Contradictions of the Enlightenment

#009

Modernity has been a western phenomena. It started with the Enlightenment and embraced the ideals of reason, rationality, and scientific thinking. Then, when these Enlightenment ideas found expression in the French and American Revolutions, they  instead took a new form, embracing emancipatory and humanistic ideals of freedom, equality and solidarity -- Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité.

Thus, the Enlightenment embraced two sets of ideals – one very practical that easily found expression in capitalism, hierarchical institutions, and representative democracy, and the other libratory and grassroots. The latter had difficult emerging because of communications and transportation problems. By default, capitalists run businesses and production sites, and politicians rule without much input from citizens.

There is indication that this is beginning to change. What are your thoughts about this? What would it mean for societies and work organizations? What would it mean for people?

 

Comments

[Heather Hoffman]

Although our society views economic and political democracy as separate, they are linked on the issue of human rights. Thanks to modern technology like the internet, these ideals are becoming more obviously one in the same. In the Age of Enlightenment, devices like cell phones and computers with internet ability or even cars and air planes did not exist. Although people began to organize and embrace ideas of human freedoms, they were limited in gaining support.

Freedom, democracy, and reason were essential to the Enlightenment movement. Since communication and transportation are becoming less and less limiting factors, politics is becoming more democratic: people are able to learn more about what is occurring globally and make their voice heard. However, due to the capitalistic society, the people with power are still linked to politics. Traditionally, those with more money have had more access to political power. Although, now that people of lower economic status are able to use resources like the internet, their voice can be heard. Additionally, the motive behind capitalism is for owners to make a profit by paying workers less. This was altered fundamentally when workers were able to buy shares of companies. Now, meeting are beginning to be open to anyone owning stock. Also, politicians need “the vote” and thus listen to the wants of the people, which has a direct effect on the economy. As political democracy becomes more representative in this sense, economic democracy follows. This modern gaining of correlation between economic and political thought will serve to create more equality, as politicians are forced to listen to the majority of the people. This could cause less class division in societies and more labor unions, or fair rates for people. Not only are politicians listening to the “common man” but individuals are listening to one another via resources like “blogs” rather than being solely limited to media propaganda. Thereby, this surge in technology will impact people to think more as independent individuals and consider thoughts other than those imposed by the ones “in charge.” Now, the “little guy” is getting heard and respected. This is what the Enlightenment strived for. Thus, the ideals behind the Enlightenment have greater power and potential than ever for free thought.

[Kathryn Wilson]

As we continue into the new millennium we are in an age of change. While looking forward to the challenges of the next century we must assess our past. This country was founded on the Enlightenment ideals of liberty, yet we have never truly lived up to that promise. Our country's history has been a progressive struggle to reconcile reality with the ideals of the American creed. But change does not come easily. Traditionally, it has taken moments of crisis to move this country forward. In these moments we have reassessed our practices and actions. During times of hardship we have come together to push for a more just and free society. I believe we are in such a time right now. I don't see this as a struggle between capitalism and human rights. No country in the world practices true capitalism, it cannot be done. However, financial crises often result in the implementation of stronger social saftey nets to secure human rights. The current financial crisis provides such an opportunity. We are experiencing a time of economic and political change- the perfect moment to progress as a nation towards the true ideals our country was founded upon. Freedom and equality for all is our goal. We are about to take the next step in securing these basic human rights for all.

[Shane Walterhoefer]

The Enlightenment has brought up two good things that this country wanted to have and that is that large companies, for example, and individual poeple can be hard and expres stheir opinions. It has always been the case that CEO's in this country could be heard and express the feelings of their company to the government and the country. They are very powerful people and can, at times, do a good job at getting what the people of their company want. This is however, was not the case on the individual level. It seemed as if the "less important" people in this country really had no say and could not have been heard. This has been very discouraging to these people until now.
People now have a strong sense that they can be heard not necessarily by themselves, but as a group. People are starting to realize that if you get into a group of people that all share the same believes and ideals as you, that that carries more weight. For example, one person in Chapel Hill who believes in Human Rights really would not stand out to the government and make a difference. But, if that one person creates a coalition and gathers 500 people who share the same beliefs, than the government will take note and it may make a difference. This makes people more active in the community and they are constantly searching for people who share the same beliefs as them to make a difference. Companies and the government have started to pay more attention to grass roots organizations and they are changing the country as we speak today.

[Andrea Ludtke]

I would have to disagree with the argument that people do not have influence on big businesses and politics. Lassiez-faire, or the laws of supply and demand, with the exception of national crises that beg government intervention to help the economy stay afloat, primarily runs big business. If the general population did not demand a product or an industry, it would not grow, so people have direct influence on big businesses. For example, while it is easy to criticize the materialism that companies seem to push on people all throughout the year and especially on holidays, let us not forget that the big businesses are just responding to the consumer’s demand for goods and services.

