Author: Nick Stees
To exist within modern and contemporary society has erroneously become an act that requires effort. Existentialist foundations of free will have accounted for the determinants present within biological human faculties and laws of the universe, but these determinants are natural and organic. Determinants of contemporary society are now purposefully posed against the individual. Control of these institutions, as a result of Duverger’s law, is held by two opposing responses to the perceived disparities of marginalized people based on economic, political, and social circumstances. Liam Kofi Bright calls this the culture war, in which the intention of each institution is to influence, control, and perpetuate the conflict between each other. French Aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville foresaw the evolution of the nature of American institutions through his analysis of American political principles, and calls the phenomena we see “soft despotism” in which control of thought occurs through the illusion of choice. It is no longer material knowledge that we can trust, rather political and philosophical methodology must be emphasized to develop critical thought that transcends the walls that control thought. Education of such methodologies offers hope to bridge the gap between contemporary controversies and provide a foundation for neutral political deliberation.
Education of democratic principles is integral in initiating progressive repair of our political system. Renowned French scholar Alexis de Tocqueville elucidates each tenet of democracy within his book Democracy in America. The love for equality and equality itself grow proportional to each other; as the degree of difference between people weaken, the significance of the differences become more substantial. An individual and his neighbors become increasingly alike, erasing the significance of self that was once established before. Proportionally, the significance of one’s equals is erased with it, thus the “penchant of each to blindly believe a certain man or class diminishes”(DA II.1.2). The equality that brought power and purpose to the individual thrusts that same individual into a state of debility, “and his debility makes him feel…the need of the outside help that he cannot expect from any of them” since they are all just as isolated and powerless (DA II.4.3). This erosion of significance causes the lines between the individual and the common to blur; the motivations, goals, and desires of the individual become aligned with the whole. The whole, being expressed by the central power, becomes necessary to warrant the wills and the desires of the individual; the people furbish “the prerogatives of the central government,” out of the “fear of disorder and love of well-being” that has risen from individual isolation (DA II.4.4). As the centralized power “becomes the sole arbiter of happiness,” the little remaining power of individual free will degrades into nothing (DA II.4.6). American lust for equality has blinded the individual to the loss of freedom. As the tendency of democratic principles have been perverted, American society exists within a web of soft despotic institutions; a system of deceptive rhetoric and propa- ganda.
Though, Tocqueville gives hope. By isolating each principle of American democracy and elucidating each principle’s relationship to each other, a path to relieve and fragment the power that hangs over us via the education of how to operate through these principles. The sense of political/civic responsibility has decreased vastly. Simple education on political concepts such as Tocqueville’s work would rebuild this sense of responsibility, alleviate political tension/polarization, while also increasing efficiency/proficiency of our ever so gridlocked system. His analysis is critical to understanding the state of affairs in America now, but even more valuable to understanding how to operate within the system itself.
The path that gave way for institutions to gain such power has resulted in a polar divide among Americans. Liam Kofi Bright analyzes the attitudes towards perceived racial dis- parities of white political elites as a result of differing economic, political, and social circumstances of which they find themselves in. Characterizing both sides of the divide, he forms two oppos- ing archetypes; the Repenter and the Repressor. Both of these archetypes represent white political elites that have a position of power within institutions that have a political or social plat- form. Each archetype has the responsibility to be involved in
the culture war, and influence it to the benefit of their party. Repenters and Repressors embody the majority of wealth held by white elites. This wealth translates into power and control over the cultural institutions which play a significant role in the public sphere. Notably though, neither is motivated to create genuine social change towards a more egalitarian society. Their profit incentive is in fact the conflict they perpetuate. Controversy and conflict garners attention towards themselves. Thus manipulation of the truth to manufacture conflict is inevitable. Repressors are naturally predisposed against the suggestion of repenter behavior or arguments, leading them to be “skeptical of any large scale reforms” (Bright, 13). This causes Bright to form a theoretical archetype in an attempt to offer hope of reconciliation between the two archetypes. He calls this archetype the “Non-Aligned person” in reference to the Cold War (Bright, 14).
This character represents someone with no partisan identity that is attempting to navigate the circumstances they are in, and the situation of the world. They are in a position in which they cannot trust their institutions, and must perform what is called “conceptual decolonisation” of their information, in which they cautiously evaluate the credibility and relevance of information and its sources (Bright, 15). Non-Aligned persons attempt to bridge the ideological divergence by developing a “habit of considering issues with a stoical dispassion” in which they disconnect from “pervasive white psychodrama” (Bright, 21). Non-Aligned persons serve to eliminate the contradiction of ideological aspirations and material reality present within the institutions dominated by Repenters and Repressors, thus weak- ening the power they derive from. Bright uses the Non-Aligned person to open the door to epistemic philosophy as a way to detach from the soft despotic constraints imposed in our overly centralized government.
The education of philosophy is synonymous with the education of moral responsibility and practicing critical thought to; navigate through a world filled with mechanisms designed to shape you. Psychological research has provided extremely thor- ough documentation on the cognitive mechanics of in-group/ out-group bias and otherwise that determine our behavior. Arguments for diversity of experience offer hope to reconcile the faults of our faculties, though a plan of action is nuanced and complicated. The study of philosophy is a means of libera- tion of such confines inherent to the mind and its relationship with the world. The realm of epistemology and the schools of thought within it can be utilized in order to develop a different relationship to knowledge that is not rooted within your sense of self. Understanding this methodology is important to under- standing rhetoric and propaganda that take advantage of our psychological functions. When Bright says “stoical dispassion” he is referencing a skeptic’s emphasis of one’s inability to ever truly know something. Rather the skeptic argues that we only know the appearance of something. Additionally, understanding the faculties in which our consciousness perceives knowledge of the world can help us grasp the way in which we understand our place within external reality. Immanual Kant developed his theory of epistemology called transcendental idealism in which he characterizes time and space not as existing concepts, but rather as filters of how external reality is perceived; time and space are constructs of the mind. The philosophical tangents this concept leads to are neverending; the significance of this concept is to illustrate the way in which the inherent faculties of both our psychology and consciousness create everything that we “know.” The overarching idea within the debates of epistemology is thoroughly examining what it is you know and believe. Contemporary information communication systems do not teach people how to understand the responsibility they have as citizens, rather, they are trained on how to take advantage of our minds, and foster power towards the web of soft despotism.
Philosophy and politics must coincide; understanding the political science of democracy through credited literature such as Alexis de Tocqueville and the philosophy of epistemology through the pillars of classical thinkers like Immanual Kant is crucial to the full realization of your agency as a citizen or free will itself. Education of these two sciences provide a foundation- al understanding of contemporary issues, and offer a means of alleviating the political polarization we see today. Free will starts with education.