The Myth of "False Consciousness"
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FEATURES THE MYTH OF John Alford argues that "FALSE propaganda designed to change so-called "false consciousness" is, in itself, CONSCIOUSNESS" futile and the effectiveness of a propaganda-oriented "correct line" political parties is highly questionable. He offers an alternative which includes breaking down the divisions between intellectual want to discuss something with a about the "real" nature of the system, and non-intellectual workers as strategic implication, namely the persuading them of the alternatives. part of the process of relationship between classes. In And the main devices for this are a generating organic intellect Iparticular I want to look at the political declamatory party press backed up by uals as working class activists relationship between those who rule pamphlets, books, public meetings who are in touch with everyday and those who are ruled. Why is it that and public manifestations such as the great majority of ordinary people, concerns of people. This article demonstrations and rallies. "The whose daily lot is not one that meets message" is all-important. And by is based on a paper given at the their needs, who are economically implication so too is "the party line". ALR sponsored Marx Centen vulnerable, pushed around in their The "message" and the "party line" ary Symposium in Melbourne, working lives, alienated in their are inevitably focused on class April 1983. domestic existence, surrounded by interests, that is on countering false urban desolation, and in the case of consciousness by explaining people's substantial sections just plain "true" class interests. downtrodden, deprived and Well I'd suggest that the spectacular discriminated against, within the failure of the propagandist approach is present social order, why is it that evidenced by the small size of the left in ordinary people acquiesce to the this country. I'd also suggest that the social order? This question is crude problem lies in the analysis of false but it isnotanewquestion.Thelefthas consciousness on which it is based, been asking it for decades. Once the which when you think about it doesn't answer used to be that working class fit well with some hard facts. For people were held down by the power of instance, there are thousands of the state, or conned by their social teachers who are progressively' democratic leaders. More recently, the minded and who honestly seek to open answers have changed. their pupils' eyes to the world. And to "False consciousness" is the key. take another example, the antipathy of According to this approach, ordinary the average Australian worker to those people are more or less brainwashed in authority, starting with the foreman, into an acceptance of the system as it is well known. is, especially through the media and the schools. They gain "illusions" hat I want to do here is re about what is and what is possible. examine this view of false ("We live in the best of all possible consciousness, and by doing worlds"). I'm painting a gross so challenge the strategy which it caricature of the approach. Leftwing implies. I'll start by looking at two of theorists have written countless the assumptions of this view. One is volumes of analyses which spell it out the instilling of false consciousness is in great sophistication. som ehow an active process — that is, a But whether its rough or refined, the process actively carried out by a strategic implication is the same — that particular group (those who rule) is, that the task for the left is to counter against another group (those who are the brainwashing, so that we can get ruled). John people organised into collective forms The other, related assumption, is of action against the boss and the that it is a one-way traffic, in which state. This means basically a people have false consciousness continuing emphasis on propaganda pumped into their heads from outside. Alford in various forms, convincing people These two assumptions lie behind the 6 ALR W inter 83 propaganda orientation of the left, market are examples. Now, by and behind the view that the task is to large, the one-way traffic view of false counter the one-way traffic consciousness only takes account of perpetrated by those who rule with our the third element: ideologies traffic in the other direction. If we themselves, more or less identifiable pump true consciousness into one ear with particular social interest groups. it will drive the false out the other. The The Gramscian framework of A propagandist approach alone, and problem is that our pumps are very hegemony, however, embraces all the analysis of false consciousness on small compared to those of the other three elements — the material world which it is based, has failed. side, so we face an uphill battle. and its social relations, "common- More importantly, this approach from the way it is experienced at the sense" and ideology. And it puts them ignores the'way in which conscious level of production. At one level, it together in a way that explains why ness forms. It ignores the fact that affirms the apparent equality of the people generally consent to the people themselves construct their own market-place — everything has a price; existing social order but can view of the world out of what they you pay your money and get your simultaneously hold particular perceive in their own practical, day-to- goods. Quid pro quo is the order of the oppositional views. day experience. If we are to day. At the other level, in the work How does it do this? Well, it starts understand how consciousness forms, place, the payment of wages for labor from the recognition that people we need a more realistic framework, is experienced unequally, in the sense construct their own experience. Their one which takes account of its that the amount of wages is fixed but ideology is constructed out of contradictory aspects and which the amount of production is unlimited, "commonsense" and out of the allows us to get at its real bases and except by the resistance of the worker, material and social world. And their thus sidestep the unwinnable battle which is external to the bargain. And commonse is constructed out of the against the one-way traffic. That the day-to-day expression of this material and social world. framework is the Gramscian concept inequality is the more or less Let me take the example of the of "hegemony". By "hegemony" authoritarian role of the boss. Now the commodity-form again to explain this. Gramsci did not mean simply "false important point is that both these People believe in the free-market consciousness". He was referring levels are real — neither is illusory, a system unquestioningly, without rather to a kind of order of society. Asa point to which I'll return. thinking about it. They profoundly commonly quoted definition puts it, The second element is "common subscribe to a fundamental capitalist hegemony is "an order which a certain sense" — the diverse, fragmented belief. But they don't do so because way of life and thought is dominant, opinions and perceptions that they've been conned by the press or and in which one concept of reality is individual people have of the world, not the school-teachers against their diffused throughout society". only of what exists but also of what is better judgement. They do so because To explain this, let me define three possible. Examples would be their material and social world means elements, and then proceed to put statements like "It's human nature to that exchange-relations are them together. First, there is the lord it over others if you get the "commonsense". There is no material world itself, and its social chance” , or "I'm not smart enough to conceivable alternative to the relations — the activities and be a boss”. commodity-form. The quid pro quo is processes we all experience as a The third element is "ideology". natural, unalterable and entirely reality. Basic examples of these are the Ideologies are more systematic than rational. And this shows at the level of commodity-form or exchange- common-sense. They are more or less commonsense, in statements like "You relationship, and the division of labor. worked out bodies of thought about can't get something for nothing". what exists, what is possible and what Of course, the same point applies to hese realities have contradictory ought to be, in political terms. They the contradictory aspects of the aspects. The commodity-form, for tend to justify the positions of material and social world. Other T instance, is experienced in a particular social groups. Liberal- realities also validate fragments of different way at the level of exchangedemocracy or the efficacy of the free "commonsense" and ideologies. For A u s t r a l i a n L e f t R e v i e w 84 7 instance, the role of manager in And this task of selectively society is the essence of hegemony. enforcing the unequal transaction of emphasising fragments of experience o what I'm saying is that "false wage-labor leads many workers to and commonsense is itself consciousness" is not false at all, construct the commonsense ideologically-driven. The ideology of nor is it simply instilled by the observation that "bosses are the manager, journalist, politician or Smedia or schools. People's bastards". And this observation whatever kind of organic intellectual, is conceptions of the social order underpins the militant trade union itself a more systematic version of are in fact quite valid. They ideology, in its corporatist and "commonsense", based on their have "true” conceptions in their heads oppositional forms.