If you have read anything else that I have written here, you would see that, again, you are making assumptions without any basis.
I have extremely strong values. However, I do not live in a delusion that my values are a reflection of some absolute values of the universe, and that, if the world ended tomorrow, that these values would still exist.
My values are based on what I believe would be a world that I would like to have. The world that I would like to live in is egalitarian, biodiverse, culturally rich, and environmentally clean. I want this enough that I will fight for it.
However, I am not arrogant enough to invent Gods or Goddesses that have declared that my ideals are, in fact, a reflection of their commandments. I do not have an ego that is so inflated that I believe that my preferences and beliefs are universal facts.
Have we returned to the 1950’s Red Scare, when people used “that’s communism” to invalidate any opinion with which they didn’t agree? I would also like to point out that random accusations of communism were most often used against Jews.
No, they were there only for a small percent of the population who had money, and who attended a small number of “elite” schools and colleges. Everybody else was taught enough reading and writing to perform menial labor and semi-skilled jobs.
The entire culture on which you are focused lived inside a bubble of wealth and privilege, even if not all of the writers which they read and quoted did.
Yet not one of them, or you, dared ask the basic questions “what value does this all have?” “does this benefit anybody except a small privileged minority”.
It was an echo chamber, inhabited by people who grew up privileged and isolated. Their experience was narrow and limited, as were their definition of “culture”. It was neither diverse, nor vibrant, it just seemed so to people for whom the experiences of the vast majority of the country will not important, nor worth considering.
What brought it down was not
It was the fact that other people, with other experiences believed that their lives and experiences were just as important as those of the “elite”. It was the fact that the people who started attending universities were not the products of the culture of the old elites (or those who wanted to belong to these elites).
The fact that you compare what is happening today to what Eliot was complaining about back in the USA of the 1920s is extremely interesting, which you consider the cultural background of the writing of The Wasteland. During that period, the barbarians at the gate were Jews and others who were not the descendants of people from Britain. Harvard and other “elite” colleges, the bastions of Eliot’s socioeconomic and cultural class was being “swamped” by Jews. Jews were leaving their slums and tenements and becoming a financial power that was difficult for the Boston Brahmins to ignore. The worst thing - Jews refused to acknowledge the obvious superiority of the Anglo-Saxon culture that Elliot and his peers had put on a pedestal.
Almost every Literary figure of the 1910s, 1920s, and 1930s was antisemitic, used antisemitic imagery, and placed Jews as an easy scapegoat of whatever they thought was wrong with the world. The 1930s were wonderful years to be an antisemite in the English-Language literary world.
After all, the response that Eliot had was to leave the USA and go to live in England, where Anglo-Saxons were still in control of the literary world. That was the way that he “shored the ruins” of his personal life - he ran away to somewhere where the literary world wasn’t being threatened by Jews and other threats to the Anglo-Saxon hegemony.
If you find yourself identifying with the literary figures of the 1920s and 1930s, and with their complaints about the decline of English Literature, you may want to take a closer look at what they were actually complaining about, who they blamed, and how that relates to what is happening today.
I will say, though, that it seems that T.S. Eliot abandoned his earlier antisemitism (or tried to), almost certainly as the result of seeing the end results of antisemitism in WWII. In general, WWII did see an end to most of the antisemitism of the 1930s in the USA.
So you are saying that there some “good” religions, and some “bad” religions? Pray tell me, what are the “good” religions and who gets to decide?
As for science, are you telling me that a sea-quirt, which isn’t symmetric, is “worse” than a jellyfish, which is?
Who gets to decide, please, whether a piece of music is “good”. As I wrote, when Europeans first heard Chinese classical music they declared that it was terrible racket. So are you saying that they were right, and therefore only European classical music is “beautiful”, and that the Chinese are all tone deaf or something?
I find snakes to be beautiful, while many others find them to be horrific, ugly creatures. Does that mean that some of us have perverted minds, and see beauty in awful ugly things?
Tell me, are parasites “bad”? What about parasites of parasites, are they “bad”. Are ants “bad”? Are rats “bad”?
Are supernovas “bad”? Was the asteroid which caused the K-T boundary extinction “bad”?
Again - who gets to decide what is “good” and what is “bad”?