Marcuse, de Eendimensionale Mens, en deze tijd : een perspectief

Het boek 'De Eendimensionale Mens' is een filosofisch werk uit 1964 door Herbert Marcuse, lid van de (blijkbaar) roemruchte Frankfurter Schule, binnen de filosofie. Marcuse was Joods-Duits (vandaar Frankfurt), die later in de VS ging wonen. Diens boek was historisch invloedrijk en had zelfs een “cult status” bij onder meer Flower Power adepten/aanhangers – die later in de 1960s opgang maakten -, begreep ik, waardoor ik het ook wilde lezen.

Het boek had ook een “linkse”, anti-kapitalische teneur vernam ik her en der, wat mij ook niet afstootte. Ik had geen vooringenomen ideologie die dat niet toe liet, zeg maar.

Ik trof een debat op YouTube, ooit gehouden in de Balie – debatcentrum te Amsterdam -, in 2023, dat ging over dat werk, met interpretaties van andere Nederlandse filosofen van Marcuse’s werk, met name het boek de Eendimensionale Mens, dat ik enkele jaren terug al las, en inmiddels deels “herlees”. Dat debat was naar aanleiding van een “nieuwe vertaling” – volgens panelleden een toegankelijker vertaling (naar het Nederlands) – dan die veel eerdere Nederlandse vertaling welke ik nog lees (uit 1968). Het gaat echter uiteindelijk om de inhoud.

Terwijl ik dit schrijf, vindt het WK voetbal van 2026 in VS-Mexico-Canada plaats, dat ik eigenlijk ook wil volgen. Ik heb toch iets met voetbal – als sport - , wat ik nog steeds kan combineren met mijn intellectueel zelfbeeld, ondanks de loze commercie en het primaire tribalisme wat er ook bij voetbal op dat niveau is. In mijn leven volgde het historisch op elkaar. Ik was als kind best een fanatiek voetballertje, volgde competities, las de Voetbal International (deels), en verdiepte me zelfs in speltactieken.

Trainen vond ik wat saaier, en toen ik brildragend werd (rond mijn 12e) werd het voetballen zelf lastiger, en ging ik eigenlijk heel organisch en terloops meer lezen, en werd lid van de openbare bibliotheek. Vreemd genoeg legde ik sindsdien een vergelijkbaare mate van passie voor lezen, over met name landen en culturen, voor de dag, als daarvoor met voetbal. Zo fascineerde mij rond mijn 11e al het land Tsjaad in Afrika: deels in de Sahara, culturele en etnische verschillen tussen noord en zuid. Ik werd hoe dan ook een boekenwurm, direct nadat ik een tijd een “voetballer” was.

Met technische – of “beta” - onderwerpen had ik minder, dus vrijwillig ging ik vooral menselijke geschiedenis, samenleving, en cultuur, bestuderen, en dat wereldwijd, soms gespecialiseerd.

Bij dit alles bleef ik voetbal als sport een leuk vermaak vinden, en mogelijk meer dan dat. Mogelijk dient het psychologisch als “tegenwicht” voor lezen, denken, studie en diepzinnig, abstract doen, naar het echt tastbare, fysieke, en concrete – directe actie en reactie – van het voetbal. Van theorie naar praktijk.., zoiets.. Als een rare, soms ongemakkelijke variant van “yin en yang” uit het Chinese Taoïsme.

TAAIE KOST

Op dit moment loopt dat voor mij wat ongemakkelijk door elkaar heen, tijdens dit WK voetbal van 2026. Herbert Marcuse’s boek de Eendimensionale Mens is interessant en – vind ik – treffend over de Westerse samenleving (al in 1964!), maar is qua schrijfstijl – taalkundig ook – “taaie kost”. Lange zinnen, met veel bijzinnen en verwijzingen. Het vocabulaire vond ik niet ingewikkeld, met mijn woordenschat (laten we zeggen HBO en hoger). Herlezen voor goed begrip bleek echter wel vaak nodig, vooral door de lange zinsbouw. Ik herlees het boek nu na jaren, en moet nog steeds zinnen soms herlezen bij het herlezen.

Ook tijdens dat debat in de Balie in 2023, welke ik noemde, erkende men dat het boek “taaie kost” was. Het is diep filosofisch en vol met lange, gecondenseerde, betekenisrijke zinnen.

Wel wat diepgaander en veeleisender, dus, dan voetbal kijken op het scherm, in essentie naar 20 mannen die achter een bal aan rennen, en een land vertegenwoordigen.

“Taai” of ingewikkeld om te lezen, Marcuse’s boek, maar uiteindelijk vervullend en leerzaam, ervoer ik. Marcuse’s punten worden uiteindelijk duidelijk, nadat hij eigenlijk – via aanvullende voorbeelden – in herhaling valt over een aantal thema’s.. met heel wat complexe zinnen. Het punt is op een gegeven moment wel duidelijk, al blijft het interessant omdat hij verschillende maatschappelijke aspecten en ontwikkelingen van toen (1964) bespreekt, die zeker vandaag de dag nog relevant zijn: zowel economische als culturele aspecten.

De ondertitel “Studies over de ideologie van de hoog-industriële samenleving” geeft helder de focus en context aan van Marcuse’s essay, namelijk van een steeds meer geïndustrialiseerde samenleving, inclusief automatisering, en een belangrijke rol voor technologie.

Zijn boek/essay De Eendimensionale Mens bekritiseert eigenlijk het toen (door technologie) moderne kapitalisme, vooral waar het zich totalitair uitbreidt naar “cultuur” en de “vrije tijd”, terwijl Karl Marx het nog vooral over arbeiders en productieverhoudingen had.

INKAPSELING

Marcuse heeft het er eigenlijk over hoe gewone burgers, en die arbeiders, betrokken worden bij dat exploiterende kapitalisme via consumentisme: dingen kunnen kopen, en de schijn-vrijheid van in je behoeften voorzien door te kopen producten, of diensten. Je zo ook als individu zogenaamd te laten gelden, een identiteit te vormen. Met technologische vooruitgang, en via taal, wordt dat consumentisme zo vanzelfsprekend gemaakt, totdat mensen het systeem niet meer bevragen omdat ze “ingekapseld” zijn, ook in hun vrije tijd. Aldus het betoog van Marcuse.

Inderdaad valt het woord “ingekapseld” veel tijdens het genoemde debat in De Balie over Marcuse’s boek. Ontwapening door inkapseling via consumentisme.

Me dunkt nog steeds actueel, in 2026, stel ik. Die voetbalwedstrijden van het WK (nu van 2026) worden onderbroken en omgeven door reclames, waardoor het voetbal een bijzaak lijkt. Hetzelfde is gebeurd met ander “vermaak”, namelijk het Internet en YouTube, als je gewoon even zonder speciaal (te betalen!) abonnement wat liedjes wil luisteren, of clips wil bekijken.

Denkelijk is “top” voetbal nog veel commerciëler dan “pop” muziek: ergens kun je nog wel op YouTube bijvoorbeeld fijne historische muziekconcerten vinden van, bijvoorbeeld, Bob Marley, Stevie Wonder, of Nirvana. Historische voetbalwedstrijden die voetballiefhebbers begrijpelijkerwijs nog wel zouden willen zien (finale WK 1970: Brazilië – met Pelé! – tegen Italië) kun je daarentegen wel vergeten: afgeschermd vanwege commerciële belangen.

Al deze steeds hinderlijkere commerciële afbakeningen en reclame’s bij bij de massa relatief populaire (passieve) cultuurbeleving anno 2026, illustreren goed dat Marcuse’s De Eendimensionale Mens uit 1964 nog steeds actueel is, en waarachtige tendensen aanwees, die zelfs toenamen. De inkapseling door het systeem, “the powers that be”, van het gewone volk, inclusief de arbeiders, van het hele leven, en niet alleen “werk”.

Panelleden in het voornoemde De Balie debat uit 2023 – Marian Donner en (min of meer) “Marcuse kenner” filosoof Thijs Lijster – vonden het inderdaad ook nog in deze tijd actueel.

Zo las ik dat boek ook. Vanuit mijn persoonlijke levenservaring, en mijn perspectief. Ideologische vooringenomenheid verstart – en beperkt – het vrije denken. Zo schijnt Marcuse – evenals anderen van de Frankfurter Schule – zowel door Karl Marx als Sigmund Freud beïnvloed te zijn, en inderdaad noemt Marcuse ze ook in De Een-dimensionale mens, evenwel zeker niet als dogmatische richtlijn: hij blijft als individu zelf redeneren, wat het ook leesbaarder maakt voor mij als individu.

SEKSUALITEIT

Behalve over arbeidsverhoudingen, technologische vooruitgang, taal als manipulatiemiddel, en vrije tijd, bespreekt Marcuse ook een specifiek onderwerp als seksualiteit. Voorspelbaar komt daar Freud om de hoek kijken, maar ook wat dat betreft denkt Marcuse echt zelf, en praat niemand na. De passages over seksualiteit vond ik tot de interessantste behoren, want “raak”, maar ook zelfs mijn “ogen openend”, of in ieder geval helder beschrijvend wat ik ergens al vermoedde.

Zijn beschrijving van hoe het “libido” door laten we zeggen “de elite” ingekapseld is in het systeem van technologische, economische vooruitgang vond ik interessant en herkenbaar. Taboes vielen weg in de 1960s, men mocht vrijer de seksualiteit beleven, maar dat bracht volgens Marcuse ook een “desublimatie”, een “onttovering” ervan teweeg. Via onder meer de porno-industrie werd seks derhalve genormaliseerd als deel van het systeem, en elke “vlucht” of geestelijke rebellie via “eros” of seks, tegen de bestaande verhoudingen of machten, zo handig door machthebbers onschadelijk gemaakt.

Om uit het boek te citeren (vertaling 1968):

“De technische vooruitgang en het comfortabeler leven maken het mogelijk, dat er in het geheel van produktie en ruil systematische libidineuse componenten worden opgenomen. Hoezeer het opwekken van de instinct-energie ook onder controle gebeurt (soms zelfs in die mate dat het een wetenschappelijk management van de libido wordt); hoezeer het ook dienst doet als stut voor de status quo – het blijft bevredigend voor de gemanipuleerde individuen, net zoals het leuk is met een buitenboordmotor te spelen, de gemotoriseerde grasmaaier te besturen en hard te rijden in een auto”..

Ware woorden, lijkt mij, al heb ik zelf met de laatste activiteiten te weinig ervaring om die met seks te kunnen vergelijken, haha.

Ook een voorbeeld van de vaak wat complexe, gelaagde zinsbouw in het boek, maar zeker een zinnige analyse.

TAAL

Veel van het boek gaat over hoe “taal” ook manipulerend gebruikt wordt, bij die “inkapseling” van het volk (of: de arbeiders): voormalige tegenstellingen worden opgeheven en verwarrend gemengd, ook voor militaire, politieke, of bedrijfsdoelen, waardoor alternatieve denkwijzen als het ware door de taal onzichtbaar worden, en de ware aard verduisterd. Dit dient het “operationalisme”, zoals Marcuse het noemt, van die machthebbers. Nog een citaat uit het boek, wellicht nog wat ingewikkelder dan die eerdere die ik gaf:

“..Hier brengt het functionaliseren van de taal een verkorting van betekenis tot uiting, die ook politiek gezien van belang is. De namen van dingen zijn niet alleen ‘een aanwijzing voor hun wijze van functioneren’, maar hun (feitelijke) wijze van functioneren bepaalt en ‘omsluit’ ook de betekenis van het ding, door andere wijzen van functioneren uit te sluiten. Het zelfstandig naamwoord beheerst op een autoritaire en totalitaire manier de zin, en de zin wordt een verklaring die aanvaard moet worden; het verzet zich tegen een bewijs, voorbehoud, ontkenning van zijn gecodificeerde en uitdrukkelijke betekenis..”

Een hele mond vol, inderdaad. Met flink wat even complexe zinnen herhaalt Marcuse ditzelfde punt in dit boek – mogelijk wat te vaak - , maar dat maakt het nog niet onwaar.

Marcuse heeft daarmee naar mijn mening zeker een punt, en een die vandaag de dag nog zeker actueel is. Manipulatie via taal is zo oud als de mensheid, en manipulatie via het geschreven woord zo oud als het schrift en de boekdrukkunst.

Ik betoog zelfs (zong ik zo in songteksten van mij) dat taal vooral gereedschap om te liegen biedt, voor een groot deel althans.

Dit slaat los van meer pragmatische, direct-praktische woorden of termen in de taal die geen ontplooiing van hun betekenis nodig hebben, zoals Marcuse zelf ook erkent, maar daarbuiten biedt “gangbare taal” genoeg manipulatie en “propaganda” mogelijkheden, voor de commercie, politiek, macht, voor verhulling van onrecht, voor verhulling van machtsverschil, etcetera.

Deze inkapseling via taal en consumentisme – inspelend op menselijke behoeften – leidt dan tot een “gelukkig” maar “vals" bewustzijn, volgens Marcuse, bij burgers, als enig overblijvende dimensie van de moderne technologische rationaliteit. Die ene dimensie.

TRANSCENDENTIE EN SUBLIMATIE

In die technologische rationaliteit is dan zogenaamd het “obscurantisme” overwonnen, maar ook de “transcendentie” uit de werkelijkheid gehaald, waardoor de eendimensionale samenleving is bereikt.

Impliciet stelt Marcuse dus dat de wereld – of de mensheid – daarentegen die transcendentie nodig heeft, alsmede “sublimatie”.

Sigmund Freud zag in “kunst” een sublimatie van meer primaire driften (seks willen, met name), maar als die primaire driften dus (economisch, commercieel) ingekapseld zijn, zoals Marcuse stelt, wordt die kunst ook minder rebels en transcenderend.

Ook dat is anno 2026 nog relevant, en naar mijn inschatting bewaarheid in de steeds commerciëlere pop-cultuur en populaire muziek, met steeds minder en gemarginaliseerde maatschappijkritiek of “inhoud”, behalve in sommige genres die erom bekend staan (Reggae, “conscious” hip hop), maar die meestal ook niet commercieel succesvol zijn, en in niches blijven. Hetzelfde geldt voor literatuur, waarbij voorspelbaarheid, bevestiging, en goedkope en veelal verkeerd gerichte “identiteitspolitiek” beter verkoopt dan wezenlijke systeem- of maatschappijkritiek. Hetzelfde geldt voor andere kunstvormen.

Transcendentie is te vertalen als “overstijging”. Behalve maatschappij- of systeemkritiek kan dat ook een “bird’s view” of “uitzoomen” betekenen in een meer spirituele zin: buiten de dingen staan om ze te beschouwen, echt erbuiten staan. Ook dat is er steeds minder in de kunsten, maar ook in zogenaamd “linkse” kringen, of andere naar eigen zeggen kritische bewegingen.

De Balie had als debatcentrum ooit een “links”, vrijdenkend imago, totdat bleek dat bepaalde thema’s die vanuit de gevestigde politiek aangezwengeld en gepromoot werden – veelal op dubieuze, gebrekkige gronden – niet betwijfeld werden, en men “meelulde” om het op zijn Hollands te zeggen: het coronabeleid, het klimaatbeleid, LGBTI problematiek, en zelfs de NAVO (en het militair-industrieel complex) – toch ooit een populaire kop van jut voor “Links” – werden en worden gespaard, mogelijk vanwege financiering door die NAVO van De Balie, zoals een gedurfd interviewende Linkse podcaster (Left Laser) aantoonde. Corruptie, eigenlijk dus, en wat men eerder “Rechts” zou noemen..

