FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Every Move You Make

Surveillance of private calls and emails.  Cameras documenting every move.  No habeas corpus.  Unimpeded entry into personal financial records.  Voting machines changing election outcomes with the flick of a switch.  Protest defined as terrorism. Many people hope that the loss of civil rights Americans have endured since the onslaughts mounted by Bush Administration II is a political reality that can be reversed through electoral will.

Established mechanisms of political power are,  of course,  the immediately available means for attempting change.  Notions of citizens’ rights,  freedom,  and democratic participation are compelling paradigms that have consistently stirred the bravery of U.S. citizens – and yet elder political scientist Sheldon Wolin,  who taught the philosophy of democracy for five decades,  sees the current predicament of corporate-government hegemony as something more endemic.

“Inverted totalitarianism,”  as he calls it in his recent Democracy Incorporated,  “lies in wielding total power without appearing to,  without establishing concentration camps,  or enforcing ideological uniformity,  or forcibly suppressing dissident elements so long as they remain ineffectual.”  To Wolin,  such a form of political power makes the United States “the showcase of how democracy can be managed without appearing to be suppressed.”

Wolin rightfully points out that the origins of U.S. governance were “born with a bias against democracy,”  and yet the system has quickly lunged beyond its less-than-democratic agrarian roots to become a mass urban society that,  with distinct 1984 flavorings,  could be called techno-fascism.  The role of technology is the overlooked piece of the puzzle of the contemporary political conundrum.

What are its mechanisms of control?

The use of telecommunications technologies for surveillance is obvious.  So are willful alteration of computer data for public reportage,  manipulation of television news for opinion-shaping,  and use of microwave-emitting weapons for crowd control.

Less obvious are what could be called “inverted mechanization” whereby citizens blindly accept the march of technological development as an expression of a very inexact,  some would say erroneous,  concept of “progress.”  One mechanism propagating such blindness is the U.S. government’s invisible role as regulatory handmaiden to industry,  offering little-to-no means for citizen determination of what technologies are disseminated;  instead we get whatever GMOs and nuclear plants corporations dish out.  A glaring example is the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that,  seeking to not repeat the “errors” of the nuclear industry,  offers zero public input as to health or environmental impacts of its antennae,  towers,  and satellites – the result being that the public has not a clue about the very real biological effects of electromagnetic radiation.  Inverted mechanization is thrust forward as well by unequal access to resources:  corporations lavishly crafting public opinion and mounting limitless legal defenses versus citizen groups who may be dying from exposure to a dangerous technology but whose funds trickle in from bake sales.  In his Autonomous Technology: Technics-Out-Of-Control as a Theme in Political Thought,  political scientist Langdon Winner points out that,  to boot,  the artifacts themselves have grown to such magnitude and complexity that they define popular conception of necessity.  Witness the “need” to get to distant locales in a few hours or enjoy instantaneous communication.

Even less obvious a mechanism of public control is the technological inversion that results from the fact that,  as filmmaker Godfrey Reggio puts it,  “We don’t use technology,  we live it.”  Like fish in water we cannot consider modern artifacts as separate from ourselves and so cannot admit that they exist.

Social critic Lewis Mumford was among the first to make sense of the systemic nature of technology.  In The Pentagon of Power,  he identified the underlying metaphor of mass civilizations as the megamachine.  The assembly line — of factory,  home,  education,  agriculture,  medicine,  consumerism,  entertainment.  The machine — centralizing decision-making and control.  The mechanical – fragmenting every act until its relationship to the whole is lost;   insisting upon the pre-determined role of each region,  each community,  each individual.

Mumford deftly peels away false hope from a social reality based on principles of centralization,  control,  and efficiency.  In 1962 he peered into the future and saw the pentagon of power incarnate:  “a more voluminous productivity,  augmented by almost omniscient computers and a wider range of antibiotics and inoculations,  with a greater control over our genetic inheritance,  with more complex surgical operations and transplants,  with an extension of automation to every form of human activity.”

Inverted totalitarianism is both inverted and totalitarian because of the power of modern mass technological systems to shape and control social realities,  just as they shape and control individual understandings of those realities.  Its contemporary existence is most definitely the result of the efforts of a group of right-wing fundamentalists who hurled themselves into power through devious means — but today’s desperate social inequities,  dire ecological predicament,  and fascist politic are the offspring of long-evolving technological centralization and control as well.

