ruling classes become complacent and selfish, and keep shaving more and more off the top of the economy, until the culture is no longer efficient. It then, sooner or later, cannot compete with a poorer culture nearby, the government of which is closer to the common people.

I think he is right—I think history reveals this pattern. It is why cultures rise and fall. And the modern West is at such a point of decadence. Who is the less bureaucratic, more egalitarian, more ascetic culture ready to take over? 

Ibn Khaldun’s theory implies that the same thing will happen with individuals and families. Not that being rich is immoral, but because they become too accustomed to having their way, rich people are likely to grow less moral and more selfish than poor people. Narcissism, or as the Greeks more properly called it, hubris, is a disease of the rich and powerful.

The New Testament, especially Luke, agrees, and makes the same point repeatedly. It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven.

This seems to tally as well with my own experience. Most often, poor people are nicer than rich people.

The matter is obscured by the influence of Calvinism on our culture, so that we often imagine, contrary to the gospel, that material wealth is a sign of heaven’s favour. And that a prominent and rich family is a “good” family.