Critique on modernity and capitalism; Quietism met by voluntary servitude and tutelage
Elvis Mantello / May 12, 2022
Numerous scientific discoveries and advanced technological progress in today’s world were possible thanks to modernity. It is safe to argue that Enlightenment was an important contribution to the modern world. The philosophical inquiries of Enlightenment based their thinking on using the faculties of people’s rationale and reason. Immanuel Kant, an Enlightenment thinker from the 18th century, notably said that "Enlightenment is man's release from his self-incurred tutelage. Tutelage is man's inability to make use of his understanding without direction from another” (1784, pg. 1). He argued that critical assessments and livelihoods ought to be done independently without the guidance of another.
However, in contemporary times, it seems as though society has not left its state of tutelage to see a truly enlightened world. Instead, people have become voluntary servants to corporations and governments under the guise of capitalism. The emergence of surveillance capitalism such as Amazon, Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, has reinforced the notions of voluntary servitude. Giving information to algorithms and corporations to seek personalization has left individuals disillusioned with the concept of autonomy. In this essay, I will argue that our modernity is still not a truly enlightened world. I will contend that society is instead facing voluntary servitude that leaves people in a state of tutelage. The contemporary world rejects Kant’s aspirations to grow out of tutelage because people have become more servile-minded and dependent on technology. Firstly, I will try to pinpoint the issues of consumerism and how it makes people more constrained under capitalism. Secondly, I will go over the concept of ‘society of control’ provided by Deleuze to analyze the issues such as "dividuals" and "samples" that directly reflect upon the masses and the eroding significance of a self-dependent public sphere. Finally, I will argue that it is inherently capitalism that is bringing social progress to a halt and preventing people from growing out of tutelage.
The birth of the symbolic exchange has created new responsibilities for the general consumers in modern-day society. The symbolic exchange has become the means to bring a dialogue in determining individuals' social status and class. Jean Baudrillard believes that credit has a new form that is akin to religiosity; radical consumerism. Baudrillard writes,
“Restriction of any kind on the possibility of buying on credit is felt to be a retaliatory measure on the part of the State; to do away with such arrangements - which is in any case unthinkable - would be experienced by society at large as the abolition of a freedom.” (1996, pg. 156).
Baudrillard contends that the vast amount of availability of consumption today has become a perverted religious activity. The modes of credit exist as a fundamental dimension to working and living under capitalism. On the other hand, Baudrillard notes that advertisement reinforces the credit system. Baudrillard believes that the new forms of advertisements psychologically make people consume the objects within the advertisement itself. Take an example of many McDonald’s advertisements. Grinning smiles stretched across the customers of McDonald’s faces in their advertisements while holding products such as Happy Meal illustrates a new dimension to consuming objects. Furthermore, the energetic sensations among consumers of Coca-Cola in advertisements signify that pleasure is with the consumption of their branded product. In essence, the new form of reinforced credit with advertisements shows the idea that there is a new functioning order under consumer capitalism that settles on ideals and fantasies that are produced within the accelerated guise of the simulacra and the symbolic exchange.
Mark Fisher famously argued, “some students want Nietzsche in the same way that they want a hamburger; they fail to grasp – and the logic of the consumer system encourages this misapprehension – that the indigestibility, the difficulty is Nietzsche” (2009, pg. 23-24). Within consumerism and the vast amounts of accessibility with products, people fail to understand the intimacy with certain things, like thoroughly understanding philosophy. Nietzsche is not a consumable product like McDonald’s. Philosophy has its unique faculties that bring people into a trance. That is to say, consumer capitalism has ignored that some things could simply not be turned into a commodity, a consumable product. “… credit pretends to promote a civilization of modern consumers at last freed from the constraints of property, but in reality, it institutes a whole system of integration which combines social mythology with brutal economic pressure” (1996, pg. 162). Baudrillard sees that there is a new responsibility to purchase and consume within the society that revolves around credit hence, he believes that this new system primes our psyche to correspond to the living standards of the world which revolve around the symbolic exchange.
