Democracy and postmodernism

[Florestan]

A society with its ultimate reference to its widest tier- rule by the largest group. In a democracy the minority is never represented and the culture's higher values, out of reach of the horde, are progressively undermined.

Thanks. I suspected it, but now I'm positive: you're fighting a straw man. There is not one single country in the Western world that qualifies.

[Sean]

You're living in pure fantasy if you can't see the march of pop culture and destruction of higher cultural values.

[Ephemerid]

A society with its ultimate reference to its widest tier- rule by the largest group. In a democracy the minority is never represented and the culture's higher values, out of reach of the horde, are progressively undermined.

Have you read John Kennedy Toole's A Confederacy of Dunces?  Sounds like you would get along with Ignatius J. Reilly very well...  LOL

Last I checked, that "horde" you are referring to are human beings with a variety of thoughts, families, ideals, desires, dreams, likes, dislikes, etc. etc.  To be sure, they may not measure up to some Standard of Greatness^TM (which will also vary from person to person), but either people can still remain human beings or you can force upon them your own particular ideology.  You can participate in a democracy by making your voice heard and letting people know why your ideas are worth listening to, but wanting to get rid of democracy and shove your own Enlightened Ideas down everyone else's throat is just tyranny.  Just cos Plato was a great philosopher doesn't exempt him form having some very bad ideas (like his absurd notion of "philosopher kings"). 

Anyway, that "horde" you are referring to has several different faces, not a nameless faceless abstract mob. 

I think you are simply confusing democracy with capitalism.  You're shooting at the wrong target. 

[Florestan]

You're living in pure fantasy if you can't see the march of pop culture and destruction of higher cultural values.

Please name one higher cultural value that has been destroyed.

[Florestan]

Last I checked, that "horde" you are referring to are human beings with a variety of thoughts, families, ideals, desires, dreams, likes, dislikes, etc. etc.  To be sure, they may not measure up to some Standard of Greatness^TM (which will also vary from person to person), but either people can still remain human beings or you can force upon them your own particular ideology.  You can participate in a democracy by making your voice heard and letting people know why your ideas are worth listening to, but wanting to get rid of democracy and shove your own Enlightened Ideas down everyone else's throat is just tyranny.  Just cos Plato was a great philosopher doesn't exempt him form having some very bad ideas (like his absurd notion of "philosopher kings"). 

Anyway, that "horde" you are referring to has several different faces, not a nameless faceless abstract mob. 

Very well said.

[Sean]

Folks, you can't post on an arts forum and not understand its distinction from pop culture. If you think there's no standard of greatness you're in the wrong place. That's not to say I'd argue against all pop culture but the tone of life has changed so that high art is no longer valued as it was, and indeed is seen in terms of subject mass cultural values- this is basic postmodern theory. The very concept of the aesthetic category has been undermined- by people for whom indeed it does not exist; it does exist for humanity's most sensitive members, but the streamlining effects are also expressions of fear of something that may go beyond the system, beyond their understanding, and are therefore attacked.

[head-case]

Folks, you can't post on an arts forum and not understand its distinction from pop culture. If you think there's no standard of greatness you're in the wrong place. That's not to say I'd argue against all pop culture but the tone of life has changed so that high art is no longer valued as it was, and indeed is seen in terms of subject mass cultural values- this is basic postmodern theory. The very concept of the aesthetic category has been undermined- by people for whom indeed it does not exist; it does exist for humanity's most sensitive members, but the streamlining effects are also expressions of fear of something that may go beyond the system, beyond their understanding, and are therefore attacked.

What you are expressing is your own set of paranoid delusions.  The high arts are alive, well and thriving, better than they ever did.  The fact that pop culture also exists is not a threat to the arts. 

[paulb]

What you are expressing is your own set of paranoid delusions.  The high arts are alive, well and thriving, better than they ever did.  The fact that pop culture also exists is not a threat to the arts. 

What sean sees, i also envision.
There will  be times of conflicts between the 2 major classical music camps.
Of course all the old guards of the romantic/anti-modernist camp deny these issues that we now see appearing in greater conflict each passing year. These keepers of the status quo want to ignore the impending crisis soon to face the classical music world. Now don't go paint with as a  disgruntled anarchist trying to disseminate sedition and discord among the 2 camps.
we just want our voice heard, and by more than 2 conductors, Boulez and Levine. though Levine seems to me better fit to stay in the podium conducting Verdi, than he does for late 20th C masterpieces.
Eventually we will gain in numbers and thus have a  position for making compromises.

Every detail of every aspect  in all worlds cultures are being affected by this current global crisis. The Classical Music community/Industry is not an exception.

[Ephemerid]

Sean, not only do you confuse democracy with capitalism, you don't even see the distinction between respresentative democracy and direct democracy.   

And by the way, pop culture has ALWAYS existed.  Do you think the majority of people used to all go around listening to Bach?    Who are you kidding?  You really do sound like Ignatius J. Reilly in A Confederacy of Dunces...