In politics, this country likes to think of itself as one of the most democratic countries in the world, and the great influx of immigrants every year, illegal and legal, supports this mindset. People want to come here because of the freedom that is implicit in our democracy. Though people may come for the freedom, what supports that freedom is a system in which the people have a lot of control over how the country is run and who is in positions of power from local community elections all the way up to the office of the president, the leader of the free world. I would also like to disagree with a previous blogger that the popular vote does not count, as it is the Electoral College that determines the presidency. Would North Carolina be blue this year if not for the popular vote, or Florida? The Electoral College does not get a chance if the people dictate that a state will be changing color that year. Granted, some states are nearly always red or blue, but this again is because of the unchanging mindset and diversity of the people that populate the state- key word, people.

Though I do not agree with the idea that people are disconnected from big business and politics in the United States, I do see how now it is easier than ever for the underdog political idea to grow, and for Arendt’s idea of solidarity through political action to have even less obstacles to fruition. We have the computer, the machine that will shape the 21st century and put global communication and solidarity on a launching pad unparalleled in the 20th century. The gap that is cultural ignorance is getting smaller by the day, as more people have access to technology that allows them to connect with global issues and people from every country, and minorities are more prevalent in positions of power in the sectors of big business and politics. In the Information Age, a YouTube video or grassroots movement can inspire global change, providing for a constant system of checks and balances on ideas. For political candidates, technology exposes every facet of their campaign and life for all to see in visual digital format, and voters have the opportunity to be as informed as they choose to be regardless of socio-economic status, race, gender, or whatever their differences may be.

Overall, I cannot say that in the past, the gap between people and big business and politics has been anything worth nothing, but I do see that the new technology boom of the 21st century provides even easier access to information that determines people’s ideas on the two sectors, and thus influences their voting, political beliefs, and consumer demands. As an added bonus, beyond our waters we are able to learn about the big business and politics of other peoples, and thus gain a better understanding of their unique cultures and trade ideas and information. As technology intertwines the politics and big business of countries, as we are witnessing now with the U.S.’s recession affecting a large part of the world, with a few decades cultural ignorance and a feeling of “us and them” with regard to the rest of the world will be all but obsolete.

[Angela D]

I believe that the world has been preparing to change for a while. In America, the current financial crisis and the recent corruption of politicians such as Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens have begun to push people to their limits. While I do not believe America will completely overhaul its economic models to mirror that of more democratic models such as ejidos, people’s frustration with the enormous expense accounts and golden parachutes of irresponsible CEO’s who make up to 300 times more than the average worker are growing rapidly. As governments all over the world step up to address the financial crisis, it has become clear that the concept of Adam Smith’s invisible hand and laissez-faire economics are being exchanged for a system in which politics and economics are intrinsically connected. The internet and faster transportation has given unprecedented power to grassroots movements that are fighting for social, political, and economic justice. The Via Campesina coalition is composed of smaller movements taking place all over the global and is a powerful example of the new ability of many individual movements to join together and demand human rights in a way that was previously unimaginable (p. 120) What this means for people is an increased opportunity, as well as responsibility, to pursue the human rights that they are innately entitled to, which one of the truest expression of democracy. Many NGOs are far more democratic than models seen in the business world. Unfortunately, I do not believe this discrepancy in ideology will narrow in the U.S. soon. The U.S. still touts the important of civil and political rights while ignoring their inherent connection to economic and social rights. However, societies can only benefit from the increased empowerment of its people and these effects also trickle down to have a positive impact on work organizations. People should not be servants of economies; economies should serve people (p. 118).

[Gerry Koinis]

