Revolution and Anomie
Bernard Brown
Brief Outline
I.
The Crises of Modernization
A.
Crisis of legitimacy
B. Crisis of participation
C. Crisis of tension management
II. Anomie
A.
Definition
B.
Causes
C.
Symptoms
In this interesting article, Brown
looks more closely at the crises that ensue from the modernization of a
society. He identifies three main problems that accompany any process of
modernization: legitimacy, participation, and tension management. Brown focuses
on the work of the French political philosopher Durkheim and he uses, in
particular, the French experience with modernization to support his arguments.
He then examines the state of anomie that many individuals and/or social groups
go into when they are forced to adapt or put up with a new way of living.
Brown starts with one major event
that Europe witnessed which forced it to cope with new conditions. That was the
Enlightenment. The Age of Reason destroyed a lot of old superstitions, and the
old political and religious foundations were swept away. For example, the
concept of Divine Right and the old Feudal societies had to give way to more
rational theories of political legitimacy. With modernization came new social
groups like the entrepreneurs, the managers and the clerks and, last but not
least, the massive working class. The existing political structure had to
integrate these new groups into the political system, and inevitably, that led
to crises of legitimacy, participation. And tension management. One living
example of this situation was France in the eighteenth century. The Revolution
of 1789 converted France into a modern state almost overnight. The result was a
long period of constitutional instability continuing to this day. The French
working and business classes are still to this day reluctant to bargain with
each other although they are compelled to do so by circumstances. Distrust and
conflict continues to interfere with the smooth functioning of the French
political system. Brown continues to expound on the crises of modernization. He
points out that not only the working class is distrustful of the political
system in France, but the students and the intellectuals. And that he
attributes to the intensive, destructive urge that characterizes students and
intellectuals in general. He concludes this part of his essay with a
pessimistic look at the course of history: that not only the failures, but also
the very success of a society in meeting the challenges of modernization may
lead to its own downfall.
Next Brown examines a serious
problem and social symptom that accompanies modernization: that of Anomie. He examines its symptoms, its
“mind” (meaning what it strives to achieve), and its causes. Anomie is the
social instability resulting from a breakdown of standards and values; on the
personal level it means personal unrest, alienation, and uncertainty that comes
from a lack of purpose or ideals. Anomie can sprout in different circumstances.
For example, when a traditional society breaks up, the family structure and the
church are brought into question. New values and new social structures arise
(for example science, cults, etc.) but many times, the individual in transition
cannot accept the new values and he feels “distanced” from the new ones. Other
individuals might welcome the change… The reaction can range from apathy at the
social-group level, to suicide at the individual level, to whole political
groups raging against established authority. In France in particular, and in
Europe in general, Anomie also manifested itself in philosophical and artistic
movements as well. Literary movements such as Dada and Surrealism questioned
science, rationality and modern society. They longed for and celebrated the
glories and the innocence of the village and farm society. They exulted instead
of the new values, the gesture of the child, the unpredictable happening, and
the immediate gratification of desires. Those values were also at the heart of the philosophy of some of the
greatest Existentialist philosophers, such as Friedrich Nietzsche. Brown
asserts that the anomic opposition to modernization is one form of protest
against poverty and exploitation. Anomic “rebels” fully accept the concept of
modernization though not through capitalism. Their goal is to base socialism on
a modern, not a primitive economy.
