|
This turns fans, too, into unreliable
rebels.
Now
that the battles are waged for the right to
consume, that consumption has become the
ultimate link between people: no true political
contests remain. As a matter of fact, all the
rebellious movements of the last forty years
have served the interests of global capitalism.
What was advocated (and still is) as the
necessary condition to free the individual from
the shackles of capitalism and conservative,
bourgeois regimes was the abolition of taboos
and prescriptions, religion and customs.
Still,
all these restrictions represented a check to
the spread of capitalism. Capitalism thrives on
the destruction of the past; it requires the
free, mobile, fast-going, isolated consumer,
contemptuous of traditions, the new wo/man
brought about by the portable phone, the lap-top
computer, and commercial TV and radio; the
files-sharing individual.
There
is no contradiction in being a vocal, committed
supporter of Napster or Comic Relief while
consuming media products; both attitudes are
complementary. The structure (and not
necessarily the contents) of popular culture may
have once been subversive, but those days are
gone.
If capitalism has become both the enemy
to slay and the instrument with which to slay it,
if consumption has become the weapon to fight
consumer society, is there any means of
subversion left?
How is it possible to be at the same time in and
out, to rebel without seceding, to subvert
without renouncing, to enjoy without giving up
or selling out? Lyotard once suggested that
science and technology, whose capacity for
change and taste for the unknown challenge
conformity and authority, could be such means.
But capitalism thrives on the dynamic of change
and innovation, too. Would then a dystopian
conclusion be fitting, should we concur with
Lyotard that the monopoly of information has
stifled the revolutionary, disalienating power
of technology, that the individual has been
manufactured in such a way that any rebellion is
unconceivable?
The way young America will grow should tell us,
once more, the way the worlds will grow.
|