The Enlightenment period brought the ideology and principles of capitalism, while also creating a discrepancy between human rights ideals and capitalism values. The emergence of capitalism brought about incredible change in regards to technological and individual advancement and in general, a shift in ideology in regards to basic forms of rationality. These values that began during the Enlightenment period have paved the way to many of the fundamental and moral problems we face today as a nation, in particular, the disregard and omission of a conscious effort to center policy matters around the basis of human rights.
The notion that capitalistic ideals are beginning to change is debatable. Overall, as a nation, we are very prideful in our democratic system of government. The basis of our system of government is between the Democratic and Republican parties and as a voter; one must decide which party is more aligned with one’s own personal opinions and views. Then, you vote on which party you feel more aligned with or whichever you feel to be the lesser of the two evils and then the winners are those who rule and preside over the nation. Democratic self-governance is a possible goal and would account for the basic rights and freedoms of all the constituents, which would allow policy decisions to cover a wider array of individuals and be less focused solely on the nation’s elite and upper-class. Government officials are held even more accountable today to please their constituents or they will not get reelected. With the incredible increase in technology, there is beginning to be a shift in control away from a hierarchal governmental structure and more towards the common people of the United States. The internet is one of the prime sources that have allowed this ideological shift to occur because communication and visibility of issues are made more aware today than in years past. Youtube has been one of the main sites for this, which allows anyone to upload videos on the web. Evidence of this can be seen by the way Youtube was so heavily utilized in this past year’s presidential election. Sources like Youtube and the whole internet world has been one of the instrumental tools in getting items onto the political agenda, which is the first step and arguably one of the most important aspects of getting policy change. With technology like television and internet, people are able to voice their concerns, and getting your voice heard is an important step in advocating for change. There has been a direct correlation between increases in technology, getting policy concerns heard, and having government officials being held more accountable for instituting these concerns of their voting constituents.
One aspect that will help lead to the democratic self governance is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Under the principles set forth by the UDHR, everyone will share the same fundamental and moral right to access of basic public goods, such as housing, education, or clean water. By having everyone already involved in these UDHR, there is no reason to believe more people should not be able to be involved in helping advance these basic human rights values. Overall, the lack of concern in making basic human rights an underlying principle in government policies has been concerned; however, hopefully with the new government administration, there will be a shift toward incorporating basic human rights, like the access to healthcare, housing, etc into legislative policy. There needs to a consistent and strong effort on both the local and national level to attain these human right values for all people and incorporate and implement Sartre’s idea of freedom for an entire society, as opposed to just individuals. Finally, Arendt’s freedom philosophy of freedom by taking into account the diversity of all citizens, regardless of wealth, status, race, or gender should also be implemented into the basis of government decisions going forward with this new administration.

[Jazmine Carter]

Although we live in country self interested, functioning on profits, and thriving on a capitalistic mindset, a must needed change is quickly approaching. To some extent, capitalistic ideals have left this country in anguish and widen the disparity between social classes. As the globe has shrunk with the internet and technological innovations, everyday citizens have been granted the opportunity to voice their opinion to the world. Now more than ever grassroots organizations have the ability to make their voices heard. These endeavors have thus been allowed to thrive and will continue to grow when President Barack Obama takes office in January of 2009.

As Dr. Blau states in Freedoms and Solidarities “let us turn the world upside” by banding together in solidarity to fight for human rights and other issues people are passionate about. As this type of social justice is becoming more evident, the teachings of Jean Paul Sartre and Hannah Arent are even more relevant. As the UDHR proclaims only through a collective effort, like solidarity, can human rights be protected, promoted, and restored. A sense of justice, empowerment, and change has swept through the population as it has become more attractive to reflect back upon the ideals of the Enlightenment. I believe the world has already witnessed or will very soon bear witness to the motivating factors it needs in order for these ideals to take full effect. It is of the upmost importance that globally people unite to embrace the fundamental ideals of the Enlightenment (“Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité”) and remain hopeful that we will soon see the change we need.

[Monique Newton]

Change is inevitable in any society. However, some change is for the best and some change is not. In this case, this change, which essentially begs for our capitalist society and political system to expand its scope and look out for the so-called 'little guys', is good and necessary. This is something that is long overdue, mainly because it is the majority of people who are often overlooked and mistreated while an elite few benefit from the exploitation of the masses. It's only natural that any change that would take place would start from the bottom up instead of the top-down, which has maintained the status quo for decades.

For societies, this change would mean that there would be unification across groups that were previously strictly separate. While grassroots efforts are rooted in a base of everyday citizens, it is largely through their coalitions with those who previously stayed secluded in the top layers of society that they can make great strides. In the workplace, this would mean that people would feel not only more respected in their particular places of the organization structure, but also entitled to share their ideas and thoughts about what can be done to improve the organization as a whole.

I believe that while it may take years and years before this change has a predominant place in all spheres of society, this will slowly set off a domino effect where people are more willing to give of their time and energy to ensure that others have the same human rights that they have themselves. We would truly have the freedom found in reciprocal relationships that Sartre so elequently spoke of.