Then Brown examines one of the
“built-in” defects of modern societies whose rationale is to create more
wealth. He believes that it is not only poverty that causes protest and revolt
in a modern society, but also prosperity. Poverty is lamentable, he agrees, but
it’s also a school of discipline. In contrast, prosperity gives people the
illusion that they are totally independent of others, that they can overcome by
themselves any obstacles that may come along the way. When life is easy, there
is no reason to obey commands and the penalty for insubordination seems trivial
or non-existent for more powerful individuals. And when an individual
successfully defies one authority, he is tempted to defy another, until finally
the very notion of authority becomes unbearable. Brown warns that prosperity
unaccompanied by a strong sense of responsibility may undo a society. He looks
into the psychology that accompanies
individuals that are “struck” by sudden wealth. The struggle for success may be
more satisfying that success itself he argues. Many individuals that “make it
to the top” become so disappointed with the fruits of success that going on
seems pointless. Some of them develop problems of lack of self-confidence -
they fear that they cannot repeat their success. Brown sums it up this way:
When the “anchors” of society give way, social discipline, political authority,
the incentive to produce and sometimes the incentive to live give way. And when
these anomie-struck individuals contemplate the “vacuum” for too long, they
risk being drawn into it. Once in a condition of anomie, individuals react in
different ways. Some of them renounce, withdraw from life and loose their zest
for it, and in extreme cases, they commit suicide. The state of irritated lassitude and exasperation that
accompanies Anomie could also turn some individuals against others. Brown sees
in Apathy and terrorism related aspects of the same continuing reaction to
modernization. Brown offers real-life examples. He quotes from History the May
Revolution that happened in France in 1968 after an unprecedented 20 years of
economic growth. He pinpoints the fact that the most raucous and undisciplined
campus that was involved in the May revolution was that of Nantere whose
students are drawn from the comfortable sections of the West of Paris. The
French May Revolution highlights, says Brown quoting Durkheim, the existence of
a new dimension in the continuing crisis of participation which I mentioned in
the beginning of this paper: the crisis of participation or “entry into
politics” as Durkheim puts it. Anomie ensued when it became increasingly more
difficult to integrate the middle and working classes into the French political
system that had previously been dominated by landed aristocracy. The life style
of the capitalists was more and more remote from the reality of workday experience. A point was reached where
it was beyond the capacity of workers and capitalists to understand each other…
In later stages of industrial
modernization, the social force undergoing the greatest rate of expansion is
the intellectual class - the philosophers, thinkers, poets, scientists,
engineers, technicians, administrators and so on. The newly massive social
class follows in the tradition of its predecessors by making demands upon the
political system. To the intellectuals, Liberalism seemed to be a cover for the
supremacy of money or numbers. In Durkheim’s sense, many intellectuals are in a
condition of anomie because they are increasingly isolated from the rest of
society. Just like the new norms affected and revolted the workers of the
assembly line, so does the organization of social activity based on the basis
of scientific and rational criteria create a feeling of “dehumanization” in
many intellectuals.
Brown keeps going deeper and tries
to uncover the identity of the “triggers” responsible for the sharp increase of
anomie in certain stages of social evolution in modern day societies. He
uncovers three.
The first is the greater strain
that is imposed on people in modern societies. Many people break under rigorous
requirements of education and performance. The amount of knowledge to be
mastered is increasing at an enormous rate, and those who cannot cope with
acquiring it “crack” under the pressure.
The second trigger of anomie is,
paradoxically, the greater freedom that modern man enjoys. The man of
primitive-society was merely an extension of
the group. He has no mind of his own. Modern man, however, enjoys greater
autonomy and is free to think as he pleases. Unfortunately, the heavy
responsibility of making a free choice can be utterly demoralizing leading
either to desire to escape or to revolt. In authoritarian regimes, the average
individual is relieved of the burden of choice. The ultimate Paradox though, is
that, even in the Communist countries of the East Block, where authoritarianism
was at its peak, many people were very unhappy… and the end result, we all
witnessed: Communism was overthrown.
The third cause of anomie is built
into the very construction of modern day society. Simply stated , it is the
fact that it’s impossible to please everyone. The capitalists are getting
outnumbered and it seems unjust for the rest of society that all power be
vested in them. The workers have the advantage of numbers but their role in
economy is to obey rather than give orders. Besides, as a class, the workers
were unable to direct themselves, let alone the rest of society. The
intellectual class is not subject to the same handicaps. They are today an
impressively large social force and they have the ability, infixed in them by their social function, to direct and
command. The question is whether democracies like France can cope with the
entry of the intellectuals as a massive social force into the political system.
The “bad news” is that where freedom of criticism is permitted, the
opportunities for exploitation are massive…
Brown concludes by stating that we
are living in an era of reversal of values. In a reference to Hegel (the parable of the
servant who, compelled to live by his work, becomes self-reliant, whereas his
master comes to depend completely on the servant), he points out that any
dominant group may be overturned by the dominated group. Optimistic social
scientists postulate that science and reason are sweeping all before them,
bringing about the rationalization of social behavior, laying the basis for
modern industry, unprecedented prosperity, and the full flowering of human
freedom. In this ideal society, it I assumed that the ideological conflict of
early industrialization will be transcended and replaced by pragmatic
negotiation among claimant groups. The long term trend would thus be toward
stability, prosperity and freedom. Ironically, history has shown us that
mastery can be converted into dependence, and that political trends may be
reversed. In a pessimistic view, Brown closes his magnificent essay by pointing
out that a complex economy can be paralyzed by the determined opposition of
relatively few people in key positions. From stability may spring instability,
from prosperity misery, and freedom may be replaced by fearful authoritarianism….