[Florestan]

Sean, as I said  before, you're fighting a straw man. Everyone can tell classical culture from pop culture and I don't recall anyone claiming there are no standards of greatness. That's not the issue. You claim we live in an era of destruction of cultural values and this isn't true.

Let's take the example of classical music.

First, I see on this forum people of all backgrounds who passionately discuss music in a most intelligent and informed manner. Granted, they are a minority in society, but don't delude yourself into thinking that in Bach's, or Mozart's or Brahms' time the situation was better. In all places and at all times, people who were actively interested in music (and generally in high culture) were a minority. What strikes me as particularly interesting is that many of the fellow GMG-ers came to classical music from other genres, including pop music, giving thus the lie to your pretense that pop music fans are a mindless horde.

Second, never in the past has anyone seen in the democratic Western world such a proffusion of symphony orchestras, concert societies, chamber music ensembles and other such things as in the last 50 years.

Third, nowadays the works of practically each and every composer, dead or alive, famous or obscure, male or female are available on disc at moderate to low prices for the enjoyment of anyone interested. And this fact alone tells that there is a demanding market out there for these cultural values.

So, where's the destruction?

[longears]

I think you are simply confusing democracy with capitalism.  You're shooting at the wrong target. 

Just shot yourself in the foot there, fella.  Capitalism is the essence of democracy--at least, in the real world.  Or do you still think the various "Democratic Socialist Republics" of the 20th Century were really democratic?  That facism and democracy are compatible?  To me it seems patently obvious that democracy is not compatible with any form of authoritarianism.

[head-case]

Just shot yourself in the foot there, fella.  Capitalism is the essence of democracy--at least, in the real world.  Or do you still think the various "Democratic Socialist Republics" of the 20th Century were really democratic?  That facism and democracy are compatible?  To me it seems patently obvious that democracy is not compatible with any form of authoritarianism.

You consider Sweden to be fascist?

[Hector]

Just shot yourself in the foot there, fella.  Capitalism is the essence of democracy--at least, in the real world.  Or do you still think the various "Democratic Socialist Republics" of the 20th Century were really democratic?  That facism and democracy are compatible?  To me it seems patently obvious that democracy is not compatible with any form of authoritarianism.

But it can be.

The beauty of democracy is that you can, peaceably, eject it for something else.

Was it Torqueville's, no democrat,he, comment on American democracy that it was "The tyranny of the majority."

Many of us live in democracies that favour "First past the post" systems.

A true democracy would try to involve all of its ctizens in decisionmaking but that comes far to close to anarcho-syndicalism for some.

Better that we trust in our "betters" ay, Sean?

[longears]

You consider Sweden to be fascist?

Sweden has a mixed economy, with capitalism carrying the weight. 

[Ephemerid]

Just shot yourself in the foot there, fella.  Capitalism is the essence of democracy--at least, in the real world.  Or do you still think the various "Democratic Socialist Republics" of the 20th Century were really democratic?  That facism and democracy are compatible?  To me it seems patently obvious that democracy is not compatible with any form of authoritarianism.

No, that's not what I'm referring to.  There is, even in the US, no such thing as laissez-faire capitalism and such a thing would be disatrous.  There are always some degree of government controls on capitalism, such as anti-trust laws, child labour laws, etc.  These are good things to keep capitalism in check.  Where capitalism is left to its own devices without some government controls, it undermines democracy.  To what degree and in what way these controls are to be used is for democratic debate.  Capitalism is a good thing, but not if its unbridled.  To the extent that there are no controls on corporations' exploitation of others, I oppose it.  There's no contradiction there.  

[Ephemerid]

To add: On the one hand you have total state control of business.  On the other you have total laissez-faire "pure" capitalism.  Both extremes are wrong.  The best course is always a mix between the two-- the rest is a debate between how much control and how.
 

[Florestan]

total laissez-faire "pure" capitalism. 

Where is this to be seen nowadays?

[Ephemerid]

Where is this to be seen nowadays?

Exactly.  That's my whole point.  But there are some people who think this would be a grand idea or would like to push more in that direction (hardline conservatives, libertarians & the like).  I think THAT is a bad idea and to do so would be to undermine democracy. 

But what Sean is going on about has nothing to do with democracy and more to do with capitalism, insofar as what companies are going to want to promote for sale, what is going to be better for TV ratings, etc etc (insofar as were talking about "standards of greatness" in art).  If he's got a problem, then he should find ways of promoting his "standards of greatness" USING a democratic forum & USING the economic system of capitalism in a way that may very well enrich people all the more.  What are some ways of creating incentives for creating some interest in these things?  (and without "dumbing it down"?)  The problem is combatting trends in the capitalist market, not just blaming democracy & thinking eliminating it will solve the problem.  That's just plain ludicrous.

[head-case]

Was it Torqueville's, no democrat,he, comment on American democracy that it was "The tyranny of the majority."

Tyranny of the majority may be a problem in nascent democracies, but the strong emphasis on individual liberties in US constitution protects the rights of the minority.

[head-case]

Where is this to be seen nowadays?

In Afghanistan, before the US went and ruined it.