FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

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:
July 19, 2018
Rajai R. Masri
The West’s Potential Symbiotic Contributions to Freeing a Closed Muslim Mind
Jennifer Matsui
The Blue Pill Presidency
Ryan LaMothe
The Moral and Spiritual Bankruptcy of White Evangelicals
Paul Tritschler
Negative Capability: a Force for Change?
Patrick Bond
State of the BRICS Class Struggle: ‘Social Dialogue’ Reform Frustrations
Rev. William Alberts
A Well-Kept United Methodist Church Secret
Raouf Halaby
Joseph Harsch, Robert Fisk, Franklin Lamb: Three of the Very Best
George Ochenski
He Speaks From Experience: Max Baucus on “Squandered Leadership”
Ted Rall
Right Now, It Looks Like Trump Will Win in 2020
David Swanson
The Intelligence Community Is Neither
Andrew Moss
Chaos or Community in Immigration Policy
Kim Scipes
Where Do We Go From Here? How Do We Get There?
July 18, 2018
Bruce E. Levine
Politics and Psychiatry: the Cost of the Trauma Cover-Up
Frank Stricker
The Crummy Good Economy and the New Serfdom
Linda Ford
Red Fawn Fallis and the Felony of Being Attacked by Cops
David Mattson
Entrusting Grizzlies to a Basket of Deplorables?
Stephen F. Eisenman
Want Gun Control? Arm the Left (It Worked Before)
CJ Hopkins
Trump’s Treasonous Traitor Summit or: How Liberals Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the New McCarthyism
Patrick Bond
State of the BRICS Class Struggle: Repression, Austerity and Worker Militancy
Dan Corjescu
The USA and Russia: Two Sides of the Same Criminal Corporate Coin
The Hudson Report
How Argentina Got the Biggest Loan in the History of the IMF
Kenn Orphan
You Call This Treason?
Max Parry
Ukraine’s Anti-Roma Pogroms Ignored as Russia is Blamed for Global Far Right Resurgence
Ed Meek
Acts of Resistance
July 17, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Trump & The Big Bad Bugs
Robert Hunziker
Trump Kills Science, Nature Strikes Back
John Grant
The Politics of Cruelty
Kenneth Surin
Calculated Buffoonery: Trump in the UK
Binoy Kampmark
Helsinki Theatrics: Trump Meets Putin
Patrick Bond
BRICS From Above, Seen Critically From Below
Jim Kavanagh
Fighting Fake Stories: The New Yorker, Israel and Obama
Daniel Falcone
Chomsky on the Trump NATO Ruse
W. T. Whitney
Oil Underground in Neuquén, Argentina – and a New US Military Base There
Doug Rawlings
Ken Burns’ “The Vietnam War” was Nominated for an Emmy, Does It Deserve It?
Rajan Menon
The United States of Inequality
Thomas Knapp
Have Mueller and Rosenstein Finally Gone Too Far?
Cesar Chelala
An Insatiable Salesman
Dean Baker
Truth, Trump and the Washington Post
Mel Gurtov
Human Rights Trumped
Binoy Kampmark
Putin’s Football Gambit: How the World Cup Paid Off
July 16, 2018
Sheldon Richman
Trump Turns to Gaza as Middle East Deal of the Century Collapses
Charles Pierson
Kirstjen Nielsen Just Wants to Protect You
Brett Wilkins
The Lydda Death March and the Israeli State of Denial
Patrick Cockburn
Trump Knows That the US Can Exercise More Power in a UK Weakened by Brexit
Robert Fisk
The Fisherman of Sarajevo Told Tales Past Wars and Wars to Come
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail