The Culture of Being Special: Capitalism, Narcissism, and Community

In our contemporary society, a remarkable phenomenon has arisen, which we can define as the "culture of being special." This culture is fueled by capitalism, an economic system that exploits our individual needs and desires for commercial gain, sometimes at the detriment of community bonds.

One of the most visible facets of this culture is the relentless competition to amass resources, often with the conviction of superior entitlement. This mindset frequently surfaces in our relationship with material possessions. Even when a single product could effortlessly satisfy the needs of several individuals, the preference often leans towards multiple acquisitions, one for each, to underscore our exclusivity.

The culture of being special is also characterized by an unceasing pursuit of the latest novelty, not primarily to genuinely fulfill a need, but as a symbol of our status and superiority. This attitude can lead us down the path of rampant consumerism and contribute to the wasteful utilization of precious resources.

A noteworthy aspect of this culture is the ascent of an elite group of narcissists. These individuals have ascended the ranks by ceaselessly promoting themselves, often at the expense of genuine empathy and communal engagement. While they may achieve success in the realms of business or in public life, their relentless quest for personal gratification may leave little room for substantive human connections.

All of this prompts us to contemplate the social implications of this culture. As we aspire to excel and accumulate resources, the social fabric of our communities can fray. Empathetic desiccation, a dearth of sharing, and unrestrained competition can undermine solidarity among people. Furthermore, it creates a paradox within our instinct for socialization, simultaneously stimulating and inhibiting our ability to connect with others.

The culture of being special, propelled by capitalism, undeniably exerts a significant influence on our society. While it may encourage innovation and ambition, it's crucial to recognize how it can also exacerbate excessive individualism at the expense of communal bonds. Our role as observers of this phenomenon is to understand its complexities and ramifications, rather than seeking quick solutions. By critically examining these dynamics, we can better navigate the intricate interplay between individualism and community, ultimately contributing to a deeper understanding of our evolving societal landscape.

The interaction between the economic system and human culture is a fascinating topic that deserves in-depth analysis. In particular, what interests us is how capitalism has penetrated so deeply into human culture, even influencing one of our primary instincts: the need for socialization. To understand this phenomenon, it's essential to examine the relationship between the evolution of economic systems and the intrinsic nature of human beings.

Throughout history, every economic and cultural system has influenced human ambitions and the sense of socialization. However, in the past, these systems tended to harness the instinct for socialization to strengthen themselves without fundamentally altering its nature. For example, nationalisms and religions exploited the need for community to create a sense of sociality and bind individuals to the system, as the system itself provided the community humans required.

Capitalism, on the other hand, appears to use opposition to society and detachment as levers to attract individuals. It's akin to dealing with a problematic teenager: to pique their interest, you leverage their desire for rebellion, individual assertion, and challenge to their belonging. We could even playfully consider this phase as the "Homo Adolescentus" of humanity, where the need for rebellion seems to prevail. However, this reflection is not meant to demonize capitalism in a generalized manner.

It's undeniable that capitalism has brought technological and scientific progress, developed individual freedoms, and made positive contributions in many contexts. However, we must acknowledge that from 2000 to the present day, it has created growing social injustices and incongruities that threaten social cohesion. This is not a new phenomenon, as injustices and incongruities have always existed in every social system. However, today they appear accentuated and amplified.

Humanity may be going through a cultural phase akin to adolescence, a step forward from the infantilism with which social masses were directed in the past. However, this evolutionary phase is vulnerable to challenges and issues since we have no precedents to rely on. The question to ask is: when did we start observing this phenomenon?

It's a bit like trying to pinpoint the end of the Middle Ages: whether it was the fall of Constantinople, the discovery of America, or the French Revolution. But let's consider one of the more likely starting dates for the "Culture of Being Special": the broadcast of the program "Big Brother." Through that program, a paradigm shift occurred. It was no longer necessary to produce something tangible like an invention, a work of art, or a contribution to society to be celebrated as the creator or father of something. The value of creation (a book, a film, a song, an invention, etc.) was replaced by the celebration of individuals without any apparent reason. No achievements, talents, or particular qualities were required to receive the attention and admiration of millions. People began to be celebrated solely for being themselves, for having the ability to attract attention, and thus for being special.

Awareness grew that the only thing required to attract admiration and success was visibility. The arrival of social media in the following years provided a platform that perfectly suited this ambition, even amplifying it further due to the immediacy with which visibility could be granted. While participating in a reality show still required passing through a casting process where someone selected what to make visible, social media eliminated this filter, making visibility readily available to anyone.

Once this awareness was established and the platform was provided, it became a matter of channeling the drive generated by the desire for recognition, something that had started to feel constricting and against which resistance became possible.

The sprout of rebellion, of challenging something pre-established when one cannot find an identity that aligns with expectations, has always been observed in human nature. Its exact origin is challenging to pinpoint, but it has been identified in every historical era and various animal societies. It might seem paradoxical that the instinct to rebel is a part of the nature of socialization, but it is indeed a genuinely healthy aspect of it.

The reason an individual within a group challenges the alpha and seeks to replace their position of power is intrinsic to the group's need for strong leadership to defend its interests effectively. When leadership weakens, those who feel uncomfortable with the position it has assigned to them rebel, challenge it, and if they are stronger, they replace it, leading to new leadership that rejuvenates the group. The more complex a society becomes, the more intricate the mechanisms that assign its members to specific social positions, and thus the greater the potential for discontent simmering beneath the surface.

Therefore, it's not surprising that between the late 20th and early 21st centuries, a weakening of the social and cultural apparatus that defined the leadership of society, especially in the Western world, allowed a chorus of rebellions to challenge authority. This led many individuals to attempt to reposition themselves in roles they found more satisfying.

Visibility, the opportunity to be celebrated as special by challenging the paradigm that relied on the norms supported by leadership to determine the necessary qualities for recognition and visibility, gave vent to these ambitions. It was a bit like in a school, for instance, where it was no longer necessary to rely on the teacher's grade to determine who passed or failed, who was the top student. This happened at a time when people were tired of arbitrary teacher evaluations and when the teacher, but more broadly, the education system itself, had lost authority up to the ministry level.

Considering these factors, along with the drive, the removal of entry barriers, and the availability of a platform, the commercialization of this phenomenon became possible. Those who participated were rewarded, and the instinct of emulation of positive examples was leveraged. This system brought about greater economic results, further development, and evolution, leading to its widespread adoption and significant societal repercussions in a self-sustaining cycle.

However, like any system, the assessment of the disadvantages versus benefits can only be made afterward, or at least at an advanced stage. The actual social and behavioral consequences can only be observed at its conclusion.