Illustratief had men het bij het debat over Marcuse’s boek dat plaats vond in 2023 (na al die corona onzin dus) en diens huidige relevantie, alleen over het “klimaat” als probleem, en een vage maar lekker links-lijkende actiegroep als Extinction Rebellion.

Er was niet alleen onzin: ook het neoliberalisme werd meer terecht ook bekritiseerd tijdens dat debat, dat ik al met al wel okee vond. Marian Donner heeft leuke denkbeelden, en zij en Thijs Lijster vatten de kern van het boek grotendeels goed samen.

Het is daarnaast aan iedereen om Marcuse’s bevindingen toe te passen hoe men wil. Als je echt in klimaatopwarming wilt blijven geloven, dan pas je Marcuse’s stellingen daarop toe, bijvoorbeeld; nogmaals het verstarde en beperkte van ideologie. Mensen kunnen helaas maar al te makkelijk alles naar hun ideologie en vooroordelen toe redeneren.

Ik geloof wel in het bestaan van milieuvervuiling, maar niet zozeer in klimaatopwarming, omdat er eenvoudigweg geen wetenschappelijk bewijs voor is (hoeveel ik ook zocht), en het klimaatbeleid “the powers that be” wel heel goed uit komen: zo hoeven ze niet echt iets aan milieuproblemen door grote bedrijven te doen, en die machten kunnen ze zo ontzien. Mogelijk is dat ook de reden waarom de multinational Shell al vanaf het begin dus bij die klimaatdiscussie betrokken is.. Dubieus..

Dat idee van “inkapseling” is dus een centraal thema van het boek, waarvoor Marcuse ook andere, min of meer synonieme begrippen als “assimilerend” gebruikt.

ONONTGONNEN TERREINEN

Volgens Karl Marx zou het kapitalisme ten onder gaan aan zijn eigen contradicties, Rosa Luxemburg vulde echter aan dat het kapitalisme iets onontgonnens buiten zichzelf nodig heeft om toch (parasitair) te overleven, zijnde bijvoorbeeld koloniën in de tropen en hun grondstoffen, terwijl Marcuse dat “onontgonnen terrein” in de privé-sfeer, de “vrije tijd” van de arbeiders (“het volk”), ook in het Westen, zag. Dat hele leven van arbeiders en burgers zou dus ook geassimileerd worden in het kapitalistisch systeem, middels consumptie, ideologie, en taal/propaganda.

We kunnen echter nog verder gaan, en die “inkapseling” gaat in mijn analyse historisch – thans (sinds de 1980s) - door naar andere onontgonnen terreinen. De Trias Politica werd ontheiligd, met name sinds de opkomst van het neoliberalisme, sinds ongeveer 1980: staatsgesteund kapitalisme door grote bedrijven. Dit was na Marcuse’s tijd, maar zette de lijn van “inkapseling” voort richting politiek (door economische machtsverhoudingen). Politiek werd steeds meer ingekapseld door “big business” en multinationals.

In lijn daarmee is een nieuwere inkapseling gaande, die met name tijdens de Covid periode pijnlijk zichtbaar werd. Wederom na Marcuse’s tijd, maar dezelfde tendens. Zelfs zogenaamd anti-systeem “links”, en activistische in naam anti-overheids en anti-big business organisaties bleken opvallend trouwe volgers van overheidsbeleid, zelfs als met zoveel losse eindjes en ongerijmdheden als dat wereldwijde Covid-beleid vanaf 2020, of als het verhaal – hoe onbewezen ook – dramatisch en “links-activistisch” klinkt, zoals de grotendeels verzonnen klimaatalarmisme hype.

Het etnische, gender, queer, en andere “identiteit” denken werd volgens meerdere auteurs (waaronder Ewald Engelen) gestimuleerd door het neoliberalisme sinds 1980, om af te leiden van klasse en machtsverschil. Ook duidelijk een voorbeeld van inkapseling binnen het systeem waarbij een identiteit nog steeds binnen de bestaande machtsverhoudingen van het moderne kapitalisme operereert, vaak met dezelfde terminologie, en dus onschadelijk, ongevaarlijk blijft.

Subsidiestromen van de overheid spelen hierbij een rol, maar net zo goed meer onbewust een totalitaire ideologie, waarbuiten het leven moeilijk wordt gemaakt. Dezelfde “ideologie” waar Marcuse over sprak, maar dat als monster ook steeds meer opslokte, inclusief dus nu zelfs kapitalisme-kritische organisaties.

Debatcentrum De Balie zelf illustreert die inkapseling, onder meer met dwaze afdwalingen richting “klimaat” en “extinction rebellion” zoals tijdens dat 2023 debat, gecombineerd met de bevinding dat de NAVO De Balie financierde, ter pacificatie van eventuele kritiek. Debatten – hoe wellicht divers qua standpunten ook - blijven dan binnen het systeem en de bestaande machtsverhoudingen. Het is feitelijk een subtiele censuur.

Het komt mij voor dat Marcuse zeker nog relevant is in deze tijd, maar dan met name gezien de inkapseling van politiek en activistische tegenspraak in de laatste decennia, chronologisch volgend op eerst het inpassen van de arbeiders – en hun privé-leven – binnen de ideologie van de op consumptie gerichte hoog-industriële kapitalistiche samenleving.

Daarop - met name sinds het neoliberalisme - volgde dus die inkapseling van “tegen-geluiden” en anti-systeem activisten, waardoor het nog totalitairder werd dan het al was. Daarbij kwam ook censuur, in verschillende vormen. Bij propaganda hoort immers ook censuur.

Het Covid en “klimaat” beleid zoals dat in Nederland gevoerd werd liet een geslaagde “ inkapseling” van activistische organisaties, zelfs de wat radicaal-linksere milieu-organisaties, of wat linksere politieke partijen die eerder kritisch waren op het systeem (SP, GroenLinks, Dierenpartij).

Met geld kun je veel kopen en “inkapselen”, een toenemende tendens waar Marcuse dus terecht op wees.

UITWEG?

Hoe komen we hier uit, uit die totalitaire “inkapseling”?, zoals Marcuse die beschreef, was een interessante vraag aan het einde van het debat in De Balie. Ook een moeilijke vraag.

Een pasklaar antwoord anders dan als een radicalinski “dit systeem moet vallen” zeggen (wel een nieuw begin, maar mogelijk ook onrust en chaos met oorlog), heb ik uiteraard ook niet. Groeiend bewustzijn is in ieder geval een goed begin.

Een bezwaar wat ik nog wel maken kan tegen Marcuse’s redenering is dat hij wat te simplistisch veronderstelt dat ieder mens als 'n passieve robot mee gaat in die “inkapseling” door machthebbers in het systeem via taal trucjes, onderwijs, (politieke) manipulatie, consumentisme, inspelen op je behoeften, propaganda en censuur, en dergelijke.

Veel mensen, ook laagopgeleide mensen, hebben toch nog een bepaald gezond verstand, een oer-intuïtie, of bewustzijn, dat er iets niet klopt: dat bedrijven producten aan je willen verkopen, je geld willen, dat politici liegen, machthebbers die macht willen houden. Dat wordt soms als “populisme” weg gezet, maar als het zich niet richt op verkeerde zondebokken (migranten, bijvoorbeeld) – of verblind is door ideologie – zit daar wel degelijk een volkse wijsheid in, die men ook wel “wisdom of the crowds” noemt. Mensen aan de onderkant staan toch iets losser in het systeem dan hoger opgeleide ambtenaren, of goed verdienende “account managers” in commerciële bedrijven, met voorspoedige carrières.

Zeker, velen van “het gewone volk” doen mee met die “passieve consumptie”, of laten zich ook in de maling nemen door politici of het hele systeem, maar hun belangen zijn minder verbonden aan dat systeem. Dat geeft hoop voor een groeiend bewustzijn en een “grotere weigering” waar men het ook in ’t debat van De Balie over had, en ook de naam van een werk van panellid Marian Donner ( ‘De Grote Weigering’).

