12

p The ruling class has been made to realise by its theorists that the choice of either perishing or bourgeoisifying the masses is inevitable. These theorists insist that the further 13 course of events depends entirely on how seriously the ruling class treats the dilemma, on the foresight and energy of the industrial, political and military elite. Capitalism, they maintain, has a chance that must not be allowed to slip away. There is, allegedly, nothing objectively inescapable in history. Its course can be directed. What is needed most is determination. Social development, they tell us, will now not follow the course set by Marx.

p The capitalist ruling class of the second half of the 20th century is endeavouring to create the material basis of the sense of contentedness, relying on the achievements of science and technology, the unprecedented growth of labour productivity, the modifications in the class structure, state regulation and the bureaucratic machine of administration and suppression.

p The certain rise of the living standard of part of the working people in the capitalist countries has two antipodal sources: concessions wrung in the course of class battles and “gifts” made preventively. The former are vital for the masses, giving them a more worthy life (as far as that is at all possible under conditions of oppression). By enhancing the working people’s political consciousness, activity, organisation and morals, they serve as the guarantee of staunchness and victory in the future battles against capitalism.

p The latter, on the other hand, are the result of operation of many factors. Some we have already mentioned: the rapid growth of labour productivity springing from scientific and technological progress, from the rationalisation of production. A certain effect has been yielded by state regulation of production and exchange and by supra-national integration. Also, mention must be made of the higher degree of labour intensification and the numerical growth of the stratum of skilled workers receiving a relatively higher wage. Among the mass of wage workers there is now a fairly large segment of relatively well-paid whitecollar workers. Crumbs have fallen also into the lap of unskilled factory and office workers. This is no longer simply bribery of the elite, no longer solely the allocation of part of the super-profits to the workers’ aristocracy as had formerly been the case (although this system operates 14 to this day). In other words, it is not a matter of the policy of big business but of socio-economic changes.

p At the same time, these handouts are an indication of mercenary class calculation, of a flexible reaction to the attractiveness of socialism’s achievements. Their purpose is to create a semblance of capitalism’s stability, to restore the much-shaken faith in the capitalist social system, in its “universal possibilities”, one of which is to work an “economic miracle”. But this requires special measures, among which is the practice of human relations covering a series of steps designed, allegedly, to improve the working conditions of the labour force. This forced (and profitable) cycle of practical steps is depicted by the capitalists in the most attractive light as an essential share of “gifts given voluntarily".

p In practice, however, the purpose of these human relations is to facilitate the growth of labour productivity and encourage the workers to take a larger interest in production. This practice envisages heightened attention to the problem of labour monotony and berodem, industrial aesthetics and safety measures, the professional and cultural training of workers, and an analysis of their capabilities and demands. It calls for the formation of small groups in production by harmonising characters, by the elevation of moods and the organisation of leisure time. It requires an improvement of “industrial democracy”, i.e., of the methods of management, the establishment of personal contacts, a dialogue between the managerial staff and the workers, and economic information (which, as a matter of fact, is reduced to reports on the new demands in the world market and to complaints against the pressure of state taxes) to the workers.

p Human relations are called forth by the profound changes in the content of industrial labour and the professional structure of the working class. Even at its early stage automation has shown that production objectively requires workers to display the maximum attention and a high sense of responsibility. An ingenious system of incentives and pay rises is obviously inadequate for purchasing the desired spirit of co-operation and responsibility, for the simple reason that commodities of this sort are 15 generally neither sold nor bought. The conflict between the basic interests of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat is the insuperable barrier between the objective need for co-operation and the actual motivations inducing factory and office workers to work.

p In order to create the impression that the interests of workers, the management and proprietors are integrating, and secure the bluebird of workers’ loyalty to capitalist production it was necessary to go beyond the technical aspects of the division of labour and the manipulations forced upon workers. The growth of the percentage of mental labour in production and the diminution of the percentage of direct physical effort, as a consequence of the scientific and technological revolution, make external control of the actions of factory and office workers less and less effective. Another point that must be borne in mind is that today the struggle of the proletariat is not confined to purely material demands, that this struggle is putting forward many social demands that are widening the arena of class collisions.

p The handouts we have mentioned are used by the bourgeoisie as material for demagoguery, for the ideological manipulation of the working people. Shameless flattery of the underdog and bombastic self-advertisement are directed into the channel of the struggle against the class self-awareness and organisations of factory and office workers in the calculation that the politically immature segment of the working people will swallow the sugar-coated fable of the capitalist monopolies having a fatherly interest in their loyal employees.

p Further, the ruling class is pinning its hopes on political liberalism, which extols bourgeois democracy as the highest aim of the political activity of the working people. The corresponding mystification creates the illusion that democracy prevails in the capitalist world. The main contradiction of the epoch is depicted as a conflict between democracy and totalitarianism. The state interlocked with the monopolies is portrayed as having a dazzling nimbus around it, as the principal factor of general well-being, the guarantor of harmony between all classes and social groups and the custodian of the interests of the man in the street.

16

p The existence of a voluntarily given prize to the slave makes all consequences of a higher living standard extremely contradictory and complicated, and engenders a sense of contentedness, creating the possibility of forming multitudes of isolated individuals preoccupied solely with consumer cares. These multitudes are passive, apathetic and unprincipled, but this does not disturb the mind of those who form them. The main purpose has been achieved—the accumulation of a genuinely revolutionary potential has been halted.

p The need for this mass production of ideals of contentedness has never been felt so acutely and understood so clearly by the ruling class as in our epoch of the growth of the subjective factor, of the social will in history. The belief that this aim is attainable and the certain advances that have been made towards it must be attributed to the reasons why in a period of an irreparable crisis of its social organisation the ruling class itself has become infused with the hope of salvation and, consequently, a sense of contentedness. In the given case this is not merely the result of its predominance, but of its belief that it can maintain this domination for quite a long time.

p The sense of contentedness recruits votaries from all social groups—white-collar workers and businessmen, the philistines in urban enclaves and luxury suburbs, owners of service stations and scientists. The picture is complicated by the kaleidoscopic character of ideological and psychological indicators: to the superficial observer it seems that the sense of contentedness is shared by all, irrespective of party affiliations, political sympathies, philosophical notions, artistic predilections, a moral level, and so forth.

p But views of this sort, which obscure the actual situation, are quickly dispelled by a comprehensive analysis. Although the possessors of the sense of contentedness do not wear an identification flower in their buttonhole, their social affiliation, convictions and morals are by no means indifferent factors of their choice. The sense of contentedness is indisputably implicit in those who belong to the big financial, industrial and commercial bourgeoisie. If there are exceptions, they are casual in the group as a whole. But the secret of the sense of contentedness is that 17 bourgeois ideas are forced upon the non-bourgeois masses, upon the strata that if only by virtue of their social condition are interested in putting an end to imperialist bourgeois rule and creating a united front of struggle against it. The purpose of the sense of contentedness is precisely to remove or at least mitigate this threat of the unity of the people. To see how this works let us consider other social groups.

p The sense of contentedness is acquired most easily by people belonging to strata on the fringe of the main social classes and comprising the so-called middle, intermediate class. Its most massive and staunch proponents are the various segments of the petty bourgeoisie called the lumpenbourgeoisie by the American sociologist C. W. Mills.  [17•*  This is due to their social status, which needs to be fed with illusions.

p But in the industrialised capitalist countries the social composition of the middle class has undergone essential changes during the past decades as a result of the numerical growth of white-collar workers and intellectuals. These quickly growing social groups are relatively weakly immune to petty-bourgeois ideology, to its behaviour patterns and preferences. By virtue of the specifics of their social status and features of their vital activity it is not easy for them to free themselves of the economic and spiritual pressures of the bourgeoisie and the petty bourgeoisie. It is not simple to win them over to socialist ideology. The sense of contentedness finds adherents among whitecollar workers and intellectuals with relative ease, chiefly among the top echelon, which has become part of the ruling elite. The degree of resistance to the standards of the sense of contentedness differs among the scientific, technical, artistic, educational, medical and managerial intelligentsia. The same may be said of the future intelligentsia, of the students.

p The sense of contentedness is to be observed to a far lesser degree among industrial workers. But there is no complete coincidence between the objective condition of the workers 18 as the most revolutionary class of present-day society and every worker’s subjective awareness of the working class’s historical mission in each given period. Due to the operation of concrete, historical reasons the conversion of a “class in itself" into a “class for itself" may be a drawn-out process. Some segments of the working class may remain susceptible, even for a long time, to the psychology of the capitalist world, from which they arc not protected by impenetrable barriers. They are ravaged by ideological and psychological infection and remain captive to old habits. The old always has as its allies the force of the concrete, the force of numbers, the force of inertia and the force of habit. The ability to counter the concrete, mass sense of contentedness depends on the social condition of the different segments of the working class, on the level of their organisation and class-consciousness. The force of these factors differs among workers of large industrial centres and among workers employed at small enterprises and in agriculture, among workers in productive and non-productive industries (trade, services, and so on), among the workers’ aristocracy, technicians and specialised workers, and so forth.

p The number of people disoriented by the ideology of the sense of contentedness is huge in countries or regions where, for various reasons, the democratic and socialist movement is less developed, where Communist and workers’ parties have to operate underground, where reformism is widespread and the masses have relatively little political experience.

