Thorstein Veblen's Theory Of The Leisure Class

When it comes to the thesis, it quite obvious that the author utilizes a host of examples and evidences which can provide the readers with a powerful thesis. First, the author contrast the working hours of Americans with Europeans and Germans, although people may say that they are more likely to choose leisure rather than great wealth, people always pursue the wealth by working hard, since Americans believe that occupations and the labor exerted in the occupations are the significant elements of a person (Clausen 120-1). Therefore, the author points out the different opinions from the four famous authorities, some believe that people should work in order to get the food while others always put their attentions on the habits rather than the official work; it brings a idea that people can prove their worth not by their accomplishes but by long hours (Clausen 121).

Attaching great importance to individuality is the third characteristic of market society. For people living in market society, economic advantages are superior to other advantages; the first thing to protect is their individual wealth. This ideological change results from the material condition in market society that people all become single individuals in the factories producing goods for making more money for themselves. In this case, the economic relations rule the social relations (Rinehart 71). Under the structure of the previous social organization, however, “man’s economy... is submerged in his social relationships” (Polanyi 46). People were always concerned about their social relations within their communities (Polanyi 46). They acted so as to maintain their social values (Polanyi 46). The reason for this when it comes to the case of tribal society is that there is no need for people to care much about “individual’s economic interest” because working for the communities enables

Before the great transformation, no economy was subject to being a prisoner of the market (Polanyi 43). Polanyi discusses previous forms of economic organization that function effectively without the system of markets (43). It can be said that through the social being of man and his relationships, that he values material goods only as they serve to an end (Polanyi 46). Within Tribal communities, each member takes on the ideology towards noneconomic ends, that is, not connecting the means of production or distribution in significance with the ownership of goods (Polanyi 46). Members of the tribe place no desire upon economic interests of the individual, but rather on the collective. Reciprocity and redistribution are certain behaviours that communities maintain (Polanyi 47). Reciprocity, regards the sexual organization of society, and redistribution is functioning under a common chief representing domain and authority

Aristotle posits Eudaimonia, human flourishing and happiness, as the ‘chief good’ of humanity achieved through ‘reflective activity’ over a lifetime (Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics, 2002). From my perspective, the reflective activity to which he alludes is the pursuit of leisure.

Moreover, the Indian villages laid claim to “the things that were on the land during the various seasons of the year”, and not the land itself, characteristic of their hunter-gatherer lifestyle that varied greatly from that of the Europeans’ (p. 65). Another distinction between the two groups’ lives was due to the nature of their governments. The politics inside Indian communities did not resemble the European governments much, and their system had “less the abstract character of monarchy, a country, or even a tribe”, instead relying on a “fluid set of personal relationships” (p. 59). The main difference stemmed from their “not being articulated within a state system”, as they valued “kinship and personality” over any other kind of “institutional structure” that could hold authority in the society (p. 59). This kind of adaptability in government was something the Europeans were not used to in their own

Veblen argued that consuming was not a way to sustain but a way to show division between classes (Ritzer & Stepnisky, 2013, p.55). His theories about conspicuous consumption and conspicuous leisure are all too often reflected in society today. The article How the Other Fifth Lives in The New York Times reveals exactly what Veblen observed years ago. According to the article the top 5% of Americans holding not only most of the economic wealth but how they also control this wealth. With the controlling of economic wealth, the top 5% also control the political arenas. This in turn causes a bigger division between the classes. As the top are becoming richer and more powerful the bottom classes are becoming poorer. To portray power and economic

When the time comes about to find a balance between creating strong communities without creating unequal hierarchies this is a challenge that arises in the new “modern era”. The problem is that, in a way, you cannot have a difference of individuals without also cancelling out the importance of the community. Several of our authors discuss this issue; specifically Hobsbawm and Woods have very effective opinions on the issue of community. Although Hobsbawm may seem to be talking only about the Romantic period and the Arts he brings about a point that is becoming an issue during the late seventeenth to mid eighteenth century; the point of the “lost harmony of the primitive man” (Hobsbawm, p.265). With much of the focus being put on defining