The challenge is to see the whole and all its parts,  not just the shiny new device that purports to make one’s individual life easier or sexier — which in itself is a contributor to the making of political disengagement.  The whole is a megamachine,  with you and your liquid TV,  Blackberry,  and Prius a necessary cog.

Forging a survivable world is indeed going to take a change of administration — for starters.  The terrifying reality that is mass technological society suggests more:  radical techno-socio-economic re-organization,  and to that end spring visions informed by the indigenous worlds we all hail from,  the regionalism of Mumford’s day,  and today’s bioregionalism.  Or visions of the forced localization that Peak Oil,  economic collapse,  climate change,  and ecological devastation propose.

CHELLIS GLENDINNING is the author of six books,  including Off the Map:  An Expedition Deep into Empire and the Global Economy;  My Name Is Chellis and I’m in Recovery from Western Civilization;  and the forthcoming Luddite.com: A Personal History of Technology.

 

 

Your Ad Here
 

 

 

 

 

More articles by:
bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
December 05, 2019
Colin Todhunter
Don’t Look, Don’t See: Time for Honest Media Reporting on Impacts of Pesticides
Nick Pemberton
Gen Z and Free Speech
Bob Lord
The U-Turn That Made America Staggeringly Unequal
Josh White
The Most Important Election in British History
Daniel Warner
The Hillsborough Soccer Tragedy: Who is Responsible?
Dean Baker
The Big Deal in Warren’s Prescription Drug Plan
George Ochenski
Another Utility Disaster Headed Our Way
Binoy Kampmark
Spying on Assange: the Spanish Case Takes a Turn
Victor Grossman
Big Rallies and Big Differences in Germany
L. Ali Khan
A Playboy Misrules Pakistan
William J. Astore
How American Exceptionalism is Killing the Planet
Susie Day
The Mad Activist Impeaches Western Culture
Andrés Castro
Look Out for the Drift
December 04, 2019
Jefferson Morley
RIP Fred Hampton: a Black Visionary Assassinated by the FBI
Vijay Prashad
Wealthy Countries’ Approach to Climate Change Condemns Hundreds of Millions of People to Suffer
Kenneth Surin
The Tory Election “Campaign” to Date
Maria Paez Victor
Indians Shall Not Govern
Peter Lackowski
Bolivia’s Five Hundred-Year Rebellion
Dave Lindorff
Billionaire Entitlement Run Amok: the Case of Michael Bloomberg
Doug Johnson Hatlem
Is Corbyn for Christmas Just Another Stove Pipe-Dream?
Howard Lisnoff
Elizabeth Warren: Savior of a Fallen System?
Robert Fisk
The Remembrance Poppy is Becoming a Weapon Against Immigrants to Canada
Dean Baker
NAFTA was About Redistributing Wealth Upwards
Richard Greeman
French Unions and Yellow Vests Converge, Launch General Strike
Binoy Kampmark
Legitimised Surveillance: Kim Dotcom’s Case Against GCSB
Walter Clemens
Goodbye Law and Morality, Welcome Pretend Tough!
Sam Pizzigati
Football Without Billionaires? Why Not?
Anthony Giattino
Royal Forests of America
December 03, 2019
Richard Lachmann
Can the US Get Out of Its Endless Wars?
Ramzy Baroud
Israel’s Unfinished ‘Coup’
David Rosen
The Dialectics of Postmodern Sexual Identity
Robert Fisk
Reporting Syria: I Talked to Everyone, Except Assad
Patrick Cockburn
Why the Resignation of Iraq’s Prime Minister May Not Stop the Mass Uprising on the Horizon
Norman Solomon
For Corporate Media, It’s ‘Anybody But Sanders or Warren’
Bob Scofield
Uruguay Turns to the Right
Joe Emersberger
Talking About Ecuador’s Political Prisoners: an Interview With Marcela Aguiñaga
Medea Benjamin
Trump Was Right: NATO Should Be Obsolete
Nyla Ali Khan
Lesson in Diplomacy for India’s Consul General Sandeep Chakravorty
William Gudal
The Bubble Machine
Gaither Stewart
Dirty Hands
Peter Certo
End the Wars, Win the Antiwar Vote
Binoy Kampmark
The Liveris Formula: Dow’s Inclusive Capitalism
Dan Bacher
California Freezes New Fracking Permits – But All Oil Drilling Permits Still Outpace 2018
Kay Sather
Can’t Get No Satisfaction?
December 02, 2019
Rob Urie
Ukraine, the New Cold War and the Politics of Impeachment
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail