|
| ||
INTRODUCTION Laying a Foundation for Politics of a New Path: Contests Over What is Real and What is True. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER ONE The Paradox of Preeminence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER TWO The Neoliberal State’s Origins and the Rise of the Right: Wars, Revolutions and Insurgencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER THREE Courting Catastrophe and Sabotaging Everyday Security: Neoliberalism’s Dangerous Dance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER FOUR The “War on Terror” (Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy). . . . . . . . . CHAPTER FIVE Why Voting Isn’t the Solution: The Problem with Democratic Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER SIX Media: the New Faux Public . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER SEVEN The Prospects for Change. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iNDEX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
Reviews of Globalization and the Demolition of Society
From Choice, 2/1/12:
Loo, Dennis. Globalization and the demolition of society. Larkmead Press, P.O. Box 1173, Glendale, CA 91209, 2011. 416p index; ISBN 9780983308102, $27.95. Reviewed in 2012feb CHOICE. Sociologist Loo (California State Polytechnic Univ., Pomona) has written an atypical book for an academic sociologist: it is well-written and jargon-free; requires no prior understanding of sociological theories, methods, or statistics; and is critical of the reigning worldwide political-economic system. That profit-based system, neoliberalism, emerged at the end of the Cold War. Loo's goal is to "help bridge the divide that exists between the world of theory, scholarship and science and the broad public." His basic thesis is that systems and structures are the primary shapers of individuals' behavior. Given that Presidents Bush and Obama function within the system, one should not be surprised to find a great amount of continuity between the policies of their administrations. On the basis of this thesis and the ideas of a number of classical social theorists, Loo examines current phenomena ranging from the role of elections and mass media to inequality and the war on terrorism. His position that an understanding of the system is a necessary condition if one is to participate in system change makes sense. However, his paraphrase of Archimedes, "give us one percent and we can lift this country and this world," concerns this reviewer, and will probably concern other readers too. Summing Up: Recommended. General readers/public libraries. -- M. Oromaner, formerly, Hudson County Community College
[A comment from Dennis Loo - I'm very pleased that Choice's review shows an accurate understanding of the main content and objectives of my book, that he sees the continuity between the policies under Bush and under Obama, and that he praises the writing in the book. Authors who get reviewers with that much understanding should be grateful - and I certainly am! The last sentence in the review does puzzle me, however. I'm not sure why he thought my paraphrase of Archimedes is problematic. The point I am making there is that public opinion is always and everywhere shaped and disproportionately affected by a small fraction of the population who play a leading role. To change the direction of this country does require that we get a small fraction, roughly 1%, to contend against the direction that the existing leaders and authorities are taking us down. We need people brave enough to take the moral high ground, and demand accountability, justice, fairness, and subordination to the law rather than the lawlessness that characterized Bush and now Obama and that characterizes neoliberalism worldwide. By doing so, they can turn the tide of majority public opinion. And, as I point out in various places in the book, public opinion would be on their side, but the expression of that widespread opinion exists in nascent form now, evident from public opinion polls sometimes, but it's not organized and it's not fully formed. We can see this, for instance, with the impact of the Occupy Movement. Polls show, with only one exception, that a majority of people support the Occupy cause, yet that opinion isn't reflected in the attitudes and actions of public officials. What matters in state craft isn't what the actual majority position is; what matters is what is represented as the majority opinion. Archimedes' point was that if you can find the right fulcrum point, you can move the entire earth. That fulcrum for moving the entire society and world in my paraphrase is the most advanced elements of the people. If my reviewer's concern about this point is that he thinks that it's undemocratic to speak of a fraction of the population taking a leading role, then he's missed my point that moving a group of people always requires leadership and that good leaders who actually represent the highest and best interests of the society and of the people are the only way for the broad masses of people to realize their group's needs and goals. As I write in the Preface: "Individuals and groups, in particular, are not separate from and opposed to each other but in fact different expressions of a single integrated process. Individuals cannot accomplish what they do without group support and group sustenance; groups, in turn, rely upon individual leaders to organize the group and thereby advance the groups’ interests." (Emphasis added, p. xii) This is a point that is a major, recurrent theme within the book that I attack from different angles throughout the entire book.]
From the MidWest Book Review, 10/11
The concept of society is that the group can do better than the individual. "Globalization and the Demolition of Society" is an argument from Dennis Loo that Neoliberalism and free market fundamentalism seeks to destroy ideas such as the social safety net, unions, and any government regulations that stand in the way of profit, and that both the political parties of the United States have been shifting this direction for years, leading to a potential bleak future. "Globalization and the Demolition of Society" offers an intriguing look at corporatism and the philosophy behind it, ideal for social issues and political studies collections.
From Paul Craig Roberts, 1/12/12 at his website PaulCraigRoberts.com
Three Books to Stimulate Thought
"January 11 was the tenth anniversary of amerika’s Guantanamo torture prison. National Public Radio commemorated the anniversary by airing critics and defenders of Washington’s violation of US statutory law, the Geneva Conventions, and the US Constitution. Listening to the former government officials justify their crimes, I realized that I was listening to those who had set the table and served the agenda that transformed the US into a criminal police state. Here was confirmation of Professor Dennis Loo’s theory of democracy in which an elite decides the agenda and the subservient media prepares the electorate’s receptivity.
"In his new book, Globalization and the Demolition of Society (2011) Professor Loo suggests that democracy without an independent and aggressive media becomes a disguised form of dictatorship. People think that by voting they are determining outcomes when in fact they are merely legitimizing agendas decided by the elite."
Roberts also mentioned Loo's book in his January 6, 2012 article "The Dismal Economic Outlook for the New Year:"
"We were even lied to about US war casualties. As Dennis Loo points out in his book, Globalization and the Demolition of Society (2011), the 4,801 Americans killed in action in Iraq leaves out the 50,000 suicides of veterans and active duty US troops. The truth of the matter is that the casualties of the Iraq war are as high as those of the Vietnam war."
---
“A brilliant exposition… compelling written and readily grasped, yet profound in its synthetic treatment . . . . Loo’s analysis of the inherent, self-reinforcing logic of neoliberalism and the ‘War on Terror’ . . . is a potential game changer.”
– Sharon Araji, 2011 President, Pacific Sociological Association, Professor of Sociology, University of Colorado, Denver
“[A]n adventure in cognitive rebellion.”
– Peter Phillips, Professor of Sociology, Sonoma State University, President, Media Freedom Foundation/Project Censored
“Dennis Loo has identified the enemy of humanity and of the very earth as neoliberalism, and the system of advanced capitalism and imperialism that it promotes and defends. It is a daunting and implacable enemy, but as he also points out, it is increasingly failing in its efforts to control events. Herein likes the opening for the resistance, which he says must come from those brave enough to openly challenge its fact-challenged ideology, and to openly resist its efforts at control. It is, he says, much like those popular movies in which super alien races invade the earth, but are ultimately defeated when small groups of humans, and ultimately the whole of humanity, refuse to submit. A powerful call to action and rejection of cynicism.”
– Dave Lindorff, founder of ThisCantBeHappening.net and author of The Case for Impeachment (St. Martin's, 2006)
“Dennis Loo has written an important, valuable book, Globalization and the Demolition of Society, that explores the real solutions that we must enact to rescue the US, even humanity from the clutches of globalization and the neoliberals who employ the devastating powers, tools and weapons of globalization. He describes just how bad things are, including the ineffectiveness of many of the approaches that naive activists (most of them) spend most of their time engaging in. Loo explains how and why depending upon the media and upon elected officials will do little to make a difference. This book will open your eyes and get you thinking in new ways that will make it much more likely for you to be able to make a difference.”
– Rob Kall, founder/publisher of OpEd News and host of The Rob Kall Bottom-Up Radio Show 1360 AM, Regular Contributor, Huffingtonpost.com
“Reading Dennis Loo's book is like opening the curtains to daylight in a dark room.
“For those perplexed and dismayed by the current American political scene and rhetoric, for anyone who wonders, "How exactly did we get here?" Globalization and the Demolition of Society, by Loo, a professor of Sociology, provides empowering knowledge of the crisis facing us. His book traces the rise of neoliberalism, the political expression of globalization, and its tightening grip on the media, highlighting current examples such as the "war on terror" in a smart, lively manner. He looks at why and how democracy cannot work under current circumstances. Personally I was very moved by Loo's excavation of unexamined American myths about the individual vs. society. Loo shows how devaluing the role of the group and the community is a tactic used by the corporate media to further the atmosphere of separation, fear and growing economic inequity.
“While Loo covers considerable intellectual ground and complicated historical developments his language is always accessible and conversational. I would recommend this book to any one interested in understanding and changing our world.”
– Adriana Scopino, Freelance Editor
“Globalization and the Demolition of Society is a clear, critical analysis of globalization and its outcomes. Instead of taking a pro-globalization or anti-globalization stance, Loo presents an analysis of how political and economic changes have occurred over roughly the past forty years. How are our lives different because of globalization? Loo points to the role of the media, crime, and misinformation to answer this question. The ‘war on terror,’ ‘death panels,’ and more are explored in great depth to understand the impact of the rhetoric beyond the initial splash.
“In careful detail, Loo explains the path to demolition and offers a way to rebuild from the wreckage. What if the role of leadership in relationship to the led were different? A more open society will benefit from the gifts of leaders and the working class. What if ‘more democracy’ was not limited to voting? If people participated more directly and freely in policymaking, not only would more people participate, but they would be heard in more meaningful ways.
“There are many books on globalization, but Loo's book contributes something distinct. The political and economic changes wrought over the past forty years are critically and systematically mapped out. Readers will follow Loo's path of bread crumbs and arrive at the conclusion understanding the steps that have unfolded to result in the Demolition of Society.
“Beyond making this distinct contribution to an extensive literature, Globalization and the Demolition of Society is also very readable--it is sufficiently clear for audiences new to globalization, and it is written in an engaging manner. Readers will connect with the material and not find themselves overwhelmed by the language. It is also distinctively sociological, taking a holistic view of society and the changes undergone by institutions and individuals in our globalizing world.”
- Keri E. Iyall Smith, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, Suffolk University, Co-Editor of Societies Without Borders, societieswithoutborders.org
“[A] seminal work… a much needed incisive analysis that provides readers with a sense of urgency regarding the false utopianisms of globalization. Loo, a faithful voice from the left, embarks on a courageous sociological journey of the intellect, of activism, and of consciousness-raising in ways that remind us that one is never too socio-historically close to assess the human condition under 21st century capitalism.”
– Jack Fong, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Sociology, Cal Poly Pomona
“My colleague on the Steering Committee of World Can't Wait, Dr. Dennis Loo, has a new book on a huge topic, even for a sociologist, Globalization and the Demolition of Society. It's really several books in one, and ambitious. You wouldn't expect less, since his last book was Impeach the President: The Case Against Bush & Cheney.
“Dr. Loo does more than recount the destruction of the global environment on the altar of capitalism-imperialism. He goes after the fundamental flaws in the ideology of the people who run this country. I can imagine students walking into his class with the typical mindset that, with all its flaws, ‘at least the United States has democracy and freedom.’ And, bam, suddenly those assumptions get challenged. Think of this book as that course, without the quizzes and homework, but with the back-up material.
“This brother is brave, and he has not lost his 60’s roots. From the introductory pages, he criticizes postmodernism and religious fundamentalism, both Christian and Muslim, and goes on to show their philosophical affinity…to which I say, hallelujah. Anyone with a university education in the last 20 years has to have been deeply influenced, and possibly paralyzed by postmodernism; even those who have no idea what the term means are infected with the idea that ‘reality is what you make it.’ Loo compares this to a religious view:
“’Reason and science present obstacles—instead of indispensable tools—to literal textualists’ preferred agendas for the planet. Reality, to religious fundamentalists and postmodernists, is what you make it. Reality is what you (or God/Allah) will it to be and want it to be. Postmodernists believe that the notion of truth “is a contrived illusion, misused by people and special interest groups to gain power over others.” Facts “are too limiting to determine anything.”’
“In contrast to that philosophical framework that denies it’s possible to determine what’s objectively true, Dr. Loo argues that it is necessary, and possible, to understand and confront what is objectively true, an important distinction if we want to act to change the world. That in itself is a huge contribution. And that’s only the first book within his book.
“Dr. Loo tackles the underlying why and how of these outrages which I call systematic crimes. If enough people read this book, it could help change the course of history.”
-- Debra Sweet, Director of the World Can’t Wait
“In a world marred by the drive for profit, ever-expanding empire, and deepening and intolerable inequalities, Dennis Loo's Globalization and the Demolition of Society presents a pivotal contribution in the realm of ideas to the struggle for a whole new world. While many scholars on the Left have grappled with either the ramifications of globalization on our planet or with what neoliberalism represents, Loo not only goes beyond what others have analyzed, he also calls for a system change to repudiate the political economy of capitalism-imperialism and its current political expression of neoliberalism. He marshals the facts to prove how anything less than a system change will not and cannot lead to getting rid of capitalism's internal contradictions. Loo confronts neoliberalism from the intersectional bases of world politics, the US' interests, and human relations. He employs analytical tools and examples from the realms of sociology, history, political economy and popular culture.
“Loo's analysis begins with a vigorous critique of the most influential paradigmatic tools that are currently being used to analyze and make understandable what is happening in the world. He examines the relationships between perception, subjectivity and objective reality. Loo exposes the ways in which the current analytical tools rely on postmodernist and pragmatist principles in constructing a view of the world that feigns truth and objective reality. He also grapples with religious conversatism's role (western, eastern and middle eastern) in implementing and reinforcing a motivated representation of the world as divorced from examining and understanding the world and working to change it. Loo exposes the underlying affinities of the Religious Right and that of postmodernism in abandoning reason and science.
“Loo locates where neoliberalism's historical underpinnings lie, where its current trajectory leads, and what response is needed to reverse its continuing expansion. He goes on to underscore neoliberalism's essential logic of generating increasing insecurity, instability, paranoia and fear and how this logic has become entrenched. In one of the most remarkable arguments in this book, Loo goes beyond Naomi Klein's widely cited argument about the intentional nature of neoliberals' triggering of crises. He shows that some of the worst crises are ones that neoliberals aren't purposefully instigating: these calamities are the inevitable by-products of the logic and working out of that logic of neoliberals' constantly creating and profiting from more insecurity and their treating their cynical use of power as if it were independent of any objective realities. Loo takes us on a journey through the New Deal and Depression of the 1930s and 1940s to the national liberation struggles, the Cold War, and the 1960s' Cultural Revolution to the rise of the Right. Loo's reading of these events constructs a tapestry by which we can deconstruct our previous understandings.
“Loo also grapples with how neoliberalism's ideological influence finds expression among the public's sentiments. For instance, he elaborates on how the justification for increased surveillance by the state becomes supported by the public under the falsely propagated notion that it will somehow lead to increased security, in part because the very way the ‘war on terror’ (WOT) is being carried out reinforces its alleged rationale by fueling anti-state terror. He compares the WOT to Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy where a parent is secretly harming his or her child in order to make certain that the child is wholly dependent upon his/her parent. His refutation of the "ticking time bomb" justification for torture (a linchpin of the WOT) is elegantly simple and entirely persuasive.
“Loo elaborates on the role voting, elections and the media have in further paralyzing the public's ability to understand their own sentiments in relation to public policies' implementation. His compelling critique of democratic theory's fundamental shortcomings and the fact that voting cannot and never has brought about fundamental change is crucial to anyone interested in social change. He exposes the role that Obama's policies have had in furthering neoliberalism's aims and perpetuating public disorder.
“In advocating a system change, Loo engages with questions of leadership, the seizure of state power, the role of the modern privatized state, and the nature of bureaucracies. His analysis of bureaucracies both illuminates Weber's and Robert Michels' analyses and takes their analyses of bureaucracies deeper. He further develops the relationship between persuasion and coercion in light of the destruction of the welfare state and the withdrawal of social welfare policies and programs. He demonstrates that coercion, the use of outright terror and the abrogation of the rule of law, are the logical outcomes of the rise of the neoliberal state. Loo unearths the tension between freedom and necessity and how necessity can be transformed into freedom. His analysis illuminates how these contradictions have been handled incorrectly under the current order and how attempts to handle them differently under the current system can only rely on increasing the use of surveillance, deception, and the force of the police state.
“Loo challenges our notion of what can be done given the historical moment we currently find ourselves in. Unlike Durkheim's notion that social inequality is a natural phenomenon, Loo expands on Marx's understanding that there is nothing inevitable or eternal about class oppression continuing. He presents us with the ideas that we have to be grappling with and what actions we have to take to contribute to ending social inequalities.
“This book is a must read for those who seek to open their minds to new ideas about how to orient themselves to the world situation, yet remain undecided about which course of action is needed. This book is fundamental for those who seek to contest the new normal of the disorderly new order. As may be apparent from this review, the book is complex and very rich. Loo does not compromise his arguments by oversimplifying the issues, yet he conveys these matters in ways that are very accessible and clear.“
- Linda Rigas
Anyone wanting to understand--or better understand--how the U.S. political and economic system has become so dysfunctional will do well to read Dennis Loo's Globalization and the Demolition of Society. Loo not only catalogs a history of recent abuses, principally during the Bush and Obama administrations, but explains how the problems we face are not merely problems of particular people in power but problems with the system that go to the core of how the system is constructed. In essence, Loo explains, this system could hardly function in any other way than the way it does, much to the detriment of all but the very wealthy.
