The century of the Self
29/8/10 19:12![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
While we're still about books and documentaries... First, a comment from a very interesting recent conversation around here:
An interesting observation, and much in line with this documentary (caution: lengthy material).
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6718420906413643126#
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-678466363224520614#
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6111922724894802811#
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1122532358497501036#
In a nutshell: psychoanalysis became an important tool for companies to read the mind of customers and shape the preferences of consumers in pursuit of more sales and profits; seeing this, politicians also used psychoanalysis (in its many forms) to detect the public's inclinations and then adjust to them in pursuit of more votes and power. This shifted the paradigm from "Here's our set of principles, vote for us if you agree with them" to "Tell us what you want, and we'll deliver it to you".
The documentary argues that the Conservative victories in the Reagan-Thatcher era were mainly due to their new message to the people: "You can be the master of your destiny, and we're the government that's gonna let you govern yourself on your own". Seeing that, Liberals realized that their only chance of regaining power was to adopt a new approach and instead of telling people what's best in their interest, they'd rather listen to whatconsumers voters expected from politicians and then give it to them. In the process, Liberals would abandon their inherent principles for the sake of appealing to the public, and thus they were successful - Liberal victories swept across the Western world (Blair, Clinton, etc). Conservatives weren't late to follow that trend, either, and we've ended up with the new way of doing politics that we have now.
Interesting stuff. I don't know how much you'd agree with it but it's interesting to consider nevertheless. Personally I think it's pretty much spot on. The cultural clash that we hear so often talked about is in my view exactly the clash of these two paradigms: the role of government in social life, and the two opposing ideas: A) S.Freud / E.Bernays / A.Freud: There are evil primitive forces lurking underneath the surface of every one of us, they should be suppressed and never let out because they're destructive, so society is one step away from becoming a mob, and we should keep it under control through psychoanalysis. B) W.Reich / P.Gould / M.Freud: The hidden powers of the ego should be let out to become the driving force of social progress, they should be catered to, listened to and let to define the making of policies, and psychoanalysis should be our primary tool for detecting, defining and recognizing them.
I didn't leave the democratic party, it left me
An interesting observation, and much in line with this documentary (caution: lengthy material).
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6718420906413643126#
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-678466363224520614#
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6111922724894802811#
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1122532358497501036#
In a nutshell: psychoanalysis became an important tool for companies to read the mind of customers and shape the preferences of consumers in pursuit of more sales and profits; seeing this, politicians also used psychoanalysis (in its many forms) to detect the public's inclinations and then adjust to them in pursuit of more votes and power. This shifted the paradigm from "Here's our set of principles, vote for us if you agree with them" to "Tell us what you want, and we'll deliver it to you".
The documentary argues that the Conservative victories in the Reagan-Thatcher era were mainly due to their new message to the people: "You can be the master of your destiny, and we're the government that's gonna let you govern yourself on your own". Seeing that, Liberals realized that their only chance of regaining power was to adopt a new approach and instead of telling people what's best in their interest, they'd rather listen to what
Interesting stuff. I don't know how much you'd agree with it but it's interesting to consider nevertheless. Personally I think it's pretty much spot on. The cultural clash that we hear so often talked about is in my view exactly the clash of these two paradigms: the role of government in social life, and the two opposing ideas: A) S.Freud / E.Bernays / A.Freud: There are evil primitive forces lurking underneath the surface of every one of us, they should be suppressed and never let out because they're destructive, so society is one step away from becoming a mob, and we should keep it under control through psychoanalysis. B) W.Reich / P.Gould / M.Freud: The hidden powers of the ego should be let out to become the driving force of social progress, they should be catered to, listened to and let to define the making of policies, and psychoanalysis should be our primary tool for detecting, defining and recognizing them.