The
Unconcious Civilization
By John Ralston Saul
Anasi, Canada, 1995 Pages 205. Price $14.95
John Ralston Saul is a distinguished Canadian writer and thinker. The book under review is the collection of 1995 Massey Lectures which he delivered in November 1995 on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Radio. The Massey Lectures are sponsored by the Massey College in the University of Toronto and the CBC Radio. The series was created in 1961 to enable distinguished authorities to communicate the results of original study or research on subjects of contemporary interest.
The backdrop to Saul's present study is the increasing withdrawl of the Western State from its earlier welfarist orientation. This trend has intensified after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. He makes no bones about his intense dislike for the capitalism as it is at during the late twentieth century. He is convinced that what goes under the name of democracy is nothing but "soft pretensions to democracy". His critique of the notion that democracy is an intrinsic outgrowth of capitalism- a popular stance in the Western ruling circles- is well spiced with the examples of China and Singapore where market forces reign supreme and yet the political regimes are nothing but authoritarian.
In fact, he asserts, is that "the more complete these (free) markets , the tighter the controls become on the other two freedoms (free speech and free elections). Free speech and democracy are closely tied to an active practical use of memory- that is history...(on the other hand) Commerce has no memory. Its great strength is its ability to constantly start again".
Saul's criticism goes beyond capitalism- he feels that capitalism is nothing but a specific instance of modern corporatism (and Soviet socialism was just another instance of this corporatism). Modern corporatism is creating a conformist society- it is nothing more than a form of feudalism without even the advantages of the early urban guild system where obligation and responsibility played a role. It is not surprising that Japan, Korea and Singapore should do well in such an atmosphere. They resemble the perfect corporatist or benign dictatorship.
From another angle- that of the 'Western' individual, contemporary Western civilization portrays her as the epitome of selfishness. This, he asserts, represents a narrow and superficial deformation of the original Western idea and a 'hijacking' of the Western civilization itself, which from the 12th century rediscovered, 'perhaps even discovering for the first time' that the modern individual could become what he or she wished'. A central argument of the modern champions of free- market capitalism is that economics is the determining factor in the world today, that democracy is based on individualism, which itself is a child of the industrial revolution. Saul's counter- argument is that much of modern individualism and democracy has preceded the key economic events of this millennium'. It was, in fact, these key elements which made the economic events possible, not vice versa.
How then, despite the strong roots of the individual has this 'hijacking' become possible ? Here Saul falls back to an argument vaguely reminiscent of the Marxist insistence on ideological hegemony. He locates the reason to be in the Taylorist basis of the 20 th century West, notably North American society. Just like all operations in the factory and the workplace have been reduced to small, simple acts to maximize efficiency, so has knowledge been reduced to tiny, narrow bands of specialist knowledge based on a 'false idea' of measurement rather than an understanding of the whole picture. The result is that doubt has been replaced by the confidence of a highly esoteric, technocratic elite shielded by their narrow specializations. More and more, this managerial elite is being supported by a smaller number of working people. Managers do not add value to things, and have to be supported by the rest of the populace (which also supports writers, thinkers, poets and other such non- producing elite). There is nothing wrong in this, but with the increase in the size of this segment to nearly 1/3rd of the society, can such a society survive ? For how long ?
These are the questions which Saul raises. It is difficult times for such doubters of the free market way, but Saul raises his trenchant criticism to such heights that it cannot be but taken seriously. Saul's primary concern is the West, the Western individual and the "fall" of this civilization. It has lapsed into a state of delirium, it has become unconscious. This again is vaguely reminiscent of from what Marx has termed "unconscious history". Comparisons with Marx become inevitable, since Saul differs from the Marxist critique of modern capitalism- he seemingly supports the early non- monopolistic capitalism of the last century, his critique, radical though it is. That this leads him to seek refuge in Socrates and Athenian democracy is but the logical culmination of weaknesses in his arguments.
There is much in the book that one can pick up cudgels against- therein lies the great thrust of the work under review. It provokes. It aims to arouse doubt. It seeks the Socratic ideal of the citizen as a source of 'persistent annoyance' and the Socratic right to criticize, to reject conformity, passivity and inevitability. There is much that Saul seeks to contest and question. The issues are far- ranging- from the perceived "inevitabilities" like technology and globalization to education, democratic process, downsizing, the export of the free- market thought to the Third World (like the classic case of Mexico). These are far too many to be discussed in this review. To know about these, you have to read the book. Or listen to Saul's invigorating talk itself.
Bhupinder
bhupi@bigfoot.com
The Tribune 12 Jan 1997