Historically, we have been introduced to two different Indians, the noble and ignoble savages. The Indian man was either a respectable, fierce less brave or blood thirsty warrior. The sharp contrast between the noble and ignoble savage blurs what they both share, savagery. Savagery referred to a condition of social development below “civilization” and in

With regards to social class, Thorsten Veblen believed we make purchases, engage in activities, and engage in certain speech patterns to denote our social class. He called this "Conspicuous Consumption." What evidence of this do you see in each of the videos you watched and also in your personal lives?

The "economic buyer" view of consumers says that individuals will only buy the cheapest goods and

Many years ago, the people of the United States shared different values. The idea of morality and success has dramatically changed over the course of American history. The world that we live in today has gone through many alterations. The present day society that we live in values different aspects of life. In one of our first class readings, “Reeves Stop Pretending You’re Not Rich - The New York Times”, Reeves highlights the simplistic idea of what it means to attempt to live up to a lifestyle. In this article, he touched upon how the United States of America is a country that certainly “classifieds” its citizens. Reeves stood firmly against the fact that, class positions are transferred through generations. In another reading, “Rothwell, the Myths of the 1%”, the article discusses what it means to live like the “executives” do in the U.S. Not only does Rothwell discuss lifestyle, the topic of economic security is also one to be discussed. In the early 1900s, citizens did not necessarily care about living lavish, however most craved the idea of security. In our class, the topic of “Consumption and Class” highlighted great factors of the Dream, in comparison to today's idea. Throughout this topic, “the theory of the leisure class” was

The goal of becoming successful is often what most people strive for. Everyone wants a good job that provides and allows them to have the life style they want. How most people show they’ve become successful is through what they buy, it could be new furniture, art, clothing or even a long vacation. So naturally, when people think of being successful they think of nice things. Thorstein Veblen in his Theory of the Leisure Class perfectly describes why this is and how it happens and the movie The Talented Mr. Ripley shows examples of Veblen’s ideas. In The Talented Mr. Ripley Tom Ripley is an example of pecuniary emulation; while Dickie Greenleaf is an example of both conspicuous leisure and conspicuous consumption.

By the late 1800s, it had been proven that while consumers purchased goods to receive and maximize marginal utility, this was only true up to a certain point, where the ratio of marginal utility to price was the same for the other goods that they could buy. Thus, economic thinkers had the tools to reason that a consumer’s demand for a good might depend on the prices of any or even, all other consumer goods. Leon Walras wanted to show through the interactions of all markets, prices could be determined simultaneously. Although a few economist before him had attempted to lay out a tentative framework for the interplay of different economic markets, Walras was the first to actually think through a general, conceptual, and theoretical structure

There are three ideal models of society that could best help Vespuccia with their issues of extreme economic inequality, poverty of many, and the lack of political representation for the working class. The three models are the ideations of Plato, the ideations of Confucius, and the Ancient India, Hindu religious beliefs. All three of these models have their own strengths and weaknesses. In order to determine the best ideation of thought I will need to compare and contrast the three ways of thought and will need to evaluate them based on how they can best fit the needs of Vespuccia.

At the beginning of this course leisure was a topic I did not give much thought to and I felt like I did not have the time to spare to put much thought into. To me, all leisure meant was having free time to do whatever it is that I wanted to do. But after analyzing my life I noticed that I had surrounded my life with solely work and school and my “free time” was anytime I spent watching television and anytime I slept. However, after taking this course I learned that leisure meant more much than that. Now leisure to me means, as Richard Kraus states, leisure is “time which is not devoted to work or work-connected responsibilities or to other forms of discretionary or unobligated time,” (Olson et al., 2003, 12). The “time” in which Kraus