About
25 years ago I first doodled a
little table which tried to identify the key subjects which had divided
opinion in each of the decades since the 1930s
At
the time I didn’t understand why I was doing this - but it was clearly an
important idea for me because I would keep returning to it…I became fascinated by the failure of those who became
disillusioned with ideas which had initially enthused them to ask the obvious question about the lessons
they drew from both the seduction and disillusionment
It
was, of course, Keynes who first drew our attention to the power of ideas. The
quote is on my blog’s masthead –
Practical men, who believe
themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the
slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the
air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years
back. I am sure that the power of vested interests is vastly exaggerated
compared with the gradual encroachment of ideas"
But
most of us seem to imagine that we are so hard-headed as to be resistant to
anything but appeals to our self-interest.
As
a result we fail to ask good questions about the rise and fall of ideas –
If only we would take time to explore
the reasons for both the seductiveness and disappointments, we might learn to
develop the art of scepticism…
The
focus of my table (called “The Ebb and Flow of Ideas”) on fashionable ideas is,
of course, rather idiosyncratic. The more normal way to handle social trends is
that of social
historians such as David Kynaston who emphasise the influence of
technological change. But documentarist Adam
Curtis shows us yet another way – choosing the theme of social control to
demonstrate how the theories of a few individuals - from Freud to “game theorists”
and characters such as RD Laing, JD Buchanan, Bob McNamara – were used by big business and politicians alike in the post-war period. And how an utterly negative assumption about human nature underpinned
the basic model of social interaction they all used…
I knew that the author of the famous satirical series “Yes, Minister” (Anthony
Jay - whose essay I reproduce in the final
part of my own 5-part series) based it on the work of the “public
choice” economists – (35 mins into part 1) but I had not, until viewing “The
Trap” realised the role RD Laing had played in destroying the US psychology establishment
and bringing in a new self-referential one…
Curtis’s
work has attracted some good profiles – eg this one
in 2007 and this
one in 2012
His most recent documentary is Hypernormalisation which
I am right now viewing and on which I may comment shortly…..
No
less a journal than The
Economist has just published a long interview with him – in which he makes the important point that -
What no one saw coming was the effect of individualism on politics. It’s our fault. We all want to be individuals and we don’t want to see ourselves as parts of trade unions, political parties or religious groups. We want to be individuals who express ourselves and are in control of our own destiny. With the rise of that hyper-individualism in society, politics got screwed. That sense of being part of a movement that could challenge power and change the world began to die away and was replaced by a technocratic management system.That’s the thing that I’m really fascinated by. I think the old mass democracies sort of died in the early 90s and have been replaced by a system that manages us as individuals
My recent post on "controlling the Masses" led to another important series of posts about contemporary politics
which included reading lists about the location of power….As I was rereading
them, I was struck with exactly the same reaction as Curtis when he makes this
comment about investigative journalism -
“The problem I have with a lot of investigative journalism, is that they always say: “There should be more investigative journalism” and I think, “When you tell me that a lot of rich people aren't paying tax, I’m shocked but I’m not surprised because I know that. I don’t want to read another article that tells me that”. What I want is an article that tells me why, when I’m told that, nothing happens and nothing changes. And no one has ever explained that to me.
Curtis uses the opportunity of The Economist interview to emphasise the point that people are searching for a new politics which will give them a vision worth striving for....and that we all seem overcome with a dreadful fatalism....I very much agree with his opinion that our times need a new more positive
and more social vision and that the central question indeed is how we learn to
trust again…..
This gives me a chance to remind my readers of the great reading list I included recently for protestors
This gives me a chance to remind my readers of the great reading list I included recently for protestors
No comments:
Post a Comment