Manufacturer Of Consent: Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) provided what might be called “The Owner’s Operating Manual” for mass democracy in the Twentieth Century. Whether his theories are relevant to the Twenty-First is increasingly doubtful - as the four Labour MPs who recently accepted Sky City Casinos' corporate hospitality are discovering - to their cost.
SEATED in Sky City Casinos’ lavish corporate box, Labour’s
four errant MPs probably weren’t thinking about Walter Lippmann. Their minds were
more likely filled with the thrill of watching the All Black’s defeat the
French. Even so, seated there, high above the masses, Phil Goff, Annette King,
Clayton Cosgrove and Kris Faafoi were offering living proof of Lippmann’s
political theories.
With the enfranchisement of women in the 1920s, democracy –
as a political system – assumed something close to its final form, and
Lippmann, though barely in his thirties, was determined to shape its future
development. In this regard, the formidably intelligent young American journalist
was hugely successful. More than any other political writer of his generation, Walter
Lippmann provided what might be called “The Owner’s Operating Manual” for mass
democracy in the Twentieth Century.
At the heart of Lippmann’s critique of mass democracy lay
his pessimistic view of the ordinary voter’s capacity for political
decision-making. The average person’s grasp of politics, wrote Lippmann, was
that of “a theater-goer walking into
a play in the middle of the third act and leaving before the last curtain”.
Flesh-and-blood
voters were simply not the “omnicompetent” citizens America’s founding fathers
had declared them to be. The world had grown much too complex for the direct
democracy of the New England “town meeting” – where equal citizens came
together to decide what should be done in their little corner of the world.
According to Lippmann, the modern citizen was just one small and largely
inconsequential member of “the bewildered herd”.
Lippmann’s genius
lay in understanding that although the management of a modern capitalist society
was well beyond the capacity of the ordinary citizen, it nevertheless worked
best when ordinary people genuinely believed that their opinions mattered, and
that their government really was giving them what they wanted.
Democratic
government, Lippmann claimed, had become a kind of vast confidence trick.
Reposing the
“just powers” of government upon “the consent of the governed” was an arresting
political principle, but, in practice, could only be made to work when the
people best placed to run complex societies: experts, specialists, bureaucrats;
“a specialized class whose interests reach beyond the locality”; had,
themselves, already “manufactured” the popular consent upon which the system rested. (In
manufacturing this consent, Lippmann’s own profession, journalism, would obviously
play a pivotal role!)
Under the modern
democratic system which Lippmann envisaged (and which, through his weekly
syndicated newspaper column and his many books, he largely defined and
systematised) elected politicians, journalists and “specialists” of every kind
constitute a permanent, self-sustaining matrix of governing “elites”, whose
purpose is to justify the ways of the democratic capitalist system, both to
itself and to the volatile and ill-informed citizens who keep it running.
Which brings us back to the four Labour MPs in Sky City
Casinos’ corporate box.
The four undoubtedly believed that they were engaged in elite
interactions that were as normal as they were unremarkable. By inviting leading
figures of the Labour Right to their corporate box Sky City Casinos were
reassuring them that they understood Labour’s need to make a large public fuss
over the vexed issue of Auckland’s new convention centre. Public opinion on
this matter was still in a raw state and much more needed to be done before
voters could be reconciled to the convention centre. Both parties understood
that the right-wing of Labour’s caucus would be crucial to that consensus-building
process. The invitation was Sky City Casinos’ way of saying: “We’re all in this
together.”
Back in Lippmann’s day, the news media would probably have
left them to it. It is, after all, precisely at these sort of informal
gatherings that specialists and professionals build the networks that keep the
system running. Telling “the bewildered herd” that their supposed shepherds had
been spotted drinking wine and nibbling hors d’oeuvres with the jackals and the
wolves would only confuse and upset them.
But, Walter Lippmann never had to contend with Twitter or
Facebook. Back in the 1920s and 30s the lucky snap of a sharp-eyed photographer
still had to negotiate the labyrinthine hierarchies of a daily newspaper before
it reached the public. The gossip columnist was still answerable to his or her
editor.
Quite what Lippmann would make of today’s “citizen
journalists” with their trusty cell-phone cameras, “Instagrams”, “tweets” and
all-but-uncensorable blogs, is anybody’s guess. It is also very hard to see how
his system of managed democracy can long withstand the insatiable appetites of
the 24-hour news cycle. Thanks to the new communications technologies of the
Twenty-First Century, the herd is not only becoming increasingly bewildered,
anxious and restless, but it is also increasingly prone to dangerous explosions
of social and political rage.
The days of four Opposition MPs enjoying a few quiet wines
in the corporate boxes of their faux foes may be over.
This essay was originally published in The Press of Tuesday, 18 June 2013.
5 comments:
Hey Chris, how do you know SkyCity's Corporate Box is "lavish". Either you have supped from the same cup or you are painting the story with your prejudice as some sort of envy bait. Either way it detracts from the point you were presumably trying to make.
There's this amazing invention, David, it's called the camera. Using it, someone can reveal to you the exact likeness of an object without your own eyes ever having to see it. Marvellous!
"It is, after all, precisely at these sort of informal gatherings that specialists and professionals build the networks that keep the system running. Telling “the bewildered herd” that their supposed shepherds had been spotted drinking wine and nibbling hors d’oeuvres with the jackals and the wolves would only confuse and upset them."
Yes, well put, Chris, that is the problem, and it has been for far too long so.
And should the title of your blog not rather be called: "Manufactured Consent"?
Much of what we have had go through Parliament over the decades is nothing much other than "manufactured" by politicians and MPs socialising and otherwise dealing with major lobby groups, with big and not so big businesses, on a "I scratch your back - and you scratch mine" basis.
This was just a bit of a revelation of what goes on much more frequent than most in the public would suspect.
And it shows that the "senior" MPs in that Labour caucus have not at all changed their views and convictions from the years when they were themselves in government, and from the times they followed the same neo liberal "laissez faire" Milton Friedman designed free market and low regulation ideologies.
No wonder they do not raise all that much opposition to many policy drives by the government, be this in welfare, crime, labour reforms or else outside of Parliament. Well, I will exempt some Labour MPs from this, as there are the more genuine ones, I am sure.
This actual hypocrisy of those 4 MPs - and I may add Shearer, who has not convinced me with just having dropped in briefly, innocently, is the very reason Labour is not gaining in poll and voter support. It is the reason why about 800,000 voters did not vote last election.
To get change more is needed, and I personally see a need for a new party, actually a new movement from the grass roots, which should clean out this self entitling lot having over-stayed their time in the House.
Honest Commenter
Ha! Bet he's been in one :-).
I've been in a couple of Corporate Boxes courtesy at Eden Park and they literally are reasonably plain boxes.
The lavishness tend to come with the service, food and booze. The owner of the box can choose different service packages. I don't think it gets to the level of caviar and canapes but the food is pretty reasonable for a more buffet oriented repast.
Post a Comment