John Ralston Saul saith:
" . . . we live in a corporatist society with soft pretensions to democracy. More power is slipping every day over towards the groups. That is the meaning of the marketplace ideology and of our passive acceptance of whatever form globalization happens to take."
And a bit later:
"For the moment, I would like to expand on the particularity of gods, kings and groups. They cannot function happily within a real democracy--that is, within a society of individuals. They are systems devoid of what I would call disinterest. Their actions are based entirely upon the idea of interest. They are self-destructive because they cannot take seriously the long-term or the wider view, both of which are dependent on a measure of disinterest, which could also be called the public good or the common weal."
And a bit later still:
" . . . the policies being put in place throughout the West are based upon exactly the opposite [of disinterest & participation]. Everything, from school education to public services, is being restructured on the self-destructive basis of self-interest."
And latest:
"Am I exaggerating? Are we truly living in a corporatist society that uses democracy as little more than a pressure-release valve? . . . But then, I am not making an absolutist argument. What I am talking about is the direction our society has taken. And how far it has gone along that path."
from "The Great Leap Backwards" chapter of The Unconscious Civilization, 1995. And it seems to me that we have continued in that direction and have made great strides along that path.
John Ralston Saul is an amazing fellow. I first encountered his great mind in Voltaire's Bastards, which is definitely on "The List" of 25 Books to Read Before You Die. When I read him, things that were previously baffling or incoherent seem to snap into place. Why is America, argued by some to be the greatest nation on the surface of the planet in at least four dimensions, doing such a shitty job of educating, feeding, and giving medical care to its denizens? Answer: because it serves the self-interest of the small group(s) in power to not care about those things . . . or even to want to subvert those things. If you educate people poorly, they are incapable of thinking independently and do not cause (as much) trouble for the ruling group(s). If you don't feed the poor, they die off, they provide motivation for others who don't want to starve to work, they tend to reproduce less, they become isolated from any avenue to power . . . and you save the money that would have been expended upon their worthless hides. And medical care . . . pretty much the same thing, isn't it? It's an amazing propaganda coup there, though. Many Americans--even the poor--have been convinced that it is somehow anti-American to provide everyone with access to medical care. Despite the fact that many, most, or all industrialized nations in the world do this. And the coup is achieved via media manipulation and ideology construction. (And by the way, people who are poorly educated are much more susceptible to manipulation by media and ideology.)
Ah, fuck. Can I go live in Ireland now, please?
No comments:
Post a Comment