[Bryce Jenkins]

I certainly believe that our society is moving towards a more libratory and grassroots mindset. With the invention of the internet and other technologically advanced mechanisms communication and transportation of these new ideals are no longer an issue. This advance in communication and transportation mediums is in turn laying the framework for a global civil society. A global civil society emphasizes that all individuals have a right to their existential freedom no matter if this freedom be different or unique to the norm. Citizens are realizing that inequalities within our societal systems exists because they are being exposed to other forms of thinking besides the capitalistic approach. Historically, our society promoted a capitalistic logic, which benefits from creating an abundance when it buys and scarcity when it sells. In turn, to ensure that this logic ran supreme in our society the government induced scarcity by withdrawing programs and services from public access. However, with the popularization of this new ideal we are seeing a change in the societal makeup. This new ideal which encourages a libratory approach to governing society has resulted in the decrease in privatization and expansion of collective goods, which are public goods that benefit and are accessible to all.

If this new ideology continues to spread as I believe it will the structuring of the government as we know it today will be completely altered. Economies will be altered because state intervention will be implemented in the place of the invisible hand to ensure that there is a fair distribution of wealth. In addition, because this new ideology promotes grassroot local movements the local government will play a larger role in the decision making process of laws and other forms of legislation. With this economic control and responsibility more decisions fall on the shoulders of the local government rather than the state and national one. Ultimately, this change in the societal practices will increase the human rights of the individual in two ways. One is that with the deprivatization of collective goods there will be no incentives to exploit others. As a result wealth inequalities will decrease dramatically giving every individual equal opportunity and more access to human rights. In addition, this new ideology emphasis on grassroots movements will encourage all individuals to become more proactive and involved in the government which in turn will increase the exposure to human rights for all citizens because those making executive decisions will be more representative of the general population.

[Lauren Daaku]

After our discussion of this topic in class and reading the assigned sections, I have come to a better understanding of the democracy, our lack there of in this country. Granted the Enlightenment movement sparked the flame and got the ball rolling to create a much needed shift in our society toward collective decision-making and more equality, but we are far from true democracy. The current structure of our society is the reason why inequality is able to perpetuate. Yes, we get to vote for who we want to represent us, but once they get in office, they have the power and are virtually free to do whatever they want.

So as society takes steps toward changing these unfair norms, I believe we have to hold those in power more accountable for their actions. In businesses and in politics, if those in power are performing poorly or are not considering the interest and opinions of all involved stakeholders then citizens have to realize that they need to come together and fight against them. A single-person’s complaints will most likely be ignored, but a collective voice is loud and clear! As we have all learned from this class, human rights, especially those of liberty and equality are unalienable rights and are not things that a small group in power should be able to take away from any individual.

[Patrice Graham]

I believe that there is a chance for the libratory and grassroots ideals to prosper, especially with the changing political nature of the United States. I believe that the way the United States is run now is not conducive to a complete democracy, and most certainly does not do all that is possible in order to protect human rights. Following along this line I believe that political and economic democracies are linked, and that lacking one necessarily, inhibits the success of the other. This is especially evident in our capitalistic society in the United States and the subsequent power/control that is based upon wealth and the use of a representative democracy. In fact in Freedoms and Solidarities it states that the, “requisite to a fair economy is preservation of collective goods and the advance of human rights”(Blau113). Therefore in order to even begin to envision a fair democracy there must be an urgency to protect the human rights of the citizens. In our current society I believe we currently lack such urgency. The problems with our current society are many for example, as mentioned in chapter 7 of Freedom and Solidarities, “Capitalism does not work: it callously exploits humans, overvalues owners and undervalues workers, depletes the planet’s resources, and goads states into war” (Blau 123). On the other hand It is also true that the representative democracy approach to democracy is not ideal because it is not democratic even by the internal standards that it is based on (Blau 135).The mix of capitalism and representative democracy in our society today, do little to promote the pure democracy that American citizens deserve, however I think there is hope on the horizon and that our newly elected President has dreams of improving such conditions.

[Anika Fisher]

Personally, I think that there is a chance for the libertarian and grassroots ideals to prosper. This is especially so with the changing political nature of America. The way the United States is run now is not favorable to absolute democracy. This most certainly does not do all that is possible in order to protect that of human rights. Along this line, political and economic democracies are indeed associated, where missing one inhibits the success of the other, which is especially evident in such a capitalistic society in the US and the succeeding power and/or control based on wealth and a representative democracy. In Freedoms and Solidarities, it is stated that the, "requisite to a fair economy is preservation of collective goods and the advance of human rights"(Blau113). For that reason, to begin envisioning a fair democracy, there must be an urgency created to guard the human rights of the people and in today’s society there is a lack of this urgency.
The problems with our current society are tremendous in number and rich in depth. For example, as mentioned in chapter 7 of Freedom and Solidarities, "Capitalism does not work: it callously exploits humans, overvalues owners and undervalues workers, depletes the planet's resources, and goads states into war" (Blau 123). On the other hand, it still holds true that the representative democracy approach is not supreme due to the fact that it is not democratic even by the interior principles upon which it is based (Blau 135). The combination of capitalism and representative democracy present in our society today, both do a poor job to promote the unadulterated democracy that American citizens deserve and desire.

