Gonzaga Reflections: Week Three and Four

All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Lord Acton

Name me someone that’s not a parasite and I’ll go out and say a prayer for him.

Bob Dylan, from Visions of Johanna

As Noam Chomsky fights his battles with what he describes as the powerful, dominant elite, I have to wonder if Prof. Chomsky is deserving of our prayers, or even our praise. Whenever a social critic of Chomsky’s intellectual power makes his case we should listen and learn. We must also ask where is he coming from and where will it lead us? He presents his view that the dominant mass media, aided by corporate and government public relations, manufacture a narrative that perpetuates the power of the powerful. To follow his reasoning, much of society is complicit, from public officials to those working in the media, especially at the networks and the New York Times. He further explains that about 20 percent of the public, the intellectual class, influence the other 80 percent. If you are reading this you are probably in the 20 percent that takes the time and has the intelligence to fall into the group of influencers.

Fifty one years ago the head of General Motors told a Congressional Committee that “What’s good for General Motors is good for the country”. GM is no longer the power it was in the 1950s. In the era of globalization Toyota might be more powerful and, in my opinion, certainly makes better cars. Noam Chomsky would probably not have agreed with GM in 1955 and I’d bet he doesn’t today. The point, of course, of GM’s well known one liner was that if the company does well, its workers do well, its customers get a good car for a good price, and the economy chugs along in 1950s bliss; it is capitalism as it was meant to be! At the very least it’s the narrative that capitalists want us to believe. For the most part it’s a pretty compelling story. The world’s leading competing narrative at the time was Communism, with its utopian aspirations and Stalinist history and reality. In the middle of these two super powerful narratives were the social democracies of Europe, the “Great Society” of the 1960s US, and the other moderate streams of political economy, from Japan to Canada.

As societies evolve so do their media. That the media tend to reflect the values and realities of their communities and nations is the heart of the argument in opposition to Chomsky. As we evolve, Dr. Chomsky fails to present an alternate narrative and power structure superior to the one he deconstructs and criticizes. In the film, Manufacturing Consent, we hear the Dutch Defense Minister accuse Chomsky of having ideas that are contrary to the values of representative democracy, rather, he argues, Chomsky’s values are more in line with direct democracy. Later in the film Chomsky cites the early Kibbutzim in Israel, as an example of the social model that would allow for a media environment powered by the people. The other one that comes to mind is the small town meeting in Vermont, where individuals rule directly without intermediary elected legislators or executives. The problem is that the Israeli Kibbutz and the New England Town Meeting are extremely small scale enterprises and have not thrived except in very limited circumstances. So with those exceptions duly noted it seems there will always be “elites” in any society. And, in general these elites wield power, often responsibly but not always. Noam Chomsky does not like the people in power and what they stand for, and I doubt that he ever will. But their power is far from absolute and the news media have served to check that power, more effectively in some periods than in others.

So it comes down to who is in power. “Power to the people”, was a rallying cry in the 1960s and 70s, also a fairly popular John Lennon song. Since Manufacturing Consent was released, the World Wide Web has become a major platform for media. Much of the content on the web is produced by the same corporations that control the large newspapers and the evening news on the networks. But the web also serves as a platform for distribution of individual expression, unrivaled in history. Really Simple Syndication or RSS makes it possible for anyone with a computer and website to create content and distribute it easily and efficiently. Many high school students regularly post their work on iTunes. So the powerful still have power and our vigilance to guard against corruption is required now as it has been in the past. The web, however, has given more power to the people.

The powerful elite—as a class--have existed throughout history. The values of humility, good will, and the Golden Rule drive our religious, spiritual, and ethical traditions. But even among institutions dedicated to these values, there is an elite group. As members of the 20 percent that influences the other 80 percent, we should look at ourselves and the narratives we perpetuate. Our ability to read Chomsky, Hall, Herman, Marcuse, and many others gives us power, whether we agree with them or not. And who is to say the narratives of Chomsky and like minded theorists are any more compelling than the ideas of capitalism expounded by the so called dominant elites? When it comes to choosing which elites to follow, I’d favor a socially responsible capitalist to the intellectually engaging but wrong headed approach of Dr. Chomsky.

Perhaps adding the preceding line to the Dylan quote from above will make more sense now.

“The peddler now speaks to the countess who’s pretending to care for him,

Saying, name me someone that’s not a parasite and I’ll go out and say a prayer for him.”

In a societal sense, who is it that cares for us?