Political Phase of Postmodernism (essay)
HenryBerry
by Henry Berry
Postmodernism has now moved into its political phase. The terrorist
incidents of September 11 have been seen by many as marking the end of the era
of modernism, particularly the era of irony which was one of modernism's
primary distinguishing characteristics. However, the incidents themselves and
what has been occurring in the weeks after them are not a break from modernism
or postmodernism. Rather, the terrorist incidents and the ensuing developments
are modern, especially postmodern, in character. For the past couple of
decades, modernism has been playing itself out largely in the areas of popular
culture and economics, with politics for the most part a secondary, and in ways
peripheral, area. But because of social, diplomatic, and military responses
required to the September 11 terrorist incidents, the standing and place of
politics in the society had been suddenly and necessarily changed. Politics is
no longer a secondary area mostly reflecting the ways and interests of popular
culture and the mercantile aims of corporations. These influences will not
disappear from politics. But for at least the next couple of years and likely
longer--the political phase of postmodernism--politics will be concentrating on
the fundamentals of the physical security of citizens and the implementation of
social, diplomatic, and military measures contributing to this while
recognizing basic humanitarian and national values.
The most glaring signal that the recent events are characteristically
postmodern events is the spectacular crashes of the airliners into the World
Trade Towers. For many years theorists of advanced modernism--most notably Guy
Debord--have been describing society as the "society of the spectacle." With
the loss of traditions, the remoteness of institutions, and the dissolution of
personal identities, public spectacle has become the primary means of
communication and unity for society, and of what coherence it had in the
dissonances of postmodernism. Sports, political campaigning, faddishness, and
sensationalistic films are examples of the spectacle of the society of the
spectacle. The daring, barely conceivable, crashing of two airplanes into the
Trade Towers fits right in with the spectacles that have been the means for
communication in postmodernism. A more spectacular act is hardly imaginable.
Spectacle is called for in all fields--popular culture, art, politics, etc.--in
a time such as postmodernism lacking subtlety and community.
The Trade Towers were a conspicuous, widely-known, symbol; a symbol of
American prosperity and leadership. Not only did they afford an opportunity for
a spectacular act of terrorism, but they served as an ideal symbol. The assault
on the Trade Towers signaled that American prominence and hegemony could be
successfully attacked. The crumbling of the Trade Towers signified that with a
proper strategy and tactics, America too could be made to crumble. Burning
American flags in foreign cities or kidnapping or killing diplomats were not
powerful enough symbols in the postmodern age rife with symbols. Since symbols
had become essential to comprehension and communication in all fields, an
extraordinary symbol such as the Trade Towers in one of America's largest
cities was targeted in order to make unmistakable the hatred and ruthlessness
of the terrorists toward the U. S. For the terrorists, the Trade Towers figured
ideally into the planning of a spectacle and the employment of relevant
imagery. That the destruction of a major national landmark moved the U. S.
population to express patriotic feelings, come together in a unity, acknowledge
certain functions of government, and think about the country's position and
activities in the world demonstrates the status symbols have come to assume in
postmodernism. The terrorist incident and the developments following it are a
new, unexpected, phenomenon of the semiology marking postmodernism. however,
they are not unrelated to other phenomena motivated by and ensuing from
semiological processes that have shaped events.
The Gulf War of the early 1990s was a preview of how war will be conducted
in the political phase of postmodernism. Technology and media will be at the
center of this postmodern type of warfare. While exemplifying how war in the
political phase of postmodernism will be conducted, the Gulf War was a
contained, small-scale, version of such war. And the basic issue of the Gulf
War was the economic issue of control of the vast, crucial oil fields of
Kuwait. Both sides in the war of the political phase of postmodernism, called
the War Against Terrorism by the Bush Administration, will be using the
resources of technology and media seen in the Gulf War on a global scale.
Although global in scope, this present-day war will not be called World War III
because it is not a conflict between states or alliances of them, does not have
identifiable battlelines, and is over ill-defined, yet impassioned issues of
identity, values, and culture. Such characteristics are extensions to politics
of the essential postmodern characteristics of the dissolution of boundaries,
ambivalence, fading of ideology, hybrid identities, and ways of behavior
associated with these. Politics will become more pragmatic, losing whatever
vestiges of ideology it had. Politics will take a global perspective to match
economics and popular culture, as the Bush Administration is already starting
to do.