Likewise, digitalization and the birth of Web 2.0 have made society less of a community-oriented public sphere. Technology has subsumed humanity. In part, this stems from the causal effects made by disciplinary societies and now in the society of control. Keep in mind that Deleuze argues that there has been a transformation from disciplinary societies to a society of control later. Nonetheless, Foucault explains the roles and modes of a disciplinary society:
“Discipline ‘makes’ individuals; it is the specific technique of a power that regards individuals both as objects and as instruments of its exercise. It is not a triumphant power, which because of its own excess can pride itself on its omnipotence; it is a modest, suspicious power, which functions as a calculated, but permanent economy” (1995, pg. 170).
Michel Foucault argues that disciplinary power is projected to surveil by not punishing the individuals of society but to reform them. The power within the disciplinary society is used to administer the life of a citizen. On the contrary, premodernity had society ruled over the body by the sovereign. By that, the sovereign was the ruler to punish the individuals who had violated societal customs. Although Foucault believes that with modernity, disciplinary society had a more rigid style of projecting disciplinary power to people. A disciplinary society had a more ordered time and had its distribution of productive forces to organize production. The ‘reform and not punish’ logic was the basic foundation of a disciplinary society that reinforced common standards and placed people in categories under different institutions to examine the individuals.
Deleuze on the other hand argues that society has not left the disciplinary society fully, but has also transformed into a society of control. In a society of control, an individual has volition but sees the issue of being constantly monitored not as a sign of control. There is a level of autonomy granted to a person to use such as social media, where they voluntarily serve their private information to algorithms and corporations. Society has also come to the fact that the reliance on social media accounts, and digital banking to name a few is no longer a demand but a necessity. Deleuze writes,
“In the disciplinary societies one was always starting again (from school to the barracks, from the barracks to the factory), while in the societies of control one is never finished with anything – the corporation, the educational system, the armed services being metastable states coexisting in one and the same modulation, like a universal system of deformation” (1992, pg.5).
Society now expects and demands individual private information be handed over, and the majority does this without any hesitation. Moreover, the idea of leaving work has vanished in a society of control. The level of connectivity with the use of social media, and to respond to work-related emails emphasizes that one has never really left work. Society of control depicts the idea of Kant’s notions of immaturity, that of the stalemate of people being stuck in tutelage. Deleuze argues that within the society of control, individuals have become dividuals, and masses have become samples. What Deleuze means by these terminologies is the fact that individuals are no longer seen as a character of qualitative ends but of a numerical body, a material that ought to be controlled.
The recurring paralysis which leaves societies in political quietism by rejecting the transcendental faculties to grow out of immaturity originates from capitalism. Instead of underlying social independence and a community-based society, capitalism encourages only for the few to concentrate their wealth and compete within the market sphere. Kant argued that people should not treat others as means but as ends. He encouraged humanity to have an honest and trustworthy relationship – which is also fundamental to the categorical imperative. Capitalism on the other hand breeds a perverted sense of freedom. It leaves one side of the pole prosperous however the other side of the pole is devastated. It is important to not succumb to the cliché meta-narratives to critically assess an alternative to capitalism. Instead, society must assess more community-oriented evaluations to solve certain issues. Replacing the spiritual significance of the human condition with numerical values and consumerism not only dehumanizes people but in return alienates their self-worth. Self-seeking societies like capitalism, will not only halt social progress but infringe upon the very ideals of Kant’s notion of maturity and the goals of a truly enlightened society.
Reflecting how society has become a sphere of voluntary servants highlights that people are still in the stage of tutelage and immaturity. The victims of late-stage capitalism are disillusioned with their freedom whilst willingly condoning servitude with a blind eye. The path to Kant’s notion of maturity is a long way ahead. Society, now more than ever requires us to acknowledge dignity without the assistance of another. However, people are drawing a blank when it comes to changing the economic policy and political ideals that have shaped this world into consumerism, capitalism, and a society of control. Society to be truly enlightened is in a dire need of a community and not the masses. The public sphere ought to rejoice in humanity with a heavy emphasis on social independence, compassion, and self-realization for each individual in a civilized society.
References:
Baudrillard, J. (1996). The System of Objects. Verso.
Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the Societies of Control. October, 59, 3–7.
Fisher, M. (2009). Capitalist Realism. Zero Books.
Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Second Vintage Books Edition.
Kant, I. (1784). What is Enlightenment?
