Santa's Hos, and Other Fine Holiday Traditions

The condom was hung on his chimney with care...

In one sense, Santa Claus represents a pretty shitty model of morality.  It's basically the Stockbroker
Mentality, where everything is OK as long as you don't make the cardinal (and only) sin of getting caught.  It's a morality dependent on the constant threat of surveillance and punishment from some kind of ubiquitous Authority Figure in whose absence all manner of depravity is all but guaranteed to take place because it is completely dependent on external forces and does not require any sort of deep internalization or encourage independent thought, which, for some, is kind of the point.  It's safe to say that the concept of Santa Claus is not particularly conducive to any form of Modified Altruism, where an individual can critically analyze a situation, empathize to some degree with a variety of other social agents (both immediate and potential), and make some kind of a decisions based on the nebula of concepts surrounding the dictum "the most good for the greatest number of people"...

But on the other hand, the tradition of Santa Claus is something of a cultural boon for atheists and all manner of freethinkers from various walks of life.  I admit that recently after I had freed my mind from religious tyranny, I quickly added a clause to my worldview that took a hardline stance against teaching fairy tales and superstitions in any way that conflated mythology and reality.  Yes, for a short while I was among the ranks of douchebags who don't let their kids believe in Santa Claus.  Thankfully, a little perspective and a lot of booze helped me on the road to enlightenment and to not strip my children's childhood of all Awe and Wonder like a selfish prick.  In fact, upon further consideration and a healthy dose of whiskey in addition to the beer (and a few Tylenol 3s, because fuck it), I realized how the tradition of the myth of Santa Claus was, in fact, the perfect atheist tradition and counterpoint to the rigid application of religious dogma and blind faith.

The myth of Santa Claus is a secular parable in rational thought.  Santa Claus has about as much in common with religion as Justin Bieber does with that lion at the zoo who tried to pee on us last year, which is to say absolutely nothing.  There are two main reasons why Santa Claus is tha shit when it comes to positive life lessons, dog:

Round 1: I Am the (All-Knowing and All-Seeing) Walrus

God - whichever of the thousands of deities that humankind has worshiped and/or continues to worship - is always held up as an absolute.  That is, figures of religious authority outrightly discourage any critical analysis of their god and any and all related paraphernalia.  Critical thinking, logic, and reason in all their wonderful forms have been and are actively disparaged by religious authorities and other true believers while Blind Faith is actually encouraged as a legitimate paradigm to construct an effective worldview. 

On the other hand, Santa Claus encourages critical thinking skills in children.  Well, the myth of Santa Claus fosters these skills not Santa himself because that portly motherfucker doesn't really exist.  From a culturally objective standpoint it does seem a bit odd that a large segment of our culture spends the amount of time and energy it does to convince our children that some magical dude with a sled and flying ungulates annually delivers presents only to all of the well-behaved children of the world whose families can already afford to get them presents, the Santa myth is great. 

The great thing about the Santa myth is that when our children get old enough to critically analyze the myth and realize that it's bullshit, we verify that it is, indeed, bullshit.  And furthermore, we don't penalize them for questioning the myth and using their evolutionarily-bestowed mental faculties to question the world around them.  Santa Claus is like a code that kids have to learn how to crack.  As children grow older, they start to examine the quantifiable, empirical evidence and weigh it against their own beliefs to see if the two are compatible.  And once they get to the cognitive point that they cannot reconcile observable reality with a deeply-held belief, they fucking change or abandon that belief.  And what's more, they are encouraged to do so. 

 

All you haterz can lick my North Pole.

A 35-year-old man who legitimately believes in Santa Claus would, in today's world, be looked at as suspect and potentially mentally unstable.  Belief in Santa Claus requires the same Blind Faith that belief in a god or gods does; the only difference is that the faith in one is dogmatically defended despite no supporting evidence and in the face of all evidence to the contrary.  The Santa Claus myth represents the perfect model for one important component of self-actualization - the willingness and requisite mental plasticity to modify one's worldview based on critically analyzing and weighing all available evidence and drawing conclusions based on the countless forms of logical thinking and scientific inquiry at our disposal.

Round 2: Because Because, That's Why

Religious beliefs are based on hierarchy.  Especially here in Western Civilization, religion has a particularly useful tool for establishing the "inherent" authority of some human beings over others.  A belief in god, and particularly the Judeo-Christian version of the bloke, necessitates a similar belief in a natural order where each member of a given community has a clearly-defined role within a hierarchy of authority and upward mobility is not tolerated.  A few related concepts include the Great Chain of Being, the Divine Right of Kings, and the conflict between the AIs and humans in THE MATRIX.  (Also, to a lesser extent, the slaves on Tatooine in THE PHANTOM MENACE that Qui Gon Jinn chose not to help for some reason.)  However, the purpose is always the same: to justify imbalances of power, particularly in the oppression of the common majority for the benefit of the elite minority.  Without these kinds of social systems in place, people might object to being fucked over while their king owned more land, and collected more taxes, and just fucking told people what to do or while bankers, stockbrokers, and executives squandered the future of the many to fund the present of the few.

The concept of a god or gods emphasizes not just Blind Faith, but specifically Blind Faith in an unquestionable and "right" figure of authority within an equally unquestionable and "right" chain of command.  The purposes of espousing this sort of worldview are strictly for the manipulation, exploitation, and oppression of one group of people by another.  I'm not saying that religion or a belief in a deity or deities is the absolute cause of all institutionalized social systems of manipulation, exploitation, and oppression in the world today, but I am saying that the mindset of those who do embrace the notion of gods is thoroughly and completely in line with those systems. 

Those in positions of power have found religion to be a useful tool for maintaining social hierarchies for three main reasons.  Firstly, most religious beliefs involving deities also incorporate some variation of the Perfect Plan trope, which is to say everything that happens in the world is driven by the conscious design of some sort of higher being.  Secondly, a great deal of religious dogma revolves around strict adherence to the status quo and hence a resistance to change in any shape or form.  Thirdly, most - if not all - religious belief systems include some concept of Supernatural Justice, whether that be some variant of the heaven/hell dichotomy or karma or spiritual enlightenment.  On the basis of these three ideological tenets alone, a belief in a god or gods, then, can be easily exploited by those who know how and for those whose best interests lie in exploiting it. 

How do you quell rebellion from the masses?

Step 1: Convince the exploited that their exploitation is, in fact, not exploitation at all but instead part of a larger plan that they just can't comprehend.  Bonus points if you can convince them that everybody's station in society is preordained by a deity or deities.

Step 2: Simplify all of the complexity of human social interaction into two extremes - Order and Chaos.  Use some variation of the "it could always be worse" trope to make the subjugated majority believe that any change is away from the Order of the current social system towards the only viable alternative that is Chaos.  Bonus points if you can actually get the exploited people to fear change so much that they actively work against their own best self interests and allow their basic human rights to be violated.   

Step 3: Persuade the huddled masses that their suffering is transitory and that they should endure suffering without question because it's either a test from a Higher Power or because True Justice awaits everyone after death.  This is a key step, because people will endure a lot of shit if they believe that the people inflicting the shit on them are due for some kind of cosmic comeuppance and they are due for some kind of eternal reward during the final reckoning.  Bonus points if you can get them to freely give even more money/possessions than are already stolen from them by institutionally established means.