Henry Berry is the author of FROM REVOLUTION TO FADS - THE PROGRESS OF
MODERNITY (www.amazon.com). He is also the editor/publisher of the online
periodical THE SMALL PRESS BOOK REVIEW (alt.books.reviews).
James Whitehead
<henry...@aol.com> writes
>The Political Phase of Postmodernism
>by Henry Berry
>
> Postmodernism has now moved into its political phase.
? is this thesis supported anywhere- as this is a post-modern essay i
hope not. Politics has its origins in Greece and is a theme of modernity
- there are no politics then in post modernity. G W Bush was not
democratically elected, T Blair is a non socialist Labour leader...
>The terrorist
>incidents of September 11 have been seen by many as marking the end of the era
>of modernism, particularly the era of irony which was one of modernism's
>primary distinguishing characteristics.
Terrorism has been around for quite awhile - what i think 11/9/01 does
mark is that the American psyche can no longer side with the rebel, with
the good ole boys in their fight against authority. The American myth
was that it stood for the individual good guy against authority. During
the cold war it could maintain this myth by presenting Russia as bad
and maybe the more powerful force - or authority in the world. America
now finds itself at the height of its empire - no longer the rebel,
defender of the individual, but alone the most powerful nation and
therefore the de facto big boy in the play ground. The irony is that the
terrorists cause is freedom from America and American influence.
>However, the incidents themselves and
>what has been occurring in the weeks after them are not a break from modernism
>or postmodernism.
with modernism we can see great nation wars (WW1) which developed into
wars of ideology (WWII) Korea Vietnam etc. There are no wars in post
modernism - look again at 11/9/01 - who is the USA (sorry "The
alliance") at war with. Not a nation, what about an ideology - not that
- its not at war with Islam.. its not actually in legal terms at war -
because of the consequences for claiming insurance! (more irony)
>Rather, the terrorist incidents and the ensuing developments
>are modern, especially postmodern, in character. For the past couple of
>decades, modernism has been playing itself out largely in the areas of popular
>culture and economics, with politics for the most part a secondary, and in ways
>peripheral, area. But because of social, diplomatic, and military responses
>required to the September 11 terrorist incidents, the standing and place of
>politics in the society had been suddenly and necessarily changed. Politics is
>no longer a secondary area mostly reflecting the ways and interests of popular
>culture and the mercantile aims of corporations. These influences will not
>disappear from politics. But for at least the next couple of years and likely
>longer--the political phase of postmodernism--politics will be concentrating on
>the fundamentals of the physical security of citizens and the implementation of
>social, diplomatic, and military measures contributing to this while
>recognizing basic humanitarian and national values.
nice prediction, we shall see. However it doesn't take a genius to see
how societies like the USA are going to be continually open to such
attacks. Look at other societies which live in a state of immanent
terrorism. In attempting to solve the problem its made worse, in
attempting to do nothing or tackling the causes is political suicide.
Who is then leading this "war" - public opinion, so of course it agrees
with Bush, its writing the script. Consumerism demands solutions, a cure
for cancer, end to terrorism (anything that bothers the life of the
individual), all that can be done is to say "ok its just round the
corner trust in me and pay your taxes" My prediction is that science
and especially information technology will be looked for as a solution,
a divine intervention by Microsoft and Cisco.
> The most glaring signal that the recent events are characteristically
>postmodern events is the spectacular crashes of the airliners into the World
>Trade Towers. For many years theorists of advanced modernism--most notably Guy
>Debord--have been describing society as the "society of the spectacle." With
>the loss of traditions, the remoteness of institutions, and the dissolution of
>personal identities, public spectacle has become the primary means of
>communication and unity for society, and of what coherence it had in the
>dissonances of postmodernism. Sports, political campaigning, faddishness, and
>sensationalistic films are examples of the spectacle of the society of the
>spectacle. The daring, barely conceivable, crashing of two airplanes into the
>Trade Towers fits right in with the spectacles that have been the means for
>communication in postmodernism.
The difference is that post-modern spectacle is not real - but virtual,
how close it is to real was demonstrated by the destruction of the twin
towers. However the twin towers destruction was real - and is for the
time real - will it remain so. I think not.
>A more spectacular act is hardly imaginable.
This sentence demonstrates how real events can become non-real. The
author says a more spectacular act is hardly imaginable - meaning that
Hiroshima, Nagasaki ... the nazi death camps .. pol pot.. were not
real!
>Spectacle is called for in all fields--popular culture, art, politics, etc.--in
>a time such as postmodernism lacking subtlety and community.
popular culture in post modernism has replaced art, politics, etc...
> The Trade Towers were a conspicuous, widely-known, symbol; a symbol of
>American prosperity and leadership. Not only did they afford an opportunity for
>a spectacular act of terrorism, but they served as an ideal symbol. The assault
>on the Trade Towers signaled that American prominence and hegemony could be
>successfully attacked.
>The crumbling of the Trade Towers signified that with a
>proper strategy and tactics, America too could be made to crumble.
not true - in personal terms the events are horrific and despicable, but
how this can bring down a culture of hundreds of millions of people and
billions of dollars is hard to see.
> Burning
>American flags in foreign cities or kidnapping or killing diplomats were not
>powerful enough symbols in the postmodern age rife with symbols. Since symbols
>had become essential to comprehension and communication in all fields, an
>extraordinary symbol such as the Trade Towers in one of America's largest
>cities was targeted in order to make unmistakable the hatred and ruthlessness
>of the terrorists toward the U. S. For the terrorists, the Trade Towers figured
>ideally into the planning of a spectacle and the employment of relevant
>imagery. That the destruction of a major national landmark moved the U. S.
>population to express patriotic feelings, come together in a unity, acknowledge
>certain functions of government, and think about the country's position and
>activities in the world demonstrates the status symbols have come to assume in
>postmodernism.
Again this should be challenged, the statue of liberty offered perhaps
a better "symbolic" target. Why the trade towers were chosen is more
complex. Why the targets of the 11/9/01 was more to do with the previous
failure, they represented to the terrorists a symbol of their failure.
Why they were originally targeted is more difficult, but the first
attack failed and more importantly those who committed it caught.
Secondly were the terrorists aware of the scale of human death resulting
from the attack. I think not, as it mitigates massive reprisals. Why did
the towers collapse so suddenly. Would a major fire on a floor also
cause such a collapse. I've heard engineers explain the collapse due to
a failure of the steel, but i'm aware that steel can be protected from
much higher temperatures. This is part of the first failure - of
technology, of the buildings to stay standing, of no alternative escape
methods - of the FBI and CIA in not knowing what's going on - of Air
Traffic control and air port security and the American airforce.
However the more significant effect was the direct experience of the
deaths of ordinary people like ourselves. "Like ourselves" - in such a
situation - what do *we* do - phone home - that was the real horror. We
see a child in Africa hours away from death, its not the same, we feel
sympathy - but those who died on the 11/09/01 were like us and acted
like us. Now we look for someone to blame, ultimately we will look to
make ourselves as protected against such incidents as possible. The one
piece of technology - which is post-modern - to emerge as significant in
a positive way of course has been the mobile phone. And its use - not to
phone for help - (from an authority) but to phone home...
>The terrorist incident and the developments following it are a
>new, unexpected, phenomenon of the semiology marking postmodernism. however,
>they are not unrelated to other phenomena motivated by and ensuing from
>semiological processes that have shaped events.
Then you are not familiar with the rise in National Socialism the
Swastika, and yellow stars .. The phenomenon that was new was that
people could talk to who they chose - not to pass on some information -
but to be with them.. individual to individual as they died. Masses die
in modern wars - some two million young men from England in 1914-18.
They died away from home - out of touch. To see what this figure implies
look at a school role -it means that in over half of any school class
the boys were removed, in every city, town and village. I think
something like this number also died in the American civil war... but
out of contact on some battle field.