Mensen proberen in zo’n totalitair systeem altijd hun eigen, semi-vrije draai te vinden, iets van vrije wil te behouden, als het moet verhuld. Dat kent men ook van totalitaire samenlevingen/dictaturen, waarin men zich weinig aantrekt van een alomtegenwoordige en opdringerige overheid, hoe dwingend aanwezig ook.

Ik merkte dat bij mijn Spaanse familie onder de Franco dictatuur in Spanje (1939-1975), waarvan de meesten geen “politieke dieren” waren, maar zichzelf veelal wel links of democratisch vonden.. en die Franco en zijn regime maar probeerden te negeren.

Hetzelfde is bekend van andere dictaturen of totalitaire samenlevingen, soms zelfs met een sterk gepropageerde ideologie. Als de ideologie een grote groep aanspreekt, veelal omdat het ”slim” appeleert aan basale, aanwezige driften (tribaal, competitie, overleving, oorlog, raciaal), zal het meer draagvlak onder een volk vinden, maar toch ook niet helemaal.

Via inspelen op behoeften en dat “prettig verdovende” “gelukkig” of “vals” bewustijn via welvaart en consumptie – zoals Marcuse betoogt - is dat passieve draagvlak er ook, net zo als “raciale superioriteit” aansprak bij een deel van de Duitsers onder de Nazi’s (en eerder bij Britten en andere Europeanen in de koloniale tijd), of Italiaanse trots bij Italianen onder Mussolini, goed georganisserde staatsverzorging in communistische landen (ook verdovend, wellicht), of religieuze superioriteitswaan en tribalisme bij radicaal-Islamitische regimes.

Toenemend bewustzijn is de manier om een dergelijk pervers draagvlak – gebaseerd op illusies en propaganda – te ondermijnen of af te laten kalven, vooral als duidelijk wordt hoeveel slachtoffers dat totalitarianisme heeft, hoeveel mensenrechten het schendt, hoezeer het vrijheid en geluk – en gelijkwaardigheid – voor de meeste mensen als individu beperkt, als men maar voorbij particuliere deelbelangetjes kijkt: als man heb je het wat makkelijker onder de Taliban of in Soedan, Saoedi Arabië, of Iran, als rijke kapitalist in dit systeem, als partijlid in dictaturen, etcetera. Degenen die de klappen opvangen, die lijden, zijn “de anderen”, de zwakkeren. Jammerlijk ontbreekt solidariteit daarmee nog teveel.

Een ander kritiekpunt(je) op Marcuse’s stelling is dat hij de “passiviteit” van die inkapseling ook overdrijft in de zin dat hij lijkt te vergeten dat er ook “welbegrepen eigenbelang” bestaat, met gevestigde belangen.

Mensen uit welvarende families in big business, of met politieke macht – de “elite” -, weten heel goed dat de taal manipulerend werkt en van die gelaagde inkapseling van arbeiders door economie en technologie in het moderne kapitalisme (nu: neoliberalisme), en steunen dat omdat ze weten dat zij er goed uit komen, uit die ongelijkheid. Heel wat mensen steunen daarom bewust die “ideologie” , waar Marcuse het over heeft. Ze doen er eerder bewust dan passief aan mee. De passief-meedoende massa is voor dat systeem echter nog steeds nodig, en daar zit mogelijk een kiem van verandering, verzet, weigering.. met andere woorden: een uitweg uit die totalitaire “inkapseling” in die eendimensionale samenleving.

Een systeem gebaseerd op exploitatie van een meerderheid kan immers niet voor eeuwig stand houden, en die andere “dimensies” zullen er toch bij komen. De mens is immers – betoog ik - van nature ook niet “een-dimensionaal”.

Marcuse wees op het belang van transcendentie, ofwel “overstijging”, dus het herwinnen van echt vrij levensgeluk, eigen genot, via vrijheid, van individuele mensen. Ook betreurde hij – in zekere zin – de desublimatie (“onttovering”) van kunst, en andere menselijke gedragingen, door die technologische vooruitgang. Mogelijk biedt de “kunst” - of breder: cultuur - die nog niet ingekapseld is, via maatschappijkritiek of meer “spiritueel”, een uitlaatklep, maar ook wie weet een vehikel voor dat toenemende bewustzijn en geestelijke en daarna fysieke bevrijding van de onderdrukte mensen in deze wereld. Een internationale, en multiculturele dimensie lijken mij daarbij onontbeerlijk.

SAMENVATTEND

Mijn perspectief op en mening over Herbert Marcuse’s boek/essay De Eendimensionale Mens staat geenszins diametraal tegenover wat panelleden in dat filosofisch De Balie debat erover zeiden, zijnde Marian Donner en Thijs Lijster. Met hen was ik het regelmatig eens. Wel kon ik het meende ik aanvullen vanuit mijn perspectief en ervaring. Dat in De Balie, gecorrumpeerd door NAVO inmenging als we Left Laser mogen geloven, de door mij geconstateerde nieuwste “inkapselingen” van de politieke en linkse activistische tegenkrachten slechts mondjesmaat genoemd worden, maar grotendeels vermeden als thema, was te verwachten vanuit schuld- en/of schaamtegevoelens. Dan moet ik er maar mee komen.

Het blijft echter mijn persoonlijke mening, maar wel een “gedocumenteerde” mening gebaseerd op degelijke informatiebronnen en historische kennis, zeg ik er ter mijn verdediging bij.

Anderen, in Nederland en daarbuiten, filosofen of niet, zelfverklaard “links” of zelfverklaard “rechts”, hebben weer een ander perspectief op Marcuse’s werk en de huidige relevantie ervan. Dat betekent dat het wel invloed had, volgens sommigen goed, volgens anderen slecht, maar aantoonbaar in niet alleen het publieke debat, maar ook op universiteiten (zegt men), en op Flower Power en andere sociale bewegingen sinds de 1960s en 1970s, in meerdere Westerse landen. Rechtse (zelfverklaard “rechts” bedoel ik daarmee) ideologen bekritiseren het “cultuur marxisme” waar Marcuse en de Frankfurter Schule voor zouden staan, en dat universiteiten “links” gemaakt zou hebben, maar waarom dat zo slecht is wordt voor mij niet altijd duidelijk. Het lijkt mij ook onwaar of minstens overdreven.

Bovendien.. waarom zou de klassenstrijd geen invloed kunnen hebben op de cultuur? Dat lijkt mij zelfs realistisch als analyse. Het is geenszins een oproep tot “marxistisch geplande cultuur”, wat Marcuse nergens doet of betoogt: hij geeft slechts zijn analyse. “Denkrichtingen”, zo je wilt.

Deze, bovenstaande, post was weer mijn analyse van Marcuse’s analyse, waarbij ik “sturende” ideologie en vooringenomenheden er buiten probeerde te houden, maar wat meeging met Marcuse’s “denkrichting”. Ik observeer hierbij naar mijn idee slechts wat machthebbers in deze tijd doen ten opzichte van arbeiders/het volk, in nominale democratische landen als Nederland, en hoe totalitair dat eigenlijk is, en steeds meer wordt.

Marcuse's boek bood mij daarvoor een handvat, een "denkrichting" inderdaad, die ik wel zelf verder doordacht.

Kwanzaa

I know about Kwanzaa for some time now already, associating it with African Americans in the US, as a way to reconnect with the African roots. The festivities following “Western” Christmas, starts at the 26th of December, and lasts a week. Each day has a theme, and it involves presents and other rituals.

The festivities – “invented” in 1966 - are based on African traditions, and indeed the very name (from Swahili for “first fruits”) refers to historical African “harvest” celebrations, common throughout Africa, but of course also common in rural areas elsewhere. The themes of the days further seek to revive African communitarian principles, so lost among people of African descent in the Western world.

