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 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 , 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: 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 . 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 -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. experiences and observations from of society as it actually presents itself egemony is not just a matter of where they sit in the world. So the to them in their daily life experiences. what people think, but also of world looks different and their criteria Hegemony is the organisation of this Hwhat they do, their habits and of selection correspond to that. And of presentation, both structurally and practices. And here we get to the other course, they get paid to do a certain actively, so that it is quite reasonable, part of the Gramscian framework: the job. or unavoidable for people to accept the particular role of intellectuals. By continuation of the existing order. intellectuals I don't mean suede- They have an "organic doctrine of jacketed academics in ivory towers. I society", a sense not only of what is am referring to Gramsci's organic desirable but also of what exists and intellectuals. To quote from the Prison what is possible. This last is important, N otebooks: because consent is not ju st a m atter of Every (class) coming into existence ... people believing that their interests are creates together with itself, more or less served by things as they organically, one or more strata of are. It is also a m atter of th e ir capacities intellectuals which give it homogeneity to do anything to change things. and an awareness of its own function Hegemony is an order in which the n o t on ly in the econom ic but also in the class capacities of those who rule far social and political fields. outweigh the class capacities of those Organic intellectuals are therefore who are ruled. They have the edge in not only economists and social knowledge, planning, organisational scientists, but managers, engineers, cohesion, inside contacts and links lawyers, bureaucrats, journalists, with elements of the opposing class, educational administrators, and and confidence. Keeping this edge is politicians. They are people who tlie function of organic intellectuals. organise hegemony. They are its active By contrast, those who are ruled side, and interact with the structural must overcome massive disadvant­ elements of material/social world, ages in their capacities. Denied commonsense and ideology. Indeed, knowledge and understanding of what organic intellectuals can only perform lies behind decisions and plans, their tasks within the context of these divided and segmented by the structural elements. strategies of , and excluded Take the example of the media. As from the inside communications of the countless studies show, the media can rulers, their horizons are limited by play an ideological role only to the their modest view of what they can do. extent that it builds on real perceptions At the individual level, it is a matter of of the real world, to the extent that they "I’m only a worker, whoam Itosayhow mesh with people's commonsense things should be run?" observations of what is actually This view is itself a product of the happening. A journalist can extol the observable daily-life reality that there virtues of the free-market (or attack the is a division of labor between those evils of central planning) precisely who work with their hands and those because this squares with one who work with their brains, or within element of what people actually “Commonsense” notions like "You the latter category between those who experience. don’t get something for nothing” and are paid to create and initiate and those I said one element, and that raises “I’m not smart enough to be a boss” who are paid to do routine hack-work. the other thing about organic are based on experience on the At the level of the organised labor intellectuals. Their function of material and social world, not only movement, the hallmarks are "organising" hegemony includes that constructed by hegemony. economism, sectionalism, and a of selecting some aspects of reality tendency to react to capital rather than and commonsense and suppressing This organising role spans the whole initiate. Even in its most combative others as the basis for ideological of society, it entails keeping the finger sectors, the militancy of the labor formulations. on the pulse of the economic, social movement is the militancy of the For instance, the ideological stance and political currents of society, and natural underdog, the assertion of its of hostility to "union power" can be intervening, arranging, adjusting, proper "rights" as a ruled class. Its derived from ordinary people's compromising and so on, to the extent strategies almost never touch on the "commonsense" opposition to necessary to maintain the basic prospect of it being the leading class in authority, which can include "big structure intact. It implies that capital society. union bosses", and which could in turn and its organic intellectuals take hat does this mean for our be based in real experiences of having account of all the groups in society, strategy? I'll conclude by to fork out union dues to tough union and develop strategies to minimise the suggesting four things. First, organisers who aren't seen at any W opposition, ranging from accomm­ it means that propaganda in itself, no other time. Witness Fraser's union- odation to confrontation. This process matter how massive, how well-argued, bashing. of taking account of the whole of how well-produced, is futile.

8 ALR Winter 83 Ideological arguments don't even touch the well-springs of experience and commonsense which underpin popular conservatism. Second, and by corollary, it means that we need a strategic approach which orients itself to people's experiences and commonsense, as it is for them, not simply for our own ideological preconceptions of their "real" interests. Not only our language and our arguments, but the very issues and interests we see as important must change. We have to focus on aspects of daily-life reality about which people will take steps that point in the direction of social change. Third, we need to conceive of how these immediate and sectional interests fit together at the broader level. We need to posesolutionsforthfe whole of society, in terms that people perceive as realistic and reasonable. In other words, we need to develop and fight for positive alternatives, reforms in which the working class is not just the opposing class but the leading class in society. The labor movement has to evolve its own hegemonic approach. Fourth, and in my opinion most importantly, we need to very explicitly orient ourselves to popular capacities as well as interests. In the shorter term this means fighting for reforms which expand the capacities of the labor movement to assert a say — things like disclosure of corporate information, trade union education, community ‘The philosophers organising facilities. These are reforms that ordinary people can perceive as reasonable from the point of view of have only equality and democracy, but which have a profound movement-building potential. interpreted the world, In the longer term, it means that we have to develop our own organic intellectuals from the ground up. We in various ways; need to break the division between intellectual and non-intellectual labor, and evolve activists who are the point, however,is simultaneously in touch with everyday concerns and able to see the whole and see the possibilities. We need to evolve to change it.’ people who match and challenge the organic intellectuals of capital, precisely by doing away with the 1883-1983 specialised function of the intellectual. All this poses sharp questions about the existing left. It suggests a new orientation away from the propagan­ dist organ and the "correct line" ALR POSTER organised political party. It suggests a new role for all of us who want to * 3 change society. Send orders to: AUSTRALIAN LEFT REVIEW, Box A 247, Sydney South, P.O., Sydney. John Alford is a Research Officer 2000. of the Australian Railways Union, Victorian branch.

A u s t r a l i a n L e f t R e v i e w 84 9