The Carnivalesque Rebellion Issue

Consumable Youth Rebellion

Teds, mods, rockers, hippies, skinheads, punks, hipsters ... now what?
Conformity
Joe Szabo

This article is available in:

Over the past 30 or so years, most people have chosen to pursue the rewards of conformity instead of the fruits of revolt. What they have been left with are ugly and stupid lives, ugly and stupid places and a planet pushed to the very edge of destruction by capitalism’s efforts to keep feeding them new promises of consumable happiness.

But the thought that one is wasting one’s life is not a cheerful one, and respectable citizens everywhere have gone to considerable lengths to avoid it. They have erected elaborate architectures of lies and self-deceptions in an attempt to persuade themselves and others that their work is not petty nonsense directed by contemptible bosses to idiotic ends, that their families are not desolate bunkers of mutual contempt and shared incarceration, that their leisure and friendships are not collections of inconsequential games and insubstantial interests, that their holidays are not banal tramps through despoliation, that the ways in which they think they avoid the common vulgarity are not entirely spurious, that their pleasures are not dreadfully small.

They cling to these illusions with ferocious desperation; but the whole house of lying ghosts and grim parodies is a fragile one, and it is threatened by the depredations of delinquency. To the extent that delinquency prevents respectable citizens from misperceiving themselves as happy and free people who are blessed with rich experiences and who continue to grow as individuals, it provokes their fury. It threatens to take away the very little they have, and to replace it with nothing. It threatens to bring them face to face with a poverty of everyday life that has been there in one form or another all along.

Since the Second World War, advanced capitalism – and the quest for contentment through consumption that it fosters – has generated a long series of consumable youth rebellions. This series has included the teds, mods, rockers, hippies, skinheads, punks, rave culture and the worlds of hip-hop and rap. Each of these has put forward its own particular array of clothes, music, drugs and cool behaviors as an authentic and ecstatic alternative to the misery of unskilled and semiskilled work and the ways of life that honest and conforming people pursue. Indeed where mainstream employment and commerce have more or less completely abandoned an area – as they have every ghetto in North America – cool culture and cool criminality may appear to be the only realistically available means to avoid poverty and obtain a sense of dignity. But none of these rebellions has marked the slightest departure from the global domination of the commodity and its logic. They have served only to assimilate young people into yet more external models of thought and action, into yet more waves of commodity production and consumption. The delinquents of today remain stuck in this pseudo-rebellious process. Consider, my friends, their sportswear, trainers, caps and jewellery; the ways in which they walk, talk, fight, fuck and get high; and their view of what makes up the good life. Do these not reveal the extent to which they are seeking to gain status and pleasure by acting out a small local variation on a few global gangster templates the dominant society has shown them?

“It probably had a little to do with the gangster films we saw. Like a gang had a lot of drugs or money. They did drugs, had the coolest cars and chicks, that kind of thing … Mostly we got it from films and those kind of things.”

—Swedish heroin user.

Consider, too, their unbroken, nervous concern for the visible approval of their friends. Does this not show how the individual is subordinated to a domineering collective? For all their defiance, the delinquents essentially live much as others do. Assimilating oneself into an external image of the good life – and submitting to a collectivity – is a perfectly ordinary form of alienated existence in the existing society. The delinquents are mistaken to associate this state of affairs with autonomy, excitement, shrewdness and freedom. They may purchase some fragile self-esteem, kicks and acceptance. They may even secure some precarious means of survival. But they pay for them with the usual currency of self-alienation.

Wayne Spencer, significantfailure.blogspot.com

142 comments on the article “Consumable Youth Rebellion”

Displaying 61 - 70 of 142

Page 7 of 15

BS

Oh, and by the way, it is a bit of douchebaggery to proclaim that anybody who lives within the capitalist system without complaint is a soulless shell of a human being. Just sayin'.

BS

Oh, and by the way, it is a bit of douchebaggery to proclaim that anybody who lives within the capitalist system without complaint is a soulless shell of a human being. Just sayin'.

Too-square-to-be-hip

Isn't this article just an expansion on the adage "no one is more contemptible than the conformist, except the fashionable non-conformist?"

I guess both sentiments come from the same source: an irritation with social posturing accompanied by lack of social consciousness. The reason the fashionable non-conformist is even more irritating than the conformist is that s/he displays defiance of the dominant culture without actually doing anything defiant.

So, I get it. However, I can't say I think the misanthropic tone is very helpful in conveying the point or encouraging dialogue. Or should I keep my ugly and stupid opinions to myself?

Too-square-to-be-hip

Isn't this article just an expansion on the adage "no one is more contemptible than the conformist, except the fashionable non-conformist?"

I guess both sentiments come from the same source: an irritation with social posturing accompanied by lack of social consciousness. The reason the fashionable non-conformist is even more irritating than the conformist is that s/he displays defiance of the dominant culture without actually doing anything defiant.

So, I get it. However, I can't say I think the misanthropic tone is very helpful in conveying the point or encouraging dialogue. Or should I keep my ugly and stupid opinions to myself?

Anonymous

It is amazing how all the people who criticize the author do it by calling him "ass" and various immature names. Is this an article discussion or a bunch of angry 5th graders trying to vaguely articulate they don't like what the article is about? That's what it sounds like. You don't hear stuff like this even in Junior High discussion of the issues. It sounds more like the rants racists and others go into on other message boards when someone says something they don't like, which usually mean the author is on the money.

Name calling is known as a form of propaganda, so I have to ask "is this the best you can do to attack the author's argument?" In that case this is a hell of an article. I think the author is hitting some nerves, because any look at these issues shows humanity hasn't overcome itself, and the thinkers of years past have wrought their hands issues like autonomy, conformity, free will and more.

These issues go into what it actually is to be human and we still don't have answers for this. Instead, what I see is people in the comments section getting scared about the issues the author brings up. Saying, "He's bad and what he says sounds mean," doesn't deal with the ideas the author is bringing up.

I could see this would really go over well in some philosophy class. Calling Nietzsche an ass wouldn't earn a passing grade there. Sounds like what we have here are jocks who haven't read anything about this stuff. This makes me wonder what kind of jock shows up at Adbusters?

Anonymous

It is amazing how all the people who criticize the author do it by calling him "ass" and various immature names. Is this an article discussion or a bunch of angry 5th graders trying to vaguely articulate they don't like what the article is about? That's what it sounds like. You don't hear stuff like this even in Junior High discussion of the issues. It sounds more like the rants racists and others go into on other message boards when someone says something they don't like, which usually mean the author is on the money.

Name calling is known as a form of propaganda, so I have to ask "is this the best you can do to attack the author's argument?" In that case this is a hell of an article. I think the author is hitting some nerves, because any look at these issues shows humanity hasn't overcome itself, and the thinkers of years past have wrought their hands issues like autonomy, conformity, free will and more.

These issues go into what it actually is to be human and we still don't have answers for this. Instead, what I see is people in the comments section getting scared about the issues the author brings up. Saying, "He's bad and what he says sounds mean," doesn't deal with the ideas the author is bringing up.

I could see this would really go over well in some philosophy class. Calling Nietzsche an ass wouldn't earn a passing grade there. Sounds like what we have here are jocks who haven't read anything about this stuff. This makes me wonder what kind of jock shows up at Adbusters?

Dander503

Jocks? Who's name calling now? You obviously come from the same school of thought as old wayney here in which you partition the world into yourself and everyone else that is wrong. I'm pretty confident that people are calling this guy an ass because he so easily sits back and ridicules everyone else and doesn't take a minute to question whether or not he is part of the same group he so furiously criticizes.

I, personally, agree with some of the observations the author has made and there is a notion of reality behind what he says, but they way he presents his argument is in itself quite one-sided and "jock-ish". He himself brings up no thoughts or solutions to deal with these ideas, he just criticizes and leaves it at that. Kind of like a ranting and immature "jock". Someone who had truly wanted to invoke discussion and thought would have provided ideas for progress. As it is we are left with just one person's thought vomitus.

Read your own comment and see if any of what you wrote applies to this guy's article. Is there any name calling on his part? Does his article sound anything like a "rant" in itself?

I think that the readers of Adbusters are just upset that an article such as this, which doesn't even attempt to address the issue was allowed on the site. I think the readers expect more than that.

And on a sidenote, since when is Adbusters an exclusive forum for only non-jocks. I would think that an article concerning a generation/society as a whole should be available for all to read and ponder upon. I mean isn't that the point? Is this forum meant only for one school of thought? Wouldn't it benefit everyone if all social groups were exposed to this material so they could possibly be "enlightened"?

Here we go again creating a culture out of a product and associating it with an "elite" class of individuals.

Dander503

Jocks? Who's name calling now? You obviously come from the same school of thought as old wayney here in which you partition the world into yourself and everyone else that is wrong. I'm pretty confident that people are calling this guy an ass because he so easily sits back and ridicules everyone else and doesn't take a minute to question whether or not he is part of the same group he so furiously criticizes.

I, personally, agree with some of the observations the author has made and there is a notion of reality behind what he says, but they way he presents his argument is in itself quite one-sided and "jock-ish". He himself brings up no thoughts or solutions to deal with these ideas, he just criticizes and leaves it at that. Kind of like a ranting and immature "jock". Someone who had truly wanted to invoke discussion and thought would have provided ideas for progress. As it is we are left with just one person's thought vomitus.

Read your own comment and see if any of what you wrote applies to this guy's article. Is there any name calling on his part? Does his article sound anything like a "rant" in itself?

I think that the readers of Adbusters are just upset that an article such as this, which doesn't even attempt to address the issue was allowed on the site. I think the readers expect more than that.

And on a sidenote, since when is Adbusters an exclusive forum for only non-jocks. I would think that an article concerning a generation/society as a whole should be available for all to read and ponder upon. I mean isn't that the point? Is this forum meant only for one school of thought? Wouldn't it benefit everyone if all social groups were exposed to this material so they could possibly be "enlightened"?

Here we go again creating a culture out of a product and associating it with an "elite" class of individuals.

Pages

Add a new comment

Comments are closed.