[Anika Fisher]

Additionally I have learn a great deal more about democracy and what it entails through the discussions. Social justice is a tremendous issue here in the US but also across the globe. With the economy in the state that it is in, I still have hope for further reassignment of wealth and financial safety for the people of our nation and in the world. We are very fortunate here in the US that the government is changed over time by party. With this method many people are able to have an opinion and share circumstances with their cultural diversities influencing these situations.

[Teja]

From the standpoint class discussions in Soci 273 and readings in Freedoms and Solidarities, I would agree with Dr. Blau’s comment. However, my concern with this is the extent of the success of capitalist influence not just in politics, but also the judicial systems. So far, even when our politicians could not be trusted with keeping the good of the people in mind, courts around the world have upheld the rights of the people. The example of the human right to marry a person of whatever race we choose comes to mind. Although the laws made by southern politicians stated interracial marriage as illegal, a Supreme Court justice in Virginia set precedence by granting a Black woman and White man to stay married (Loving v. Virginia). A similar state is what currently exists with gay marriage rights in America.
Recently, politicians and capitalists have impugned the reach of the justice system too! In order to escape liabilities, they have invested millions of dollars into buying off seats for right-wing justices to be appointed to trial and supreme courts all over the country. The rest of the world is no different- appointing favorable leaders to countries where oil and corn can be purchased for cheap. Although grass-roots campaigns are increasing by the day and people are becoming more aware of these injustices, I am skeptical about how successful they will be in their efforts. There are many fronts to fight from and an overarching world campaign to overthrow this capitalist system is the only way to win.

[Robert McAuley]

In my opinion, things are definitely beginning to change. With our technological advances today, it is becoming easier and easier to stay in touch with everybody at all times. Communicating with others, even across the world has become a possibility in a split second. During the enlightenment period, more people started gaining human rights all over the world. Today, we are part of a country that just put the first African American president in office which is a great thing. I believe part of what helped Barack Obama get elected into office was his understanding for new technology and how he was able to harness it in his favor. He is also a president who seems to truly care for his people. This is something that will in time have a positive effect on society and organizations around the world. He is not about allowing the rich to get richer, but about equality and fair chance. He seems to be a true human rights president who will keep the best interest of the people constantly in his mind.

[Sarah Gonzales]

Our democratic system of the United States was meant to give a voice to all of its people, to not have to live under the unjust rule of another with no means of escape, but to CHOOSE how it governs itself. However, this system of democracy, while a precious privilege to those of us fortunate to have the freedoms that we do as a nation, still has its flaws.

Given this nations’ current economic situation and its declining situation over the past several years we can see that the “voice” of this nations’ people is still being suppressed by the elite and those with enough power, money and will to control their own investments and successes will continue to do so. We should be looking out for one another yet this idea of camaraderie that has become a private ideal, not to be shared amongst neighbors of nations and of people.
To do this, I think the definition of success and a perception of power has to be modified by all, and political as well as economic leaders need to join forces. Currently, grassroots efforts are slowly but surely driving the notion of human rights in relation to the political sphere and to our shared economy as a nation, but the change needs to come from within the giant corporations that control our economy and political groups.

[Brandon Berkis]

I believe that to maintain self-governance in our society is a crucial objective mostly due to the fact that the liberties and inherent rights of our citizens are considered and attended to when government policies are put into practice. It is of upmost importance. This simply means that citizens would become their own leaders rather than those who take commands from others who are in a higher position. In such a situation, I believe that we could promote an extended sense of community which could lead to a dissolving severance between members of the community strictly due to a person’s name tag in various working environment, organizations or businesses.
I also believe that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is boosting our progress towards accomplishing self-governance in a democratic society and, consequently, reaching TRUE democracy, in all components. If we are following the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we see that people in our country all share the deep-seated and (what should be) the undeniable rights to healthcare, water, education and housing. Under such a system, people in our society should also be able to actively participate in our countries “democratic” decisions that promote these very rights—they should also be actively accepting and dealing with the consequences of the decisions made. Therefore, if the individual people in a greater community are able to seek and eventually self govern, we will see a dramatic increase in the various other inherent human rights specified in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as other human rights that they feel are inherent but aren’t specified under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Because times change and the world changes over time, through self governance, we will be able to, as individuals coming together in a greater society, amend and sculpt a more fair, just, and good natured society as we see fit.