It is not difficult to perceive the stratification of intellectual life in contemporary British society. One has only to watch the television. It can seem at times that there are only two stereotypical categories of television viewers. On the one hand one can imagine the ‘popular culture’ viewer who likes to keep abreast of contemporary fashions, be they in terms of accoutrements or indeed any material manifestation such as home and gardens. On the other hand one can, albeit more rarely, witness the ‘broadsheet’ approach to television where a group of TV-friendly intellectuals may be dissecting the latest ‘cultural’ deliveries such as art, theatre or indeed music. Or perhaps there may be a reportage of classical history or perhaps a cultural travel program. These two camps rarely meet although, on occasions, bridges may be attempted which bridge the divide. Sport may be one such attempt although doubtless even these ‘universals’ have their socially polarised adherents. It seems a shame that such polarisation is so readily reinforced by media. For, this seemingly further entrenches portions of society into their respective corners. Thus, as the chasm widens, that bridge becomes less of a physical possibility.

From a Western perspective the individual is the most important unit of society. This is in stark contrast to traditional Eastern societies where one can witness the group holding sway over any notion of individualism. Of course though even this fundamental tenet is beginning to be eroded in the face of crushing globalised trends. I think this would be a mistake though. As China and India continue to climb the greasy pole of ‘progress’ they would be wise to look to the West and notice the ills of individualism, out-of-control materialism and associated polarisation not just in terms of wealth but more importantly in terms of intellectual capacity.

That is, assuming that the ‘knowledge economies’ flourish and continue to dominant the productivity landscape of this century then obviously those that have been able to secure a good schooling for their children – through amassed material or intellectual wealth – will continue to increasingly (possibly in exponential terms) be the key players in society whereas those of less fortunate circumstances will find themselves pushed even more to the fringes of ‘society’. This is of course assuming that individualism becomes the dominant global model which all inhabitants of our planet strive for. Aside from this increasing polarisation there are other more obvious disadvantages of the individual perspective. These may most importantly include global warming.

Societies are complex by nature. No one will ever know the best way to organise them. As East does meet West I believe we’d be wise to share and assimilate aspects of each other’s culture. And the same goes for North and South when that battle also reaches a tipping point. Only by maintaining an open mind can we integrate in a sustainable and stable manner.