The Politics of Change
As November 6th draws near, America stands at a point in history perhaps more divided in its basic tenets and beliefs than during the epoch leading up to the American Civil War. While differences in ideology have always been a cornerstone of politics, never before have we faced such polar opposition of ideas, values, and beliefs from within our society, as it seems today. What appear to be just plain commonsense ideas to one group is anothers heretical doctrine. Our values contradict each other more than they unify. Our beliefs go from one extreme to the other with very little common ground shared anymore; or so it appears, but is that really the case?
Certainly we’ve had periods throughout history where everyone did not agree on everything. In fact, that is probably more the situation rather than the exception. America is a country founded on modernity and therefore opens itself to many viewpoints unregulated by a central influence or core. It is a melting pot of ideas, values, and beliefs that often gets mixed together and becomes the “norm” but as a society changes and grows these norms can take on a completely different flavor for a time. Durkheim saw this as “anomie” that deviated rather than departed from the “norms” (Susan Leigh Star, Geoffrey C. Bowker, and Laura J. Neumann, 1997.) Durkheim pointed out that in a traditional or simpler culture there exists a stronger, more cohesive “Collective Consciousness” based on similarities within that society, that envelop “the body of beliefs and sentiments common to the average members of society” (Zopf, 2012). This “Collective Consciousness” guides individuals as a societal whole rather than as separate entities. Durkheim also suggested that as a society grows more complex, this same “Collective Consciousness” begins to weaken into what Durkheim referred to as “Organic Solidarity.”
As modern society evolves so do its ideas. New values emerge to fit contemporary circumstances that allow society to deal with new and ever-developing problems and issues. However as society plants one foot forward, it often drags one foot behind in an effort to hold on to what it once thought to work. All ideas are born out of necessity enabling us to move forward with a situation. In other words, all ideas begin as a “progressive” step towards a solution. If they work, they are retained and become the standard solution or conservative approach. As society changes and the situations at hand modify, new “progressive” ideas are formulated and a struggle to adopt progressive ways over the old “conservative” ways ensue.
Durkheim agreed with Marx that “circumstances could drive beliefs/norms,” but he also formulated that “ideas/norms can drive history” (Zopf, 2012). We see this happening not only in America today, but also throughout the world. For as evolved and widespread as our societies have diverged from one another, an omnipresent dichotomy of Collective Consciousness appears to have taken hold worldwide. On one hand there exists a movement to address the many situations that have emerged as a result of more conservative ideals. As both Marx and Durkheim postulated, this would be a situation where the condition drives beliefs and norms. One need only look at the many demonstrations, riots and revolts happening around the globe to see that bad conditions are driving change. However as Durkheim also suggested, ideas and beliefs can also drive history and society both forward and backward. While societies struggle with new, “progressive” ways to deal with the current fallout of global problems, there exists an equal and opposite struggle to maintain the status quo and let nature and due process take its course.
So, what is it that transpires among the masses to form the “anomie” of dichotomous ideals/norms? Do we suddenly somehow divide amongst ourselves, spontaneously developing completely different opposing viewpoints? Perhaps it lies in the vestiges of an earlier, simpler societal phase clashing with an evolving, modern society that is more independent of collective influence, that bring about these schisms in the “Collective Consciousness”.
It would be interesting to see how Durkheim would interpret the effect of media on society today. To witness the constant and unrelenting bombardment of not only the mainstream media on society, but to interpret the effect that the Internet and social networking plays on shaping public opinion and driving change as well. We no longer seem to develop ideals working as a society, but rather are given ideals via media and led to believe that these as the new norms. It will be interesting to see how this constant bombardment affects the elections and society going forward. Hopefully history won’t have to repeat itself.
Certainly we’ve had periods throughout history where everyone did not agree on everything. In fact, that is probably more the situation rather than the exception. America is a country founded on modernity and therefore opens itself to many viewpoints unregulated by a central influence or core. It is a melting pot of ideas, values, and beliefs that often gets mixed together and becomes the “norm” but as a society changes and grows these norms can take on a completely different flavor for a time. Durkheim saw this as “anomie” that deviated rather than departed from the “norms” (Susan Leigh Star, Geoffrey C. Bowker, and Laura J. Neumann, 1997.) Durkheim pointed out that in a traditional or simpler culture there exists a stronger, more cohesive “Collective Consciousness” based on similarities within that society, that envelop “the body of beliefs and sentiments common to the average members of society” (Zopf, 2012). This “Collective Consciousness” guides individuals as a societal whole rather than as separate entities. Durkheim also suggested that as a society grows more complex, this same “Collective Consciousness” begins to weaken into what Durkheim referred to as “Organic Solidarity.”
As modern society evolves so do its ideas. New values emerge to fit contemporary circumstances that allow society to deal with new and ever-developing problems and issues. However as society plants one foot forward, it often drags one foot behind in an effort to hold on to what it once thought to work. All ideas are born out of necessity enabling us to move forward with a situation. In other words, all ideas begin as a “progressive” step towards a solution. If they work, they are retained and become the standard solution or conservative approach. As society changes and the situations at hand modify, new “progressive” ideas are formulated and a struggle to adopt progressive ways over the old “conservative” ways ensue.
Durkheim agreed with Marx that “circumstances could drive beliefs/norms,” but he also formulated that “ideas/norms can drive history” (Zopf, 2012). We see this happening not only in America today, but also throughout the world. For as evolved and widespread as our societies have diverged from one another, an omnipresent dichotomy of Collective Consciousness appears to have taken hold worldwide. On one hand there exists a movement to address the many situations that have emerged as a result of more conservative ideals. As both Marx and Durkheim postulated, this would be a situation where the condition drives beliefs and norms. One need only look at the many demonstrations, riots and revolts happening around the globe to see that bad conditions are driving change. However as Durkheim also suggested, ideas and beliefs can also drive history and society both forward and backward. While societies struggle with new, “progressive” ways to deal with the current fallout of global problems, there exists an equal and opposite struggle to maintain the status quo and let nature and due process take its course.
So, what is it that transpires among the masses to form the “anomie” of dichotomous ideals/norms? Do we suddenly somehow divide amongst ourselves, spontaneously developing completely different opposing viewpoints? Perhaps it lies in the vestiges of an earlier, simpler societal phase clashing with an evolving, modern society that is more independent of collective influence, that bring about these schisms in the “Collective Consciousness”.
It would be interesting to see how Durkheim would interpret the effect of media on society today. To witness the constant and unrelenting bombardment of not only the mainstream media on society, but to interpret the effect that the Internet and social networking plays on shaping public opinion and driving change as well. We no longer seem to develop ideals working as a society, but rather are given ideals via media and led to believe that these as the new norms. It will be interesting to see how this constant bombardment affects the elections and society going forward. Hopefully history won’t have to repeat itself.