The Santa Claus myth, on the other hand, is pretty much the polar opposite (some North Pole humour for you there) of this sort of dogma.  Santa Claus is established among children as an omniscient authority figure that arbitrarily metes out justice.  However, the social negotiations surrounding Santa Claus as a child ages provides a model for entering into effective dialogue with figures of authority.  This is a rite of passage that not only teaches children to question what they're told but also how to challenge authority in a constructive way.  Within this particular cultural model, people are encouraged to call other people out on their bullshit but in a negative way like "You've been lying to me for 12 years, motherfucker, and I'm going to carve your dead, black heart out of your chest with your own broken femur," but in a rational, thoughtful way like "Based on the available evidence, I don't believe that your assertions of one man's supernatural toy distribution system should have any bearing on my worldview and I respectfully challenge the validity of this dominant social narrative." 

But you see, abortion is wrong
because then we have less
children to molest.

That's the fucking brilliance of Santa Claus.  Without even realizing it, the model for peaceful social progression has been sitting under our noses.  Rational, logical thought based on effective interpretations of available evidence coupled with ongoing dialogical processes.   

The point is not to deny our children fairy tales; it's to make sure they develop the critical thinking skills necessary to not confuse myth with reality.  Neither is the point to deny our children a sense of wonder or awe at the universe.  Fairy tales are OK when they're used to inspire or for entertainment or educational purposes but not when they are proselytized as facts in order to foster blind adherence to potentially harmful and regressive dogma for some ulterior motive whether that motive be some kind of financial or material gain, the abusive exercise of power, the subjugation or alienation of fellow human beings, or, in the case of the Catholic church, the raping of young boys.  In a nutshell, as long as we acknowledge fairy tales and myths as fairy tales and myths and don't elevate them to the status of religion then we'll all be a lot better off.

The New (Old) Morality

A couple of years ago my wife introduced a new Christmas tradition to the family courtesy of Wal-Mart.  Because that's how it goes now.  Traditions and customs are not passed on from generation to generation.  They are bought at your local retail store.  But I like it this way.  This is a new time and we are a new generation and we need new traditions more in line with our modern ethos.  We are consumers.  We buy everything else at giant retail stores--clothes, music, food, medication, ribbed condoms (for her pleasure) (extra large, of course, bitches!)--so why not our culture as well.  I'm not being sarcastic or ironic.  I am a consumer whore and there is little in life that gives me as much pleasure as buying something I really want.  And while I know there is a (presumably) growing movement of friends out there who "Don't let Their Friends Shop at Wal-Mart," these people are stupid, anti-progressive, and almost 100% of them are dumbfoundingly hypocritical to the point where I feel embarrassed for (technically) being the same species as them.  But that's for another time and place.  This article was about Christmas traditions.

So a couple of years ago my wife comes over to me all smiles and giggles, so of course my first assumption is that she's drunk at 3 o'clock in the afternoon.  Then she proceeds to tell me about this great new idea for a new family Christmas tradition that one of her friends told her about.  This was my introduction to the Elf on the Shelf.  Basically, the product is a little toy Elf dressed in a bright red suit with this creepy crackhead smile plastered on his face and wide open demon eyes that seem to follow you across the room and a book explaining how he works.  The book--written in shoddy, contracted-to-the-lowest-bidder verse--explains how the Elf basically spies on the family and reports back to Santa Claus on a daily basis as to the behaviour (good, bad, or ugly) of the family members so this fat, arrogant fuck can decide whether or not to give them presents.  The real "fun," we're told, comes from searching for the Elf every morning.  For the kids he moves presumably on his own accord and presumably by some magical means.  For the parents the subtext is that we are supposed to hide this motherfucker in a different spot every night, which means one more thing that isn't porn, video games, or SIMPSONS quotes that I have to remember.  For 24 days (the 24 days of December preceding Christmas--Duh!).  Once she explained it to me, I  knew my wife wasn't drunk--it was definitely hallucinogens of some kind that she had ingested.