As such, this book will be invaluable for the Occupy Wall Street movement and anyone else in detailing why not just officeholders but the system itself must change; for anyone trying to get a handle on the spectacular abuses of political, economic, and financial power of recent years; and for those who suffer in the midst of the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression and see only disdain from our political leadership in both parties. It's a mammoth undertaking, and Loo pulls it off with a highly readable style that means if there is a single book that one should read to understand our present dilemma, this is it.
- David Benfell
http://dennisloo.com/reviews-of-gds.html
| ||
This is a powerful and timely book. Globalization and the Demolition of Society is sophisticated and subtle yet hard-hitting. Loo has a gift for precision, close analysis, and synthesis conveyed in a manner akin to the unfolding of a richly textured story. Without expressly intending to do so, he also tells a very personal story as he unwraps the tale of not two cities but two worlds in motion and fierce contention.
Loo, as an editor has described it, "takes what might seem like scattered disturbing developments in politics and places them in the context of larger, identifiable trends in history." The evidence, analogies, and mode of discussion in this book bring concepts and theory alive. He uses and explains theory so well that it is as if the theory he is scrutinizing is an actual concrete object in his hand. He hones in on the essence of a phenomenon or concept and then artfully examines its various facets and connections to other processes and entities. In so doing, he manages to be both concise and uncommonly comprehensive. After reading this book you will not see the world in the same way. You will feel both provoked and more empowered. His willingness and ability to speak the truth is precious in these times of profound troubles. |
http://larkmeadpress.net/page6.php
| ||
Since the 1980s, political systems across the globe have been undergoing relentless and radical restructuring. This tectonic shift in the nature and role of politics in people’s lives has been and is being carried out under the signboard of installing market forces and unrestrained individualism as the director for all matters personal and public.
Reminiscent of H.G. Wells’ depiction of extraterrestrial aliens invading the US in his classic The War of the Worlds, no arena has been spared from this full-scale assault. The proponents for free market fundamentalism bring with them not only concrete programs that they are fervently and meticulously inserting into place but an entire army of philosophers of privatization who hector us from every media outlet conceivable, generating a drumbeat of scorn for any who object. “There is no alternative, this is the panacea,” this army’s foot soldiers and generals tell us; nowhere and nothing is immune from their demand that they must take over and take charge. The acolytes of the invisible hand are visible everywhere we look. (From the Preface) What you believe and how you interpret a situation matter greatly, but interpretation does not overcome reality. The fact that Bush and his cabinet believed that their invasion of Iraq would be greeted with flowers as a liberation and that post-invasion planning was therefore unnecessary did not make their self-induced fantasy real. (Introduction)
Truth is not, unfortunately, self-evident. Things can get in the way of recognizing truth. Those of us in the US live in history’s richest capitalist country, the greatest superpower ever seen, and the very fact of that overwhelming power and wealth clouds the truth for us. The view from the inside differs from the view from the outside; the scene from the top is very different from the scene on the bottom. (Introduction)
Facts are facts, as the saying goes. And as far as it goes, the saying is true. Facts are facts. But what facts mean is a contested matter, and debates go on constantly about which particular facts are most meaningful. Facts can only be properly understood and perceived through the lens of theory. In fact, only through paradigms can particular phenomena even become known to exist and therefore become classified as facts. (Introduction)
Perversely, the more preoccupied the public has become with security, and the more that measures have been employed supposedly to promote security, the more insecure we in fact have become—subjectively as well as objectively. This holds true both on the national level and on the personal level. It goes beyond the question of the competence or incompetence of the US government’s economic policies or its anti-terrorist and anti-disaster measures and policies. It goes beyond the matter of whether the Republicans or the Democrats are in power. It goes to the very heart of the new world order’s fundamental nature. (Chapter One)
Social systems, economic systems, political systems, and so on, are all governed by their own internal logic. All systems have rules and inherent logic. You do not change those systems by putting different individuals in charge of them. Systems do not operate the way that they do primarily because of the nature of the people who occupy them. In the Stanford Prison Experiment, for example, the “guards” and “inmates” were all Stanford students. Yet they one and all readily and quickly adopted roles that eerily mimicked real prisons’ occupants and repressive atmosphere. To stop the Stanford students from behaving like prison guards and prisoners, Philip Zimbardo, the experiment’s lead investigator, brought an early end to the simulated prison. You change system outcomes, in short, by changing the system. (Chapter One)
[Friedrick] Hayek in effect dismisses the idea that there is such a thing as objectivity or necessity. There is only what the individual wants and that must prevail. Hayek’s hypothetically free individual declares his or her freedom, as if to say, “I care not what is right, nor what is true. I care only that it is what I want. And that shall suffice.” If objective reality does in fact exist, and if science, medicine, navigation, exploration, and technology all rely upon objective reality’s existence to work (a fact evident to anyone using a car or airplane, for instance), then the ongoing effort to determine at any given time in society what the best ideas are—the ones that more truly represent objective reality—is not merely an idle intellectual exercise but one with powerful material consequences. Which ideas predominate and set the terms matters to the whole of the society. Science, for example, operates through a collective process of peer review. A claim made by one scientist has to be demonstrably true for the scientific community or that claim is rejected as untenable. If what matters more than anything, on the other hand, is that individuals should have the right to pursue their ideas and plans based on their “own” ideas, then the question of what is true and its impact on the whole of society becomes moot. Implementing Hayek’s stand as a principle for the whole society would produce tremendous damage; indeed we find it doing precisely that, as this book discusses, by leading to the demolition of society. (Chapter One)
Individuals are like a tree’s leaves that extend out from twigs (the family), that spring out from branches (populations) that in turn spread out from the tree trunk (society). The tree, for its part, cannot live without leaves. It is true that some trees shed their leaves for a season and live on their stored resources and connection to the ground. But they would not have those stored resources if they didn’t sprout leaves for the rest of the year in order to collect the sun’s rays and carry out photosynthesis. Leaves are a tree’s way of providing for itself. Leaves, in turn, cannot survive without being attached to trees. A detached leaf, going about its merry way on its own and freed of its connection to and the dictates of the tree, falls and dies. (Chapter One)
The problems of capitalism that are now being expressed are not simply the product of a few (or even a lot of) greedy, corrupt, and shortsighted business figures. They are not primarily the result of poor monitoring by the … federal government. . . They are not fixable through a set of adjustments or through electing one party over the other . . . They are not mainly the fault of a . . . savings-allergic public. These are systemic problems. . . Systems do not change just because you put a new face in the White House and new faces in Congress. (Chapter Two) It is in the nature of free markets to cease being free markets. Libertarians’ belief that free markets are the solution to all ills, therefore, cannot be realized and implemented any more than a butterfly can go back to being a caterpillar. Small may be beautiful, but big is cheaper and more powerful. Small businesses can, and always will, emerge just as small saplings spring up amongst the towering pines, but the economy’s key players will continue to be big businesses. Some of the big businesses will be supplanted—witness General Motors’ bankruptcy plight even though for a long time it had been the world’s largest corporation—but the companies that supersede their previous competitors will then assume the monopolist position themselves. The players may change, in other words, but the disparities of position between big and small remain structurally and fundamentally the same. (Chapter Two)
What changed in World War II were not American political elites’ attitudes towards blacks. What changed because of World War II was the emergence of a socialist bloc. Had there not been a socialist alternative, in other words, blacks’ ongoing segregation in America would not have presented such a problem for those in power in the US; their segregated system would have been the only game in town and discrimination could have gone on more or less as it had for the hundreds of years prior to that. (Chapter Two)
The US civil rights movement emerged through an opening given to blacks with Brown v. Board. The actions of political elites, pursuing a strategy to make US interests more appealing, opened that crack. Through this small fissure rushed blacks’ long-suffering and long-suppressed aspirations and they erupted like a geyser. The civil rights movement that played a vanguard role in bringing forward the Sixties insurgencies would have, at a minimum, been indefinitely postponed absent communism’s successes internationally. (Chapter Two)The collective memory and scholarly consensus about the Sixties’ crime issue, however, is fundamentally wrong. Sixties’ poll-measured crime concerns did not show a highly aroused public preoccupied with street crime. To paraphrase Mark Twain’s famous retort to reports of his death, accounts of the birth of punitive and Social Darwinist public policies as a result of a public obsessed with crime have been greatly exaggerated. Instead, elites fabricated a fictive consensus around “law ‘n order” in the Sixties and employed it as a device to introduce momentous public policy changes. This consensus lacked a genuine popular component. It was, rather, the representation of a popular consensus. Since that time we have seen a reiteration based upon the same playbook of this fundamental falsification and manipulation of popular opinion on a succession of issues—in the 1980s’ the “war on drugs;” in the 1990s’ the “war on crime;” and since 2001, the “War on Terror.” (Chapter Two)