p As we have already noted, the sense of contentedness arises out of the objective processes of social reality. However, the different impulses come not solely from that reality, for it is diverse, but also from each of its “pieces”. The sense of contentedness does not take shape spontaneously. There arc class forces—they, too, are an element of the life of society—that are directly interested in “ helping" reality to influence the individual in such a way as to give him that sense. Therefore, one can and must speak also of the ill will of a definite group of people.

p Contemporary state-monopoly capitalism purposefully indoctrinates the masses in the spirit of the sense of 19 contentedness on an organisational scale that is both unprecedented and inconceivable in the past. The machine called upon to effect mass ideological suggestion consists of a host of units, each of which contributes to the attainment of the set aim. Despite the outward impression of being swamped with their own work (management of production, organisation of marketing, the provision of services on the scale of a country or corporation, the supervision of legality, the imparting of knowledge, and so on), production, consumer and military organisations, politico-judicial and administrative institutions and educational systems uninterruptedly participate in exercising ideological pressure, which is sustained by the maintenance of a definite public opinion and the placement of personnel, and manifested in an ideological undertone of technical and economic decisions, in streamlined methods of encouragement and penalties, in the selection of needed spiritual and volitional qualities in people, in the imposition of desirable responses to events, in behaviour patterns and in assessment scales. On this point Lenin wrote that “nothing can be done without the masses. And in this era of printing and parliamentarism it is impossible to gain the following of the masses without a widely ramified, systematically managed, well-equipped system of flattery, lies, fraud, juggling with fashionable and popular catchwords, and promising all manner of reforms and blessings to the workers right and left—as long as they renounce the revolutionary struggle for the overthrow of the bourgeoisie.”  [19•*  In one way or another all elements of the superstructure, all the components of the social organisation take part in controlling the behaviour of people.

p Let us now examine the organ specialising in ideological and psychological indoctrination—the ramified and allembracing system of mass propaganda media. The strength of this system of social suggestion is exemplified best of all by the organisation of mass chauvinistic, racist, fascist, anti-Soviet and other hysteria. Also, evidence of this strength is given by quantitative indicators: the average American is involved in the system of mass media, i.e., he 20 listens to the radio, sees films and TV programmes, and reads newspapers and magazines, spending as much time on this as on his work. All the branches on the conveyer of show business are called the super-light industry by the French sociologist Edgar Morin. In only the USA this system employs more than a million people, and its budget runs into several billion dollars annually.

p The content of the information given by this system is well known. Even the majority of bourgeois sociologists acknowledge that information is selected, juggled, touched up and frequently, much too frequently, falsified in order to brainwash people and attune their emotions in favour of undisguised or covert anti-communism, in favour of an eye-catching presentation of the ideas and way of life of the “free world”. The aim of ideologically mesmerising people is served by social and political demagoguery, the eulogisation of bourgeois-democratic institutions, religious preaching, nationalistic stock phrases, “warm” moralisation and sex bombs, the stimulation of consumer cults and the creation of show idols.

p A high level of professionalism in the presentation and interpretation of information, and a differentiated approach to each social stratum are demanded of the system operating in an atmosphere of brutal competition. High standards are required in flexibility and in adaptability to the fashion, to the vacillations of moods, to changes in the psychology of the man in the street. Language, style and intonation are adjusted to the level understood by the consumer. All the achievements of technical thought in the sphere of communications are utilised quickly.

p Logical argumentation is conspicuously absent in the ideological torrent deluging the man in the street. Small wonder that the system of mass media is called a machine of indoctrination, not of persuasion. Clearly predominant in it is the trend towards irrationalism, towards rubberstamp decisions of problems, towards appealing to prejudices and base instincts barely covered with the fig-leaf of reason.

p This lack of scruples is justified with references to certain qualities of the man in the street, to his allegedly innate primitiveness and bigotry, indolence and 21 irresponsibility, slow-wittedness and incompetence, the corrosion of his artistic taste. It is asserted that his thinking is biased, that he is astonishingly willing to accept the most dubious analogies and that he invariably gives his sympathies to varnish rather than the essence of the matter, that he is inclined towards frivolity and camaraderie (the impression that an anonymous communication is addressed to the given person). It is recommended that this should be taken into consideration.

p The following, in general outline, is how the mechanism of suggestion operates. At first the individual being brainwashed by bourgeois propaganda is weaned away from independent thinking, by various manipulations the resistance of his consciousness is suppressed—mundus vult dedpi, ergo decipiator—and then this circumstance is used to justify the “forced” lowering of the standard of the mass media to the level of the dulled consumer. In the beginning standard thinking and unco-ordinated wishes are forced upon the people, stunning and demoralising them, and then the people are accused of drabness and indifference, sentimentality and blood-thirstiness, bias for labels, stereotype, mob thinking, etc.