But far be it for me to argue, mostly because when push came to shove it didn't really matter one way or the other to me.  I will admit, though, that it has brought a bafflingly immense amount of pleasure to my daughter this year who loved that fucking Elf to death.  I initially wanted to rail against this Elf, but I really couldn't think of any valid reason except that I didn't want to hide it.  And that's not even a valid reason.  It only takes like five seconds to hide the bastard.  I still can't explain my initial dislike of the idea and my subsequent apathy.  But that's kind of my personality.  I will complain about something simply for the sake of complaining about it.  I remember my diatribes against Guitar Hero back in the day.  I told people it was a stupid idea and that kids could better spend their time learning to play "real" instruments and that I couldn't see myself playing it.  Then I tried it and totally got addicted to rhythm gaming, an entire genre of video games that shouldn't even exist and yet has become one of the most enjoyable activities on the planet, a cultural phenomenon, and the most socially relevant running commentary on both music and games in a few short years.  But in that way I'm like a lot of people: I will argue until I am blue in the face against a product or experience I have yet to even try with absolutely no empirical or qualitative evidence simply for the sake of arguing.  Most people are assholes and I am (usually) no exception.

So like most things in life, I half-assedly embraced the Elf on the Shelf tradition.  My contribution was the name.  When you bust open the poorly written book that comes with the Elf, it tells you that part of the fun is naming your Elf, which I suppose implies some kind of emotional bond and limited ownership like when you name a dog or a child: you don' really want to (it cuts into INCEPTION-watching time), but you need to brand it as your own.  My daughter was too young at the time we got it to participate in any sort of logical verbal exchange, so my wife asked me what to name it and I jokingly said "Narc, 'cause, you know, he narcs on you to Santa Claus," and then went back to playing God of War.  I was trying to be a dick, but surprisingly my wife loved it and a legend was born.  Now good old Narc comes out for a little less than a month every year hiding in crafty places like on top of the microwave...

...perched on a picture frame in the dining room...

... swinging from the lights...

... and... enjoying a beer?

And what the fuck is this?

I still have to sit on that couch, dude!  Doggy-style, nice...

Fucking Elf is getting more action than I am.  I just hope he didn't get his candy cane jizz all over my ass groove in the couch.  That's where I sit to play video games or watch movies or rub one out or write blog posts that nobody will ever read about deranged alcoholic sex-crazed winter sprites.

But I guess he's earned all that drunken debauchery because the more I thought about that little Elf on the Innocent Skater Chick's Asshole Shelf the more I realized that he taught me the true meaning of Christmas.  Or one of them anyway.  This Elf is the embodiment of our modern sense of morality.  It teaches kids--and indeed all of us--that the only reason not to do something bad is because you might get caught.  I suppose this is in contrast to a more idealistic ethos of 30, 40, 50 or maybe even 100 years ago which espoused doing "Right" simply for the sake of doing "Right."  You don't steal because it's the "Wrong" thing to do.  You don't punch some elderly lady in the face for cutting in line because it's "Wrong".  You don't cut your uppity neighbor's brake lines on his car simply because he looked at you the wrong way and his haircut is slightly better than yours because it would be inherently "Wrong."  But that's all bullshit.  Nobody actually believes that any more.  There are some people who want to believe it, but deep down they know it's not true.  The new morality is a lot simpler: It's only wrong if you get caught.  I mean, that's really all morality is: the fear of being punished for certain actions that when we're absolutely sure nobody is watching we would do in a heart beat. 

The more I thought about the more I realized that this sexoholic Elf was just the latest, most tangible extension of that morality.  It's been circling around our consciousness for years through lyrics like "He sees you when you're sleeping / He knows when you're awake."  Santa Claus was always just this omnipresent force like god, or the CIA, or the Matrix.  But that's not enough any more.  It's not enough just to sing annoying, archaic holiday songs anymore: now children are becoming more and more cognizant at an earlier and earlier age and realize that the laws of physics overpower their parents' off-key Christmas carol.  If I can't see Santa, then he can't see me.  No, now Santa needs an ever-present spy to ensure compliance with the laws of the land.  So in one sense, this is not the New Morality, it is the Old Morality because there is obvious historical evidence that the Western world was at least vaguely aware of the fact that constant surveillance was a key part of keeping people in line.  In another sense, this is the New Morality because we are now becoming fully cognizant of the fact that the only thing keeping us in line is the threat of some negative consequence from an authority figure and that in the absence of that figure we will do whatever we damn well please.  And rightfully so.

