Appetite for Total Extravagance – Folha de S. Paulo, April 9, 1972

by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

The drug addiction problem continues to attract the attention of psychologists, moralists, and sociologists around the world. They study it from a wide variety of perspectives to curb its alarming rise in contemporary society.

In this endeavor, researchers ask, among other things, what path addiction takes through the various social strata. In other words, which areas of society are the first to succumb to it, and through what stages it then spreads to infect the entire social body.

According to reports, the Chaban-Delmas Committee in France reached conclusions on this matter that were also accepted by other equally competent entities. The drug initially gains access to refined social and artistic circles. In a second stage, it reaches university and student circles. Finally, and somewhat simultaneously, it reaches all other environments, including the working class. Most rural areas remain resistant to drug use.

Why is this so? Why are rural areas less susceptible to contamination than cities? Why are the refined or artistic classes more vulnerable than students? And why are students more vulnerable than other social sectors?

These questions are of great interest because once clarified, we would be close to uncovering addiction’s true origins.

I do not intend to propose a simplistic solution to such a complex problem here. I wish to share some observations suggested by the findings of the Chaban-Delmas Committee.

To do so, allow me to change the subject for a moment.

* * *

How is communism typically implemented in a country?

At first glance, the task seems straightforward. Nonconformist utopians who romantically dream of panacea revolutions capable of transforming the world into a paradise are everywhere. It is well known where to find people like these, in which circles, in which places of entertainment, and in which bookstores. Two or three well-trained proselytizers from Moscow, Beijing, or Havana can easily find and recruit the most active and enthusiastic among them into communist cells.

The next task is more challenging. How can they get the objective, sensible, open-minded people who make up the vast majority of the population to embrace communist utopianism (utopian even when labeled “scientific”)?

In theory, the answer seems simple. Just look for the environments least favored by the social and economic situation. There, the number of discontented people—even if they are neither utopians nor romantics—must be significant, making it easy to recruit proselytes for communism. Once this recruitment has been carried out on the necessary scale, it will be possible to spark the subversion of the poor against the rich.

All this is theory. In reality, this is not how communism progresses. The vast majority of workers are usually indifferent or hostile to communist preaching. The initial cells of romantic revolutionaries remain inward-looking until one fine day someone in snobbish social circles remembers to call themselves a communist. This vanguard quickly finds like-minded people who boast of being communists to attract attention. From the fashionable snobs to the “intelligentsia,” the sparks spread rapidly. Sometimes the contagion reverses, as the snobs of the “intelligentsia” infect the fashionable ones.

As innovative as youth may be, much of what exists or happens within it reflects preceding generations. There are also fashion and culture snobs among young university students. Seeing what happens to their older counterparts, the communist fire begins to crackle within them as well.

Naturally, the attention of the majority of the population focuses on those who embody social prestige, wealth, intelligence, or youth. There is no shortage of media outlets that lead the masses to believe that the snobs in these various categories are not exotic and isolated minorities but rather the prestigious and dynamic majority in their respective environments. Bad examples easily sway the masses. Hence, communist cells spread through society like metastasis.

Agriculture is the sector most resistant to communist expansion.

Here is an observation rich in material for diverse reflections: the path to addiction to communism is identical to the path to drug addiction.

This is easily explained because communism and drugs are processes of decomposition. Both attack the social organism’s most fragile part, which is most prone to extravagance, violent or super-refined sensations, and evasion of logic, common sense, and reality.

“Corruptio optimi pessima” [The corruption of the best is the worst]. Nothing is better than good elites. For this very reason, nothing is worse than sophisticated elites who have deteriorated, become divorced from reality, and lack a sense of duty. For them, ideas, morals, traditions, and everything else are objects of play and display. At the center of this game is the championship of vanities. They are happy as long as everyone can show off. And since being extravagant is the easiest way to show off, the result is a noisy and inglorious race toward total nonsense. Each in its own way, communism and drugs are total absurdities. Unsurprisingly, the most daring snobs rush toward them, dragging their followers in their wake.

Like all others, this game has risks. How many begin by claiming to be communists without actually being so! But by dint of saying so, they end up becoming so. Like many who, when they start using drugs, do so to show off but end up being dragged down by addiction.

It is the sad fate of those who play with fire, even if only out of snobbery. “Those who love danger will perish in it” (Ecclesiasticus 3:27), says the Holy Spirit.

* * *

Snobbery appears to be one of the most potent factors—if not the most—in the spread of drugs and communism. In contaminating the entire social body, both share the path of snobbery, leading to total extravagance.

Am I exaggerating? I don’t think so. Look at the power of snobbery in other areas and the fascination with extravagance. I am talking about nudism. All changes in fashion today are made under the banner of extravagance. And the extravagance they tend toward is total nudism, achieved in ever bolder steps. Now, what else but snobbery leads the masses down the wrong path of fashion?

* * *

I do not, however, expect subject-matter experts to give due weight to the snobbery factor. It is not snobbish to talk about it…