> The Gulf War of the early 1990s was a preview of how war will be conducted
>in the political phase of postmodernism. Technology and media will be at the
>center of this postmodern type of warfare. While exemplifying how war in the
>political phase of postmodernism will be conducted, the Gulf War was a
>contained, small-scale, version of such war. And the basic issue of the Gulf
>War was the economic issue of control of the vast, crucial oil fields of
>Kuwait. Both sides in the war of the political phase of postmodernism, called
>the War Against Terrorism by the Bush Administration, will be using the
>resources of technology and media seen in the Gulf War on a global scale.
The Gulf war - though war it was not - was in a way a gift to the
military - terrorism is a different matter.
>Although global in scope, this present-day war will not be called World War III
>because it is not a conflict between states or alliances of them, does not have
>identifiable battlelines, and is over ill-defined, yet impassioned issues of
>identity, values, and culture. Such characteristics are extensions to politics
>of the essential postmodern characteristics of the dissolution of boundaries,
>ambivalence, fading of ideology, hybrid identities, and ways of behavior
>associated with these. Politics will become more pragmatic, losing whatever
>vestiges of ideology it had. Politics will take a global perspective to match
>economics and popular culture, as the Bush Administration is already starting
>to do.
OK politics will be seen to not exist. If technology finds a replacement
for oil that would half the problem - as America could withdraw from the
Arab world - and it starved of American money would soon fall into a
decline. Its economics as to whether this will be done... and in the
hands of the oil companies. The other problem is of course
Israel/Palestine. However maybe the middle east deprived of money from
oil revenues would mean that the Arabs would be unable to compete at all
with the Israeli state. (So replacing oil would let GW win this
particular "WAR")
The other question is does this Islamic fundamentalism represent a
challenge to capitalism/consumerism. I don't think so. Its cause in my
opinion (worth little) lies in the internal tensions within Islam. As
Islamic culture meets western culture individuals, especially women,
begin to question authority. A natural re-action to this (as always) is
an extremism which within a growing economic and individual centred
post-modernity will fail.
So the outcome is either a globalization of consumerism and collapse of
yet another major world religion with bloody consequences, or a withdraw
from the middle east and it settling back into some third world self-
sufficiency whilst the west deploys ever smart technologies. This is i
think painfully obvious to the Islamic and Arab leaders - and hence "the
alliance".
Which is the more likely is hard to call, the middle east is exploited
for both oil and cheap labour, its down to if western technology can
provide cheaper alternatives, which in turn is down to who persuades
government the most (to give it tax breaks) - the old oil companies or
the new technology companies. So the "real" war is perhaps between
Microsoft and Texaco.
>
>Henry Berry is the author of FROM REVOLUTION TO FADS - THE PROGRESS OF
>MODERNITY (www.amazon.com). He is also the editor/publisher of the online
>periodical THE SMALL PRESS BOOK REVIEW (alt.books.reviews).
>
--
James Whitehead
Kristian Kirsfeldt
go and listen during all of those jolly beginnings of new eras and
historical turningpoints - mostly during rural tours that our club issued
with great care - and mostly being heavily swizzed.
The basic stuff they have during these speeches is that something is
erupting and also that anyone who objects this statement is a disgrace to
those who died during these eruptions. Oh yes, they make a straight run for
this disgrace-business, use the heavily over-used third sin of the seven
deadly sins - that is, the sin of describing previous underdevelopment or
the broadening of mind; and fail to get to the self-referencial part of
their theories becouse they have a couple of chaps with dubtious character
hidden away in the crowd who start cheering 'hurrah' or that sort of thing
right after the speaker has enunciated the juiciest parts of the speech.
But what they don't know, these poor chaps, is that while having perfectly
nice claims about those who disagree being chivied off sooner or later, they
have overlooked the disgrace that those fellows who got killed in the
eruption got over themselves. I'm assured that you all remember a similar
situation with all of the Young Angry Men, who's movement was partially
financed by the Young Angry Immortals; and after the former movement um...
decised in the '50s their protectors issued a note basically stating that
all of the victims that did happen to died are a disgrace to the immortals.
artyw
> The Political Phase of Postmodernism
> by Henry Berry
>
> Postmodernism has now moved into its political phase. The terrorist
> incidents of September 11 have been seen by many as marking the end of the era
> of modernism, particularly the era of irony which was one of modernism's
> primary distinguishing characteristics.
Irony is dead. In lieu of flowers, friends and relatives are
requested to send Anthrax.