An aspect of cultural studies that I always enjoyed was the analysis of popular culture/dominant culture and the concept of resistance. I have no illusions that such analyses result in models that represent anything in the real world, but performing such analyses can be helpful in reframing issues and looking at the world differently.
In my experience, cultural studies enthusiasts are almost universally leftists, not surprising in view of the contributions of Marx to the field. They tend to characterize “left wing”, “progressive”, or “liberal” ideas or cultural expressions as popular culture in opposition to a dominant “conservative”, “right wing”, “reactionary” culture. In my view, this is misguided and leads to confusion. Why are so many working class people so conservative or part of the religious right? Is it false consciousness? I reckon that some aspects of conservatism are more usefully regarded as expressions of popular culture and reactions to the hegemony of bourgeois liberalism and modernity.
For example, a working class woman might like to stay at home with her children and be a homemaker instead of toiling at a crappy low-paying job, but the dominant culture tells her that such a choice must be inherently unfulfilling and that it makes her dependent and vulnerable. Moreover, the world conspires to render her choice unaffordable and perilous. The woman reacts by adopting the view that her choice is morally superior, that the sacrifices she makes to realize her preferences are what any good mother would endure. Her position, seemingly a throwback to the days before women were liberated, may be viewed as opposition to the prevailing notion that women should strive to have it all, etc. I contend that the latter is now dominant and the former is a form of resistance.
Another aspect of cultural studies that leads to confusion is a tendency to view society as comprised of classes with a single “culture” in each class. The popular culture and the dominant culture are sometimes spoken of as if they were real and more or less uniform within each class. I reckon that it is more useful to imagine that each class is fragmented and marked by disparate cultural strains. The popular culture takes on many forms, from hip hop to fundamentalist religion to separatist movements, all of which resist the various strains of dominant culture. The dominant class is not entirely united, either, and the different factions within the ruling class exploit and co-opt different strains of popular culture for their own ends. The elites in the GOP, for example, play on the fears of the religious right and their resistance to modernity, rationalization, and individualization.
Libertarianism can, I believe, appeal to folks in the working class of almost every persuasion by pointing out how the dominant culture dupes and exploits them and by emphasizing how folks in a free society can live as they please without hindrance. The culture war, on which the politicians rely, does not have to be fought on the basis of compelling one’s neighbor to adopt your preferred cultural forms. Rather, let every strain of culture compete in a marketplace of values and mores. The “superior” cultures will prevail and become more widespread, but every culture will be free to preserve itself and persist if its carriers work at it. Best of all, nobody has to like what his fellow citizens are up to, and they are free to hold illiberal or ultra-liberal values as they see fit.
Those who are devoted to central planning of values and mores will never be won over, but I reckon that these folks are more numerous in the dominant class and among the intelligentsia than among ordinary folks. I suspect that ordinary folks are more interested in living as they please than in forcing others to conform.
The concept of multiculturalism, currently used ironically as a bludgeon by the left to impose tolerance of favored values and lifestyles and used as a bugaboo by the right to stir up a defense of a unitary national culture, could very well be turned to the advantage of libertarianism. Let’s take it away from the ruling elites and reframe it in terms of liberty. In a real sense, every individual is a “culture of one”. Every family has its own culture, as does every neighborhood, workplace, community, what have you. Culture isn’t real. It’s a concept used to describe the set of commonalities among an aggregation of people. Culture talk by politicians is always collectivist talk. No misuse of the concept of culture should be allowed to slide, and the people should be reminded constantly of what culture talk really means.
The people aim to resist. We should show them how.
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment