Veblen describes the leisure class as a development from earlier culture. Is it a form of progress or a form of evolution? How much is Veblen's concept of the leisure class influenced by Darwinian thinking?
Can leisure be said to be a form of labor itself? Is the leisure class obligated to perform its conspicuous leisure and conspicuous consumption? Is it work? If not, why not?
The master-slave dialectic posits that the masters need the slaves and that the slaves cannot function in an organized way without the masters. But Veblen's theories of vicarious leisure and vicarious consumption describe the servant class as mere evidence of the wealth of the master class. What economic agency does Veblen attribute to the servant class? Does the servant class make itself necessary to the leisure class?
Where does the wealth come from that allows the leisure class to consume so much...
This section contains 751 words
(approx. 3 pages at 300 words per page)