We live in an age now when this New Morality is not only welcome, it is necessary.  In order to succeed in a capitalist/consumerist society you need to fuck over the guy next to you, his mother, all his friends, and their first born children.  And you can't do that if you're shackled by archaic ideals of ethics.  Just like in a game of Monopoly or in HIGHLANDER, there can be only one.  Every success you've had in your life by necessity means that at least a hundred other people have failed.  We are constantly being fucked by large, faceless corporations and large, faceless governments who understand the New Morality implicitly.  Embezzle the money.  Get kids in third world countries to make your clothes.  Get blow jobs from your secretary.  Sell weapons to terrorists.  And if you do get caught then you lie, lie, lie.  Dishonesty is the new honesty.

Imagine this scenario if you will: You find a wallet on the street with three hundred dollars in it.  It has the person's ID so you can either A) Bring it to this person's house, B) Bring it to the cop shop and let them sort it out, C) Keep the money, or D) Any combination of A and B with C.  In this scenario, what is the motivation for returning the money?  Is there really any?  I think personally I'd drop off the wallet at the police station because I know it's a pain in the ass to replace your ID and whatnot, and I would keep the money as a finder's fee.  And why not?  You can never possibly be caught so why not keep the cash and go and buy a Wii and a case of Alexander Keith's?  I don't think there's a single self-actualized person today who wouldn't keep the money.

Now imagine this scenario:  You buy a shitload of hardwood flooring for a home renovation project from your local Generic Home Building Outlet and when you go to pick up your order the dude loading it onto your truck fucks up and gives you an extra $1000 worth of said product by mistake.  Do you A) Tell the dude as he's loading it that he made a mistake, B) Say nothing then return the extra flooring thereby cheating the company out of $1000 or C) Sell the extra flooring to an idiot friend at twice the price?  If you said B or C you are an honest person with a strong grasp of the New Morality.  My personal pick is B because it is just so satisfying to stick it to some big, faceless corporation and because it's a lot less of a hassle than C.  It just makes sense.  If you're given a way to get ahead and you're stopped by what some religious text written over two thousand years ago says (you know the one...) then you are just plain naive and you deserve all the bad things that happen to you.  We all know that the right thing to do is to fuck over the big company.  The old axiom is true:  It's only illegal if you get caught.  It's the same reason you drive thirty kilometers over the speed limit and download pirated music.  You can't fathom any possible legal, financial, or social repercussions.  You don't think you're going to get caught.

Of course some of you might be saying "Well then, you're saying it's alright to kill someone as long as you don't get caught.  You're advocating murder."  To which I'd answer: It depends who you're killing.  But the New Morality isn't concerned about the intrinsic "right" or "wrong" of a particular action, merely about our motivations for completing or not completing said action.  There are some people who would argue that most of us don't steal or kill or rape because people are inherently good and we are progressing as a species.  But that's simply not the case.  The reason that many potential thieves don't steal and potential murderers don't murder and potential rapists don't rape is not because that deep down we all believe that these things are wrong.  It's simply fear of retribution that stops them.  Morality is relative.  I would personally have no problem stealing a couple thousand dollars worth of product from a faceless multi-billion dollar corporation given the opportunity, however I personally draw the line at rape and murder.  But that's just my worldview.

But ultimately the New Morality is about getting ahead.  It's financial.  It's consumerist.  It's materialistic.  That's the important thing.  That's the true meaning of Christmas: pretend to be someone you're not in order to be rewarded while trying to get away with as much as possible without getting caught.  God bless us, everyone.