Douglas Rushkoff in the Arthur Magazine – An End to Movements:
“Mass organization may just have been a twentieth century thing: collective actions of all sorts—good and bad—were responses to the corporatization of government and industry. As such, they took the form of the entities with whom they sought to do battle. But—like the top-heavy, highly abstracted creatures they were created to counter —they are proving utterly incapable of providing an alternative to what they would replace.”
I don’t know if this is because of his book promotion or a style of thinking. But often people get hold of a formula and everything they say is reduced to a template. Perhaps this is the case with Rushkoff, yes we get it, need to buy more from a local farmer… And then there are holes in the logic. The rejection of mass movements, that I applaud, doesn’t really explain how America, still a country the last I checked, can be governed. What is being advocated in practical terms, the split of the union into states, small towns? This is a careless flaw in Rushkoff’s logic. Yet he is right and most contemporary thinkers sense the decline of “big”, the decline of mass media and mass movements. Also true that the Obama phenomenon is a contradiction to this trend. Even Obama himself perhaps recognized this fact when he called for “a more perfect union”. So we are either in the midst a last gasp of “big” or indeed searching for the elusive perfection. But despite my objections to Rushkoff’s logic and his final stupid put down of blogs, I find some of his passages simply delicious. Can sign in blood to this paragraph:
“In our current position, when disconnection from the real world is itself a cause for concern, movements only serve to disconnect us further from the actionable. They give us content for websites, language for our bumper stickers, and faces to put on our ideals. But they distract us from the matter at hand, and worse, turn our attention upward toward brand mythologies instead of immediately before us to the people and problems that need our time and energy. In the place of real connections to other people, we get the highly charged but ultimately fake connection to an image.”
Everyone should tape this last paragraph to their mirrors. I might roll a mezuzah out of it. Still Rushkoff is a fascinating thinker but he lacks people around him who have the rigor to challenge and perfect his ideas.
Further Reading:
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
This sounds much like Daniel Bell's book “The End of Ideology.”
the current mass movement against the health care bill, much like the american revolution, is all about taxes. the current administration, not six months in, threatens to balloon taxes under cover of its health care bill.
the people, not stupid, have taken to attending town hall meetings to stop this. polls show 49% opposed to the bill, only 43% for it.
it's a mass movement alright.
kids turned out for obama; these are adults talking now. they speak more loudly.
–dr. arthur kyriazis
Arthur, there must have been some elders who voted for Obama, for him to win the election. And yes kids seek out movements with much greater enthusiasm than the jaded elders. And yes there are a lot of “end” books today, I am not sure if the intensity of change exceeds the historic precedents but it surely feels like it.
Dear Ben:
First, I have the greatest respect for your blog and for your comments. I mean no disrespect for your point of view.
Second, and here I would refer to the latest copy of STATISTICAL ABSTRACT of the UNITED STATES or some equally neutral reference statatistical source, but i believe the statistical voting patterns were pretty uniform in both the primary and general election; voters over 55 voted for Hilary over Obama, and for McCain over Obama. The split was more even from 45-55, and a majority of white males voted for McCain over Obama.
Obama won by 52%-47.5% of the popular vote, but ran up a huge plurality among voters under the age of 30. Now turnout among voters under 30 is usually very low in presidential elections, but in 2008, that turnout among under 30 voters was unusually high.
Also, normally turnout among african american voters is low; that turnout was historically high in 2008, and it was also all Obama.
Furthermore, Obama won the hispanic/latino vote by a plurality and it also turned out. Across the board, turnout was very high.
I believe where Obama will run into problems in 2012, as always with one term democratic administrations, is holding his coalition together as to intensity of feeling and turnout.
Since he's not going to end the Iraq war anytime soon, this may disillusion his young supporters; since he's not going to give his african american base jobs, housing or welfare or civil rights enforcement, he may alienate his african american base; and he may alienate his hispanic base if he doesn't get immigration or health care reform.
he may also alienate his other bases of support, like teachers unions and labor unions by coming across as anti union or not delivering on labor issues.
the bottom line is the democratic party now has a big tent, and he has to deliver to everyone.
As to part II of your comment, not sure what an “end” book is.
Are you referring to eschatology or eschatological matters? Ontological matters? Metaphysical matters?
I'm a scientist, I don't really believe in the end of the world or universe except as a natural phenemenon, but I am also a believer in the creed of the church and in the resurrection to come, so like many other scientists, i believe that religion and science can co-exist, since god is beyond all science.
as st anselm once remarked, there would have to be a perfect god that was beyond space and time, because if he didn't exist, it would be illogical for him not to exist.
I think specifically the doctrine as explicated by the church fathers is that while god the holy spirit and christ are beyond space and time, and can co-exist in one space at the same time (a great mystery), the spirit proceeds from god and therefore is an instant after the father, god, and christ also proceeds from the father, so he is also an instant after as well. and yet they all are co-existent and co-substantial and have always existed, which is a great and wonderful mystery.
i spend more time worrying about the life after this life than about this life.
this life is a temporary vessel; the spirit and the soul are the true life.
–art kyriazis
amendment–i see, you refer specifically to “end to movements” books.
that just isn't so–i would have thought that it was clear that the end of the cold war simply unleased a great many ethnic and religious movements that had been frozen in time, c.f. Huntington's Clash of Civilizations.
the bush project in the middle east is to return to the project of secularization and westernization of the middle east by bringing parliamentary democracy to the region, by force if necessary. on paper you wouldn't think it would work, but then again, the Ayatollah Khomeini has been destabilizing democracy for like 30 years along with his worth anti-semitic successors by funding hamas and hezbollah and the iran-iraq war in israel lebanon palestine and elsewhere along with terrorism for so long we never thought to try the obverse side of the coin.
now that there's democracy in iraw and shi'ites can vote and rule, their cousins over the border want free elections too, and there's a mass movement for parliamentary freedom in iran.
no, the time for mass movements is just beginning. the movement in iran will turn into a tumultuous revolution. the last such ferment in iran overturned the Qajar dynasty from 1906-1911 and was also driven by western style desire for parliamentary voting rights and rule.
dr arthur kyriazis
Arthur, thank you for your kind words. I am not sure that revolutions per se are movements. Movements need a positive current. Even if there are millions people participating but their idea is that they are merely are opposition than this revolution is not a movement. Of course there are revolutions that are also movements, many. Some use a movement-like demagoguery to drive a revolution (perhaps Obama in this category). In other words there will be no new ideas coming out of Iran even if they change the regime and that is inevitbale eventually.