SIMILARITIES

In this, what they call, neo-African conception, it shares similarities with Rastafari as a movement, but also differences. The similarities are in the reconnecting with the African roots of Black people in the Americas. The differences are in the sense that Kwanzaa does not strive to be religious or even spiritual in the strict sense, while Rastafari is a spiritual movement, partly based on “rereading” the Bible from an African perspective.

Other similarities with Kwanzaa as festival, I find from what I know of “neo-African”, or “danced religions”, as some scholars call them: Haitan Vodou, Cuban Santería, Palo Mayombe, Surinamese Winti, and so on.. Again, Kwanzaa does neither have that spiritual component – let alone of “spirit possession” as in these traditions - , but does share the “community” and “structured festivity” aspect with these traditions.

“Community building” seems to be the main goal, all these African-centered movements among Afro-Americans have. The methods differ somewhat.

RASTAFARI

I find it philosophically interesting, that both Rastafari (originating in the 1930s in Jamaica), and Kwanzaa (designed by a Black Power activist and scholar, Maulana Karenga, in 1966), share that connection with the Black Power movement. In the case of Rastafari more through Marcus Garvey and his teachings, in the case of Kwanzaa, and its creator Maulana Karenga, more with (next generation Black Power activists) Malcolm X, Black Panthers, civil rights movement, etcetera.

Since Rastafari is older, Kwanzaa was probably influenced by it, in its conceptions, for instance, besides direct African models. Indeed, its creator Karenga said that one of his influences was Marcus Garvey, so there is a link.

I am more a Rastafari adherent, but still appreciate Kwanzaa’s theme-centered – and positive – focus on community building and self-determination. “Self-determination” is in fact one of those “day themes” in Kwanzaa (the 27th of December): defining oneself.

That’s why I started to celebrate it a bit.

It is, by the way, today mainly celebrated by African Americans, and elsewhere in the African diaspora, but there are today also White and other people celebrating it.

I don’t know much about the inventor of Kwanzaa, Maulana Karenga, but read more and more about him.. He had a turbulent life, but also some interesting and inspirational ideas. His later distancing of Kwanzaa from any specific religion can be deemed tactful, so as not to alienate African Americans considering themselves Christian or Muslim. Even some Rastafari adherents celebrate it, also here in the Netherlands.

Perhaps, the Rastafari movement is too loosely organized for such “structured” festivities, and some miss that (although Haile Selassie’s coronation and birth dates are regularly celebrated among Rastafari, world wide).

Since Rastafari is older and international, and I personally got into it way before in Kwanzaa, I find it interesting to compare the two, specifically hoping to deduce what Kwanzaa has to offer what was not there before, especially to repair the cultural identity within the African diaspora.

RELIGION

Christianity is – or rather: became – a mainly European religion, “Europeanized” over time. Islam started mainly as an “Arab” religion, and – while spread among various peoples – it still is largely “Arab” in its orientation. So African Americans belonging to some Protestant churches, or to the Nation Of Islam, kind of “compensate” through a focus on African cultural principles, guiding Kwanzaa days. A difference, as said, with Rastafari, being more a faith in itself.

Interestingly, there is a similarity with e.g . Vodou or Santería, in that a European Catholic Church-focus is responded to with African retentions, also spiritually. Likewise in Africa itself, European Christianity or Arab Islam, is often mixed or alternated with indigenous spirit faiths.

Neither Kwanzaa nor Rastafari seem to promote so much the “spirit possession” aspect of the African heritage. Their progressive aims seemingly left little room for such “backward”-seeming magic, although Euro-Christian propaganda (calling it ”devilish”) also created a distancing. There is after all a strong Protestant Christian influence in both Jamaica and the US.

BLACK POWER

The primary focus on the own Black community, of the Kwanzaa days, shows a Black Power influence, in which Jamaican Marcus Garvey played a pioneering role.

This “reconstructing” of a damaged identity because of slavery and deracination, certainly is a key element in Kwanzaa.

Yet, I argue, its principles and concepts are quite universal. The concept of “harvest festivals”, “eating together”, and passing-down values, are found historically in all cultures, in different ways.

The seven “theme days” of Kwanzaa, might betray its creator (Karenga)’s academic and scholarly past. It has theoretical, verbal “themes”, meant to structure intellectually a reality, that normally is just “lived” as part of community life. Universal, but with an African dimension.

Still, being a bit “academic” myself, I can see the value of that categorizing intellectually: it sharpens thinking and the focus on, importantly, positive notions. Notions that are, in turn, much more broadly human, than what can what can be categorized or even put in words. Thinking without overthinking.

INVENTED TRADITION

Some speak in such cases as Kwanzaa of “invented tradition”. I heard it in sociology classes I followed, but never cared much for the term. I find it subtly demeaning and negative. Partly it seems neutral, but it ridicules unjustly, I think. Even if originating or “invented” later, a tradition/custom can still be based on real, cultural traits living – if dormant – among specific populations. The cultural loss due to Trans-Atlantic slavery was destructive, yet not fully. African culture was maintained, and partly reworked, still with the underlying African cultural values.

Kwanzaa is an interesting example of that.

COMMUNITY

Additionally, I argue that the “community values” expressed within Kwanzaa, are not only relevant to the African Diaspora worldwide, but also to the whole of humanity, certainly also in this “corona crisis” time. In it, governments feel entitled to interfere with people’s social life and contacts, even more than decades before, with as excuse an infectious flu virus. Plandemic, New World Order, some think. Others think it is actually about health, ignoring the trampling of rights and freedoms we were used to. In psychology that is called “cognitive dissonance”.

I myself begun to think it is indeed a plandemic, because they did not involve the people they claimed to protect, and because of the world’s rich elite behind it (now united under the World Economic Forum - the WEF -, in part inheritors of the Bilderberg group), with accumulated wealth going back even to colonial times. Of course, my mistrust was awakened when these peoples started to tell us how we should live our lives..

I can study actual scientific sources (even did that professionally, once), and unfortunately my suspicion was confirmed after studying the actual (relatively limited) danger of that virus, and the actual (non-health) interests behind them. Therefore I added the L to pandemic (pLandemic) too.

From a bird’s view – or in modern terms: zooming out – it involves mass dehumanization, as well as “infantilization”, as we are commanded like we are children, and our natural, human urges are being criminalized. The history of specific Black/African Americans shows much more extreme and prolonged experiences of dehumanization, starting with trans-Atlantic slavery, or even earlier with the Arab slave trade in Africans. This was followed by centuries of exclusion, poverty, and discrimination.

LESSONS

As the most experienced usually teaches the novice, the new learner, in this case the accumulated wisdom from suffering from the Black Power movement since Marcus Garvey, and the civil rights movement in the US, more or less are summarized in the themes of Kwanzaa. The wisdom of community life, precisely that being under attack with this plandemic (probably for “divide and conquer” purposes). This experience can offer useful lessons for people now confronted with sudden dehumanization and restrictions.. “Sudden” when compared to the relatively freer democratic periods in Europe after WW II, Fascism, and Communism..

The state and political class now turned again dictatorial, bad-intentioned and only self-interested, and is – like in Mussolini’s Fascism – aligned with Big Business (which includes Big Tech and Big Pharma), and these rich elites behave as adversaries of the common people. Therefore: strengthening community life – the actual people – is the only answer toward and solution for a free life. Community is the basis of Kwanzaa.

I know, it was intended for Black redemption specifically within the African Diaspora, and for an oppressed racial minority in the US context, but universally Kwanzaa can, I argue, still offer good building stones for an alternative for the New World Order (NWO), the rich elite in this world wants (for which Covid policies prepare the ground).

This alternative for the New World Order/New Normal by necessity has to be at the benefit of the people, not a small elite thinking themselves to be superior because of their accumulated wealth. The open global plans for Agenda 2030, the Great Reset of the WEF, and a 4th Industrial Revolution.. that is what this elite wants..

Does this combine with the world Kwanzaa (or its followers) want? Of course not..

PRINCIPLES

More specifically, the seven African principles of Kwanzaa (called Nguzo Saba), or “theme days”, of Kwanzaa can demonstrate that (full description of these you can for instance find on the Wikipedia page on Kwanzaa):

UNITY

This first day of Kwanzaa (orig. for Black Unity) - the 26th of December - calls for communication, and free gathering. Well, this has been discouraged since March 2020, with all these draconian covid-related policies.

SELF-DETERMINATION

Independent thinking has also been discouraged during this totalitarian approach. It specifically “narrowed our frame” toward a hyped-up flu virus, disregarding our true interests, and the actual wider world. Censorship is also part of the current totalitarian approach.

COLLECTIVE WORK /SHARED RESPONSIBILITY

The key word is equality. The shared responsibility comes from within and is therefore proven true, not forced from above. False senses of solidarity can after all be easily manipulated by powers that be, as dictatorships and variants of Fascism earlier in history showed. This is what happens now, as the “fear” for a relatively mild virus is being misused.

COOPERATIVE ECONOMICS (OWN BUSINESSES)

For some reason, the corona policies, this plandemic, attacks small to medium businesses, while enriching and empowering bigger businesses, meant to replace them.

Thinking about it, this means that independently starting your own business for a specific community will be made difficult. They want more control by the Big State-Big Business over them.. Therefore more money and power to the richest elites, but also limiting freedoms of possibly rebellious, independent-thinking communities.

PURPOSE (COMMUNITY BUILDING GOALS)

With repressive governments/regimes, being open about your ambitions can be dangerous. The corona policies were even at times “opportunistic”, restricting what they saw people do (the terrible sin of “groups having fun” somewhere).

Marcus Garvey said that Black people’s plans “is their own business”, and need not be disclosed for “approval” by the White man.

Doing instead of talking, is therefore important here, and letting natural human characteristics flow, among people.

“Let respect just groove around”, as Curtis Mayfield sang.

CREATIVITY

This plandemic is a war against culture, and against joy, as a forebode to the joyless/modern slavery-like New World Order. It is also an attack on freedom. This is because freedom and joy/cultural expression inherently go together, and can never be separated for long.

FAITH

Whatever spirituality one adheres to, the very spirituality goes against the “material”, numbers/figures focus of this plandemic. The obsession with (manipulated, false) numbers (contagion/infection) is psychopathic. Cold, lifeless numbers to keep the masses scared.

As a Dutch comedian (Theo Maassen) once joked: “some things are too terrible for words, but never for numbers”... Spirituality = humanity = life.

I therefore recommend a Kwanzaa World Order instead of a New World Order, to abandon this dystopian “corona plandemic” way and route.

It is possible, even if it seems – as people with wicked and evil plans always present it – inevitable, or unescapable. We should and can go another way.

CONCLUSION

My “research question” or “thesis” – to put it academically – in this post was broadly: what is the added value of Kwanzaa?

For the Black struggle in the US and internationally, it seems to thrive, though up to now never eclipsing the best-known festivity known as Christmas, in its characteristics (Santa Claus, trees, reindeers, etc.) of German/Anglo-Saxon origin, besides the Christian/Jesus reference. Only later Christmas went also to the “Latin” world: South Europe and Latin America, and in fact global.

Kwanzaa is more African-based in its characteristics, and has a cultural and social focus. It achieved some popularity among African Americans, and Black people elsewhere, often combined with other celebrations. It affirmed and strengthened their sense of identity and cultural pride: these are important.

I see the global corona policies as – among other things – a “war against culture”, as I sing in one of my songs. I came to conclude this definitely, after studies showed the draconian measures “limiting contacts”, “lockdowns”, and “curfews”, had NO effect on virus spread. Governments just want more “control” over the people: attacking/limiting/changing their culture is a way to do that.

Kwanzaa is about reviving a repressed culture, promoting positive, constructive values. Exactly those values that are now under attack with the plandemic that prepares the way for a New World Order of technocracy, control, and stakeholder capitalism.

Kwanzaa values are on the other hand based on community life, and from the bottom-up: sharing, cooperation, but also own choices and identity. Compared to the NWO/WEF/New Normal values they are much more African, and also much less materialistic. Kwanzaa expresses mainly cultural and immaterial goals. These are more important, even if money addiction is widespread among all races. Numbers are lifeless and never end, so cannot give inspiration and joy by themselves. In essence it is not just a battle between freedom or slavery, but in a deeper sense also – philosophically – between “life” and “death”, between “good” and “evil”.

It is therefore much bigger than “race” as such. In certain epochs a focus on “race” was necessary in the Americas. Marcus Garvey did good works regarding this. The Mighty Diamonds sang, Garvey “gave the black man self-respect”, and many other Reggae artists (e.g. Burning Spear) praised him for this too. This self-respect is aimed at humanity, and is needed now among all groups affected by the plandemic .

Those content or agreeing with even the strictest of corona policies – let’s say: non-socializing, fearful types -, or still believing the covid/”killer virus” narrative, are difficult to save right now. For the others, more skeptical and critical, Kwanzaa’s community/culture values seem now more required than ever. Even urgent.

In addition, when all this nonsense is over – or in parts of the world with much less strict corona policies/influence - Kwanzaa values would be good values, I opine, because of their immaterial, sharing “community” and more “human” and “popular” base. It is a good antidote to the cold "power" governments seek, and “money” capitalists seek. As Marcus Garvey – one of the several inspirers of Kwanzaa – wrote already in 1927, in his long poem ‘The tragedy of white injustice’: “Cold capitalists and money sharks, make life unsafe, like ocean barks”.

Now with this plandemic (as during Mussolini’s Fascism) with politics and big business (and press, judiciary etc.), combined power/control and money into one big totalitarian whole, toward a New World Order/New Normal. Beneficial to a small elite, restrictive and repressive to the dependent rest.

Instead of this New World Order, I therefore propose a Kwanzaa World Order..

That is what my celebrating Kwanzaa at the end of 2021 – more structured and focused than before – taught me: its “community life” values are needed in this world.

Detachment

I guess “detachment” is a welcome concept at the time of writing, amid a “corona crisis”, that many see as an elite’s pLandemic.

These corona policies resulted in gradually normalized, yet still “surreal”, measures like global lockdowns and curfews, trampling of people’s rights and liberties, increasing inequality, divide and conquer, segregation, and recently even discrimination and “medical apartheid”. Something like “covid passports” in several countries, including France, Germany, Italy, and recently also the Netherlands, where I live, is now required for simple entry into free public life (bars, restaurants), and hacks at the roots of liberal democracy as we know it.

A sad and disturbing period, also because the “infection risk of a severe and deadly virus” narrative of the international governments, seems to be believed widely, or at least upheld as accepted fiction.

Many say these governments are elite-driven, negative forces “against the people”. They assume mass control goals by a wealthy elite, with a hyped-up virus/pandemic as excuse, or pretext.

Others (at least in their public statements) believe such strict, undemocratic measures might be unprecedented in liberal democracies since Fascism and Communism, but are necessary to deal with a pandemic and the dangerous Covid 19 virus. Simply said: some think it is about power and/or money, some think it actually is about health.

I am not going to walk that well-trodden path of these hopelessly opposed stances – even if involving reality or true facts (with few “true” facts on the side of those who think it is about health, and more plausible, yet difficult to prove, facts on those who think it is about power).

In reality, if it is just a control plan based on lies, it can be considered “too much honour” to dignify it by having it become the main subject of conversation: “cold” and tense themes like disease effects, virus infection, infectiousness, IC capacity, and so on.

More important I consider now the attack on and limiting of democratic values through corona policies in once liberal democracies like the Netherlands or France. These were built after all successfully, though with imperfections, since WWII, and these changes in them touch us individually, our way of life, how we move in our societies. It changes our lives, whether we want to or not.

The gradual nature of all these policies are suspect, but also obscure that by now we must conclude: since March 2020 we have lost control over our lives vis-à-vis the state and politicians, due to this corona crisis. This cannot be denied. Most harshly and humiliating for those not submissive enough to take the experimental "vaccine", but requiring "a pass" to go to e.g. a bar, restaurant, or museum, should be questioned also by the now newly privileged vaccinated, even if their ego is caressed.

Gathering freely as humans, travelling freely, even going out to a restaurant or bar (requiring covid passes/codes in some countries).. all has been made problematic, through some kind of “commandment politics” by “tough” politicians, giving their statements suddenly - in tone and content - as “closed” and “final say”, as in Fascist or other dictatorships.

GLOBAL POLICY MONSTER

In a sense, it made us as individual humans feel more powerless, especially as this Fascist “final say” and "definite" tone political leaders use nowadays in once democratic countries – from Macron in France, to Rutte in the Netherlands, Merkel in Germany, Trudeau in Canada, and Biden in the US -, seems part of a big “global policy monster” which for individual citizens seems impossible to fight. Or even leave out of one’s life.

Yet.. I argue it only seems impossible. I return therefore to the first sentence of this post and the word “detachment” for a philosophical concept. There must be a spiritual way to detach oneself from this – in essence – psychological war - , and I think this detachment is necessary.

The totalitarian nature of the policies, show especially in the “behavior” ordinances for citizens that oddly became commonly accepted: when to gather, how many people in your house, where to work, how to go out. Using “fear from infection” worked apparently wonders, even in “free” societies.

The gradual nature of this corona hype, hid from plain sight that the focus is always negative: both tone and content. Commandment/ordinnances rather that consolation, threats rather than advise, division rather than unity.

Against this seemingly unbeatable foe of negative energy, I think a spiritual approach, or rather spiritual “detachment” or disconnection can help us humans maintain balance and positive purpose. Especially because of much of it is “fear-based”, thus irrational.

First of all: how can detachment be defined?

DETACHMENT

In its philosophical sense, the Wikipedia article on Detachment, contains some interesting things , but is too limited in scope. It restricts philosophical “detachment” to Eastern religions in Asia, notably India, China, and Persia (Buddism, Hinduism, Bahai, a.o.), and Christianity, but excludes e.g. Africa, and the Americas.

Detachment might be best known in its Zen Buddhist meaning: being detached (unstained) by one’s thoughts: not to be harmed mentally and emotionally by them.

Also interesting is Detachment in Hindu thinking as “living in the moment” (focusing on the task at hand). Both in parts of Buddhism and Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Detachment is connected to being “free from lust or passions”, being available solely to God, related to the lambasting of “temptation” in the Bible and Quran.

These are mentioned in that Wikipedia article, but ignore therewith many other equally interesting faiths and spiritual beliefs in this world, such as in Africa, among Amerindians, or African American ones, like Rastafari, or Vodou.

AFRICA

Focussing on belief systems in some African cultures one can find Detachment in this philosophical sense in some way, but indirectly through “spirits”.

The Igbo in Nigeria know the concept of “Chi”, a spirit/godliness belonging to an individual. While connected to a higher encompassing spirit or deity, “almighty creator”, the “Chi” itself is individual, and therefore represents one’s own godly, spiritual essence and destiny. It is an initiating and animating force. The detachment lies in its independence from all else: the material world, and societal demands, while indirectly connected to higher deities, or ancestral spirits.

Similar personalized spirits among other (higher) spirits can be found in other African peoples as well, such as the Akan in Ghana, the Yoruba, and the Bantu. All have this implied “agency” for each individual human, which also can be understood as “rising above”, disconnection form worldly affairs, as well as an “inner strength” or “fire”. Or indeed Detachment.

Even the concept of “cool” in the African aesthetic – to which I devoted an earlier blog post – is related to this detachment.

RASTAFARI

This African type of “detachment” found its way into the African Jamaican spiritual movement Rastafari, originating in the 1930s, now well known through Reggae music.

The “Livity” spiritual concept – of which there is also a Wikipedia article – is certainly relevant here.

Livity is according to that Wikipedia article:

“Its essence is the realization that an energy or life-force, conferred by Almighty Jah (God), exists within, and flows through, all people and all living things. This is seen as the presence of Jah living within humans, and is often expressed in Rastafari vocabulary as "I and I", where the first "I" refers to the Almighty, the second "I" for oneself.”

Later on:

“In Rastafari philosophy, Livity can be enhanced by intense prayer and meditation (often enhanced by sacramental cannabis use), adherence to an Ital diet, and perhaps most importantly, loving behavior toward others.”

The remarkable similarities with the mentioned Igbo concept of “Chi” (and similar notions among the Akan and Bantu people) shows that this must be an African retention, mixed with Christian/Biblical influences.

It also shows an idea of “detachment”.

Spirit possession cults and beliefs in Africa and the African Diaspora, such as those in Vodou, Santería, Kumina, or Winti, are ways to connect with ancestors for sure, but their very “possession-like” or “trance-like” character – often through rhythm and drums - forms an escape or detachment by itself.

RECONNECTION

It is, then, a reconnection with one’s spirits within – or ancestral ones -, but when “reconnecting” one apparently felt disconnected before. Too attached to the worldly and material. To "the system".

Since the drastic and ineffective “lockdown policies” were stubbornly chosen internationally since 2020, this also meant a limitation of culture and the hospitality sector, and an increased focus on home life, avoiding people, especially by those very afraid.

This increased loneliness and mental problems among many groups, largely due to the lack of “outlet” or stress relief, or even the togetherness and consolation of other people with similar lots.

In this confrontation with oneself, in such a tense time, I think a positive and spiritual detachment is crucial.

Power politics and fear are negative, yet strong, invasive and polluting forces that can take over minds, limiting a clear view on things.

The detachment in all senses seems necessary, whether from Zen Buddhism, the idea of “living in the moment”, to African, and other ones, simply to escape monotonous, tense themes like viruses, infections, and such – “hyped up” –, and related politics and power games.

Then to look within oneself: at first detached from passions and worries (as in Buddhist and Christian interpretations), then finding what really makes you tick, what are your unique needs and qualities (as in African interpretations).

Here, the “African” concept of an individual “inner spirit” or “inner divinity” – yet connected with ancestors – really can be helpful in maintaining own pride and agency. Detachment with a purpose.

Labi Siffre sang about it in the fine song “Something Inside So Strong”, while African American author James Baldwin in an interview interestingly said that however oppressed and limited – and damaged - by historical White power structures: these will “never have ME”..

The world needs this individual pride and agency. This also in light of cultural differences. Chinese culture developed through time as collectivistic, rather than individualistic, making a “social credit” system, probably not loved, but accepted there more easily.

CONDITIONS

The corona policies, especially the digital “covid passports” made many fear similar plans in Western democracies, as it introduced external conditional aspects to one’s behavior. Conditions by other forces, beyond our control.

In my opinion, history can largely be seen as wealthy elites, fearing - and therefore controlling and restricting - the poorer majority, and their possible rise or rebellion. A "control state" seems only a more totalitarian "solution" to this long-held "fear of the masses".

This very idea of another party being able to place “conditions” on your behavior as free individual, would seem absurd and morally unacceptable – as it should be considered – when you know that inner, “divine” strength, your right to agency. Living and not being lived. Ruling your own destiny. To say it with a cliché: “believing in yourself”.

The long-upheld Christian and Islamic idea of a “God in the sky”, apart from humans, limits human agency, also toward such unprecedented political “control” goals, and therefore seems less helpful in maintaining one’s own strength. The same applies to a quite naïve "blind" trust in authorities, that is still common, though not universal.

We need to “detach” from that entire system through our own energy and agency, I think, before the “control state” and patronizing, demeaning “social credits” systems goes any further than it already has, and then “roll it back”, toward true humanity.