p In the planning centres of the ideological battle waged by the modern bourgeoisie, they are afraid of intelligence because capitalist reality no longer has intelligent foundations. There can be no question of having the true interests of the people explained to them, as was once insisted upon by bourgeois enlighteners, who laid bare (even though they were unable to explain it) the paradoxical contradiction between the potentialities of an autonomous mind and the prevailing consciousness of the people. On the contrary, the ruling class is out to obscure the true interests of the masses, to obliterate any notion of these interests from their minds. The semblance of explanation that is given appeals to brute instincts and excites hysteria. Artificial requirements are foisted on the man in the street and the corresponding thoughts and feelings are cultivated in him. When the mind is blurred and man sleeps with his eyes open or is in a state of shock, it is easier to enforce suggestions cramming the people’s minds with specially selected ideas, and subjecting them to external control. After 22 this sort of bourgeois manipulation the individual is ready for dogmatic repetitions of political prejudices and pseudomoral incantations in accordance with the ideological catchwords imprinted in his mind. The aim has now been achieved and every conceivable imprecation may be called down on the hopelessly “dull-witted mob".

p In the bourgeois world most of the mass media serially reproducing the sense of contentedness are not free from ideological and commercial interests. These media set the standards for and uphold the bourgeois way of thinking and behaviour. They perform the function of moulding in the masses a general motivation and offering them ways of adaptation. But society abounds in different motivations and modes of adaptation. Which are regarded as basic? Unquestionably the ideas (and also aims, motivations, standards, and so on) of the ruling class, the bourgeoisie. This means that the system of mass communication strives to make bourgeois ideas, value inducements and standards general and even mandatory.

p The guideline is that people’s behaviour depends entirely on how they interpret a definite situation. In philosophical language this is nothing less than an idealistic understanding of history, a return to the maxim that “opinions rule the world”, according to which socio-psychological phenomena are interpreted from the standpoint of social psychology. In other words, the world is ruled by the architects of opinion, by those who direct traditions, have command of the ideological kitchen and are able to give feelings and emotions a preset orientation. It is argued that however acute and irreconcilable the contradictions of capitalism may seem to be, they can be resolved amicably with a certain effort at deforming the mentality of the man in the street, by inducing him to accept the ideals, expectations and values of the ruling class. If the sense of contentedness becomes general or is instilled into the vast majority of people in such a manner as to make voluntary slavery intangible, and rule out resistance and protests (or direct the latter into a relatively harmless channel) the course of events will allegedly remain under control of the opinion-makers.

p To the superficial observer it seems that by ideological 23 manipulation it is indeed possible to programme behaviour, attitudes and the entire range of emotions, and divert public attention to forms of activity (work, entertainment, insipid criticism) that can do the bourgeois organisation no harm. Once this is achieved the greatest of tragedies are drowned in the general noise; functioning in a preset orientation, information will fill the vacuum of routine with compensating illusions, muffling protests, orientating people on consumer symbols and encouraging irresponsibility: strictly dosed social criticism will be directed against individuals (whipping boys) and against definite actions of certain institutions. Meanwhile, the system as a whole will escape real criticism and thereby retain its attractiveness and moral “sanctity”.

p People subjected (o bourgeois ideological manipulation discuss with more eagerness than ever whether the star of the serial hit film of the season will marry, whether the detective in a TV film will solve his case, who the next boxing champion will be, or what the next year’s auto show will look like rather than the arms race, the strike struggle or political debates. And if the consumer of bourgeois information turns to problems of die day, his judgment will be based on the bourgeois ideological recipes given him long in advance and which will seem to him to be an expression of his own thinking, of his own interests, which are in some miraculous way consonant with the good of society. In the long run people behave on the basis of their judgments.

p Such is the typical anti-utopia, which bourgeois propaganda does not stint effort and means in its attempts to translate into reality. These attempts give rise even to eccentric theories (for instance, the theory propounded by the Canadian culturologist Marshall McLuhan), according to which the technical means of mass communication are the basic factor of historical development.

p But these calculations, as we have noted earlier, rest on an idealistic understanding of history, once more showing how and whv the ruling class necessarily arrives nt this perception of the world; this and nothing else allows it to justify and uphold its aims, and in the epoch of decline to keep alive the hope that it will remain 24 invulnerable. Historical idealism is thus a means not only of deceit but also of self-deceit.

However, relative success in the manipulation of mass opinion and behaviour cannot endlessly bring the bourgeoisie dividends. The drugging of the people’s consciousness inevitably comes into collision with the people’s ultimate awareness of their basic and not only of their momentary interests.