[B]ecause Obama, not Bush, is president, and because Obama is much more credible than Bush to many who vigorously opposed Bush, we now see a process underway in which consent is being manufactured to measures that would have been unthinkable ten years ago. (Chapter Three)
The very fact that poor people, migrants, Muslims, drug dealers, and political protestors are all included in . . . list[s] of potential “terrorists”—justifying surveillance over them all and the rousing of nativist sentiments against them—reveals a momentous and explicit shift in how public officials and opinion-makers govern. . . . [M]igrant labor fuels economic activity like arteries keep a person alive, the criminalization of these indispensible groups reflects a deeply troubling facet of our contemporary world. The marginalized groups are told, in effect, “We need you to exist as you do, for you make us rich and comfortable, but the very fact of your existence renders you a suspect, a criminal and a possible terrorist.” (Chapter Three)
[I]ntelligence failures do not discredit the existing policies of ubiquitous surveillance, suspension of core civil liberties, war, occupations, indefinite detentions, torture, assassinations, and drone attacks. Failures of intelligence promote and justify the existing policies . . . . The longer the US goes without another successful or abortive terrorist incident, the harder it becomes to justify the security state’s measures. Thus, the security state has a stake in having at least some anti-state terrorist incidents occur. This is the security state’s dirty little secret. (Chapter Three)
The law no longer represents the standard that people must abide by in order to avoid having police actions and prosecutions imposed upon them. The new standard is that one can be subjected to governmental or private social control measures simply for being a perceived threat . . . The undermining of the rule of law . . . is being carried out across the full spectrum of bureaucratic and corporate purview and policy making from top to bottom . . . . Obama’s perpetuation of [Bush and Cheney’s] actions represents the further advance of that neoliberal project. This means that attempts to restore the rule of law will not succeed as a strategy separated from a fundamental challenge to the entire logic of the system itself. (Chapter Three)
The worst and most alarming news here. . . is not that 9/11 was an inside job . . . . It is instead that 9/11 and other disasters such as the BP Deepwater Horizon catastrophe are due to the normal and ordinary workings of capitalism, and specifically neoliberal policies. (Chapter Three) In Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, a parent surreptitiously harms his or her child in order to ensure that the child is entirely dependent upon him or her. The more ill and weaker a child becomes, the more the hovering parent is “needed.” The US War on Terror mimics Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy in its impact on the US public. (Chapter Four)
The biggest problem that we face is not, therefore, the danger of anti-state terrorism, as real a problem as that is. The biggest problem we face is the “war” that is being justified in the name of fighting terrorism. The War on Terror provides by its very nature a self-generating basis for its indefinite and expanding presence, just as predatory parents create the need for their presence by slowly poisoning their children. (Chapter Four) The fact that governments and international organizations are now defining terrorism so indiscriminately tells us something about how much independence from the people they are now asserting that they should have. Some of those who try to affect government action are acceptable and not terrorists; corporate lobbyists, for example, have more influence than ever, while others are to be excluded and criminalized for daring to try to influence “their” governments. (Chapter Four)
Representative democracy overwhelmingly confines public participation in political affairs to voting for or against one’s representatives. Even in the best of all possible scenarios, if voting comprises the best and highest political role that the people can play, then the people will never have any real power over politics. (Chapter Five) Since the main way that people in a society learn about current affairs is via mass media, then what media are doing and what they are not doing constitute something extraordinarily important. Even those who do not pay much attention to the news garner their views via media from what might be termed “headline impressions:” they take what the headlines say as their point of orientation to the big stories and issues of the day and add to those media headlines the comments of others around them (with those others around them also having received their take on current events from the media). Headlines and lead stories are the snapshots that most people absorb from the news and tabloids, and it is the frame of that story/issue that is decisive. Because of this, the dominant news/issue frame determines the perspective of the large majority of even those who consume a lot of news from diverse sources (e.g., professionals and intellectuals) as well as the people who only go by “headline impressions.” (Chapter Six)
