A new Middle Ages is approaching, one in which the aristocracy will consist of sterile individuals who will greatly complicate the lives of those who wish to live as citizens committed to others—with and for others, and with and for their sons and daughters.
by Luigino Bruni
published in the Messaggero di Sant'Antonio on May 4, 2026
Every era has had its main social classes, those upon whom peace, wars, wealth, poverty, rights, and happiness depended. In the Middle Ages, they were aristocrats and serfs; in the age of the Counter-Reformation, landowners and peasants; and then capitalists and proletarians in industrial society. The ecclesiastical hierarchy—popes, cardinals, and bishops—belonged to the ruling class, the rich and powerful; parish priests, friars, and nuns to the other. There were also always intermediate and locally significant classes (think of the medieval merchants of Venice or Florence, or the artists in these and similar cities), but the axes along which social and economic dynamics unfolded were generally two.
With the new millennium, two new classes are emerging—transversal to those of previous eras and seemingly very different—but they are shaping social and relational dynamics, and soon political and economic ones as well. We also know that, in the end, we human beings are very similar in almost every respect (vices, virtues, fragilities, beauties…), and these distinctions should always be treated in the same way one speaks of salt in recipes: “to taste,” because no person ever fits neatly into an abstract category.
A “class” is that represented by those people who, all over the world, live life as a social commitment, as a spiritual and ethical task. They fall in love, then start a family, often get married, and above all do everything they can to have children, and if they cannot do so naturally, they adopt, taking upon themselves the risk that every adoption brings (along with its beauty). It is the global community of spouses, life partners, fathers and mothers, entrepreneurs, cooperators, missionaries—people who decide to invest their best energies during the most beautiful years of their lives to create something with and for others. Some time ago, I proposed the idea of introducing a new ring, similar to a wedding band, for those who are mothers or fathers: so we can recognize them on the street, thank them, and express our gratitude to them. When I see a person wearing a wedding ring, I always feel a positive civic thrill, which would double if I also saw another ring of a different color signifying that that person has dedicated their life to creating new human life on earth, that they have spent their life for two similar yet distinct commitments: to a person, to children, to a “forever.”
Alongside this “group” there is another. The equally widespread group of those who do not marry, do not live in stable and public romantic relationships, or, if they marry or live together, intentionally decide not to have children. The reasons are many, and I do not wish to pass judgment on them. Some present these choices with an “ethical veneer”: “How could I bring a child into this terrible world?” Generally, this group of singles, or couples made up of two singles, do not like strong bonds, particularly not with other humans. In fact, many of them live with one or more animals, usually dogs and cats, which they love deeply because these animals lack the typical traits of human beings: freedom, conflict, and reciprocity. They often love nature deeply, lead healthy lives, are health-conscious, very concerned about their physical fitness, and fear aging. They are often excellent workers—and even more so, female workers—reliable and devoted to their companies; they build excellent careers and often end up with a lot of money (which they don’t even know how to spend). They blend in with everyone else; they are no more unlikable than average; they are less generous, and therefore less generative (the two words are almost synonyms).
They can, however, be recognized by certain indicators. The first is the lack of joy and zest for life, which is masked by short-lived, adrenaline-fueled fun and cheer (trips, vacations, happy hours, maybe a little drug use now and then). They aren’t happy; they’re just fleetingly cheerful, satisfied by the joys that dogs, cats, and vacations can provide. The second indicator is the lack of deep, true friends, who are replaced by acquaintances and companions—here too, fleeting and low-commitment, because they are tied only to a specific activity (vacation, the mountains, a restaurant…), which only come into play in that context, with no connection to daily life. The third is the large amount of time devoted to self-care, which almost entirely takes the place of caring for others.
Unless something changes in our global culture—the one expressed in TV series, movies, talk shows, and novels—this second class of single men and women will increasingly become the dominant class and, like any dominant class, will impose its lifestyles, rules of the game, and fiscal and economic policies on everyone. A new Middle Ages is approaching, where the aristocrats will be childless individuals who will greatly complicate life for those who wish to live it as a civic commitment, with and for others, with and for their sons and daughters.
Photo Credit: © Fabiano Fiorin / MSA Archive
