Patrice Riemens on Thu, 6 Nov 1997 04:30:01 +0100 (MET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Yvonne Burgess: The Myth of Progress |
Yvonne Burgess' book is a bit hard to get, but you may try en lieu of it: David C. Corden "When Corporations Rule the World". cheers,patrice ................................ "Given the undeniable costs to human life in Britain, Africa and in the 'New World' exacted by industrial-colonial 'Progress', it is worth asking what on earth was said in its defence by the political advocates and by the philosophers of the early industrial age. The question remains essentially the same today: what *can* be said, what *is* said, in defence of 'economic development', given the worldwide suffering it entails. There are two kinds of defence of Progress - materialist ('Look at the things we have managed to produce!' 'Look at improved disease control, medical treatment and so on!') and philosophical: in the last century, 'God has given us mastery over nature', nowadays, 'It's human nature to be curious and inventive' and 'we've always found a solution, we can do it again'. And the old chestnut: *'You can't turn the clock back!'* But although the individual argument for Progress-as-economic development merit attention, the central issue remains, for me, the choice of *direction* the West has made. For it seems that, as a culture, we have chosen to turn our backs on our past and our faces towards the unknown and increasingly dangerous future which our style of Progress promises. It feels almost as if we Westerners would prefer *anything* new to anything we have already known. We don't quite come out and say it but this underlying agenda becomes harder to overlook as our Progress comes to make less and less sense, as we loose our hard-won material security to unemployment and ill-health, and our very survival becomes threatened by our 'standard of living'. The first defence of modern industrial Progress has always been the very fact that it is Progress! Clearly, this is not an argument but a tautology which has meaning only for the people who accept the assumptions contained in it. A Western anthropologist would immediately spot such circularity in another culture's reasoning. To break this circularity, we would first have to ask: 'What exactly does this tribe means by Progress?' To which a simple answer might be: 'Progress means *improvement* or betterment.' The next question would be: 'Why does this tribe regard mechanization and the accumulation of profit as Progress, or improvement, in the face of all the evidence of human suffering caused by these cultural practices, among themselves and neighbouring tribes, evidence known to them?' Possible answers might be: 'Because these practices ensure that powerful groups within the tribe retain and increase their power. They also provide an outlet for the energies of ambitious individuals to improve their status, in a way which does not threatens the social structure. The innovations of progress free tribe members from work they perceive as hard, boring and repetitive. They give the tribe power over other people (this is rarely admitted explicitly even among the members of the tribe). On the cultural side, this people believes that its enquiring and innovative spirit represents its highest faculty. Thus, these economic processes are in a sense a gift from God. Therefore to criticize or reject what Progress brings is taboo.' I believe that the last answers come close to the nub of the issue. Progress has become bound up with Western cultural identity, and this is the knot we Westerners must unravel, to get to the root of our arrogance, our racism and our irrational faith in 'more Progress'. Observers from other cultures could help us here: but, unlike Westerners abroad, most non-Westerners are too polite to criticize us on our own home territory, when they have been our guests.' >From Yvonne Burgess 'The Myth of Progress' (Glasgow: Wild Goose, 1996, p 90-1) --- # distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@icf.de and "info nettime" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: nettime-owner@icf.de