As Shanto Iyengar, a leading expert on framing, explains, referring to the well-established phenomenon that people will give very different answers to questions depending upon how the questions are worded: “Question wording effects are not symptomatic of weakly held preferences or naïve respondents. To the contrary, these effects emerge across a wide range of subject-matter sophistication and expertise.” In other words, it is not just the ignorant or easily swayed that are seduced by framing effects. This effect applies equally to people of very varied political persuasions. A story’s framing determines the boundaries of acceptable discussion and debate. Thinking outside those boundaries is invariably labeled “unrealistic,” rendered irrelevant, and designated as impossible or outlandish in the arena of “legitimate” public debate. (Chapter Six)
The main problem for our society is not, therefore, that too few Americans pay close enough attention to the news or that too many Americans are gullible, even though both of these phenomena exist and contribute significantly to the problem. Through a combination of, on the one hand, the media’s failure to cover—or censorship of—vital facts and issues and, on the other hand, their framing of issues in ways that predetermine what may or may not be considered, what the people of this country do not know about public policy and what falsehoods they believe have never been more extensive, extreme, and consequential. In the parlance of computer science: GIGO—Garbage In, Garbage Out. If the people are not being given reliable and fair representations of current events and issues, and if in addition they are being systematically told outright falsehoods, then there is no way that they can make sensible and wise decisions; they are being fed a steady diet of garbage. Mushrooms grow well on manure, but people do not make good decisions on a steady diet of it, as the quote from Babbage at the beginning of this chapter illustrates. (Chapter Six)
All of us, all of the time, are interpreting the sense impressions that come to us. Framing, that is to say, interpretation, is, therefore, inevitable. What are not inevitable are the particular frames that the media choose. The process by which those frames are chosen now constitutes the key arena of political power in society. It even trumps the use of state or non-state violence, since both those who use guns or other weapons and those who choose to either acquiesce to weapons or actively resist those weapons do so based upon what is in their heads. Guns do not settle political disputes in the final analysis, even if in the short run they can be decisive. If the people who use the guns are seen as doing so illegitimately, there are not enough guns and people to put down a determined and broadly aroused people, composed in part of a significant minority within that majority who are willing to die if necessary to change what has become an intolerable situation. (Chapter Six) Why do the less desirable jobs in any society, such as picking crops or cleaning bathrooms, have to be reserved for a certain class of people who must do these jobs their whole lives, while others are exempted entirely from having to participate in these socially necessary tasks? Why cannot these tasks, the putatively lowly, but indispensible, as well as the highly esteemed, be shared by everyone? Of course, someone who has exceptionally specialized skills such as brain surgery should not be doing things that would endanger their hands and eyes, but they could certainly spend some of their time doing more humble tasks. They and the society would be the better for it. (Chapter Seven) If we stopped paying brain surgeons as much as they now earn, would that mean that everyone now performing brain surgery would put down their scalpels and say: “Well, I’m not doing this any more.” (Chapter Seven) When a bus is careening out of control and the driver is not paying attention but is screwing around with someone in the front so that he does not notice or discounts the reality that the bus is heading for a precipitous cliff, someone else has to step forward and take control for the sake of the entire busload of people. Someone in that situation could decline to take action, saying to himself and others that he would never succeed in wresting control of the bus from the bus driver, and that trying to do so would only get him ridiculed, hurt, or killed; but in such a situation, inaction represents a cowardly and ultimately fatal choice. (Chapter Seven) I am reminded, when thinking of the functionalists’ celebration of the allegedly non-antagonistic relations among all of the society’s classes, of the Disney movie The Lion King’s opening scene. The newborn male lion Simba’s proud parents hold him up while standing on a cliff overlooking the wide African plain. Arrayed in concentric circles on that plain are all of the animals of the kingdom—giraffes, water buffalo, gazelles, and so on—bowing down before the new lion king. “The Great Circle of Life,” the film’s thematic score, rises in this grand happy scene in which the prey of lions celebrate the newest member to join the ranks of their predators, who will one day happily eat them. (Chapter Seven) [P]ublic policies, corporate behavior, and any other group behavior are not the product primarily of the values, personalities, or choices of the individuals within them. They are primarily the product of the standards being set by the leading individuals in those groups and organizations and the governing logic and rationale of those organizations and groups. Changing the behavior and nature of public policy, et al requires a structural change, and said structural change must be led by individuals who enlist the support of others to supplant the existing leaders and the existing structures. Change, in other words, requires leadership and groups of people acting in concert with each other and under that leadership. (Chapter Seven) A website has been created to accompany Loo's book at http://dennisloo.com. |
http://larkmeadpress.net/page3.php
|