This is best done by having faith in one’s own spirit of capacity, of self-study, intelligent thought, despite outside pressure, “shaming”, or “fear-mongering”. Independent self-confidence. True independence requires courage.

In short: this type of detachment helps in my opinion in “opening one’s third eye”, realizing the self-ridiculing absurdity of the undemocratic, rights-trampling policies, and also in presenting an alternative.

This alternative is an individuality detached from - in the "Zen" sense - materialism, including all man-made oppressive/freedom-taking structures, but also aligned to all living beings and nature (and natural immunity!), and the ancestors, - as in the African and Rastafari senses, or in the Bantu concept of Ubuntu: human through other humans.

A good way to deal with trauma, and revive culture, togetherness, and social living, as a way out of this dystopia..

Deeper consciousness

In another blog post I talked about “Word Power”, a term also used in reggae and Rastafari lyrics. There is an interesting concept behind it. It is even a Biblical idea: “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God..” (Genesis). Rastafari people tend to use it broader than this: the “consciousness” is important in Rastafari, and formulating your grievances, “speaking out”, pointing out in words, through speech what is unjust, how you are oppressed, is a crucial aspect in the “message music” that much of reggae music is. Through the power of the word, consciousness is achieved and expressed. This I find an interesting psychological phenomenon: the creative potential of language, expressing things.

TALKING AND TEXT

“Potential”, indeed, because in my opinion talking or saying things are just as much used to obfuscate, to trick and hide things. Talking around things like a smoke-screen. The Nigerian writer Ben Okri likened in this sense politicians to magicians. Not just politicians, but also other powerful people like presidents of companies, head teachers, or also people trying to gain power over people or profit from them - or people who try to keep people away from them - use language as smoke screen, hiding their true feelings and opinions. This is defendable when it is a matter of politeness or being well-mannered. If you do not like – such as out of prejudice – certain people, in formal situations it might be better to keep that to yourself. When you want to buy something in a store, you would not really appreciate to note the negative views the shopkeeper holds about the ethnic group you seem to represent.

The same Ben Okri - a writer I recently got more interest in - points in his writings on the power of “stories” in shaping societies and the world. For good and for bad, he explains, but at the same time intricately human and unavoidable. To quote from him: “It is only our storytelling sense that can work with this immeasurable data of life”.. You can deduce from his arguments, however, also that stories are not necessarily the same as “the verbal” or (written or spoken) texts as such. Stories are also lived, experienced.

Either way, either to express truth or hide the truth, words are indeed powerful and influential. It is part of the very basis of humanity; people who are not listened to do not matter, are not as “human” as you. Self-expression is essential for all humans. The easy response of turning loud and aggressive is perhaps not the most intelligent one, but it is understandable from a human point of view: if you listened with an open mind in the first place, the other party would not have to “scream” (literally or metaphorically). Power relations and prejudice are thus intricately related to the spoken word.

Many oppressed and discriminated people feel they are “not listened to”. Listening is here likened to caring. Justly, I think. That is why reggae is I think so valuable as “message music”. It is, as many said, truly the voice of the people. It has a degree of consciousness.

Especially in Rastafari-inspired reggae music, the rebellion against "Babylon", representing the Western oppressive system - and/or "evil" in general -, or decrying Babylon's wickedness, is a crucial part of the lyrical expression.

SUPERFICIAL

That is, of course, not to say that all music and lyrics made by poor people in the world are socially conscious and express this; many “escape” in party and love (or sex) lyrics, eschewing wider social critique. This has I think a variety of reasons: the political situation including censorship, social movements (or lack thereof) in certain countries, and level of education/knowledge. It is self-expression, only more superficial.

I myself speak and understand Spanish, and I noticed a difference between the lyrics in Spanish Caribbean music and British Caribbean music. It is not an absolute difference, but somewhat generalizing you can say that in both (much) reggae and much calypso, social critique in lyrics is common, while in Cuban, Dominican, or Puerto Rican music much less. Love, party, and relationship lyrics dominate there. This need not be - not consciously at least - using language to “hide” or even worse “trick”, as I said before, but can be matter of simple enthusiasm, focussing on daily life, and avoiding complexities. Or just a lack of consciousness and knowledge. Or political censorship, especially the case in Cuba.

Also in Jamaican music such “lighter” lyrics exist, but balanced more with social critique.

INDIVIDUALISM

Another aspect that might explain such differences is the degree of individualism in societies. Individualism is a much misunderstood term in this world, I think. It has been (mis)used by Western people to express e sense of superiority of their culture (“negative word power”, so to speak). Interpreted broader, however, African, and also Afro-Caribbean and Afro-American cultures can be seen as individualistic in some ways too. Even in more profound ways than it is commonly interpreted in the West. In the Western (European) culture individualism is supposedly valued, especially in modern times, and is said to have inspired liberalism or even capitalism. The Wikipedia article (in English) on individualism only refers to Western philosophy and schools of thought, which is a missed opportunity, I think.

It has a social-class connection and is commonly (justly or not) associated with the West, but individualism is certainly noticeable among poorer-class Afro-Caribbean people, for example. Case in point: varied and creative language use: in Jamaica, for instance, most common people speak Jamaican Creole among themselves, sometimes mixed to differing degrees with (standard) English, or use English only in formal situations, as English is still the only official language in Jamaica. This by itself requires an individual manoeuvring, as do all class – as well as cultural - differences. Jamaican Rastafari-adherents also creatively invented many new words, expressing their ideas (such as “I and I”, or Downpression instead of Oppression). The very fact of the presence of a broad and varied creative culture (musical and otherwise) in Jamaica, originating new music genres (like reggae) from different influences, and that in Jamaica also a new religious/spiritual movement – Rastafari – originated that would become both (reggae and Rastafari) global, all point at a strong sense of individuality.

DANCING

There are regional differences though. In many countries of Latin America, dancing alone - by yourself - is rare. Especially on some genres, like salsa music. You usually dance in couples. Dancing by yourself is not absent, but neither is it common. In Jamaica, on the other hand, dancing alone, by yourself is much more common, even the norm, unless you are in a romantic relationship with someone who is also at the dance. Or in cases where people “bubble” or “dagger” (dances that simulate sex, but are not sex). I myself travelled to Cuba and Jamaica some years ago, and went to many dances in both countries, so I experienced this also first-hand.

This difference in dance orientation has always intrigued me. I relate this to the presence of more socially conscious lyrics in reggae. Social consciousness is in the end an individual process of awareness. You cannot as a person be curtailed too much by people around you, if you want to achieve this mental awareness, which by definition is individual. This is compensated by connections (community, spiritual, social) to other people of course, so it is not totally isolated. That is maybe one of the misapprehensions about individualism: that it’s the same as isolation (from man kind). It need not be. In fact, I think you respect other people’s individuality even more when you truly respect and know your own individuality on a deeper level.

As much reggae is “message music”, how you dance to it therefore also expresses your own interconnection with and awareness of the music and lyrics. You need to be personally involved to truly get into it. Your own mind can then not be distracted too much. If the lyrics are on the other hand superficial and do not go deep, attention can more easily be given to social obligations around you and formulaic dance moves. That is basic psychology.

It relates also to the idea of “individuality” within the Rastafari movement. A movement that after all developed in Jamaica since the 1930s, among Afro-Jamaicans. It also largely influenced the “message” and rebellion in reggae music, of course. The term “individualism” is problematic here, because Rastafari adherents do not believe in “isms”. For the very same reason that the term Rastafarianism is not liked by everyone. Anyway, there is a strong presence of a sense of individuality within Rastafari, called “epistemological individualism” (or individuality).

In the book (collective volume) ‘Chanting Down Babylon : the Rastafari reader’ (ed. by Nathaniel Samuel Murrell, William David Spencer, and Adrian Anthony McFarlane’, from 1998) it is related to ideas of radical freedom, liberation from oppressive structures, as well as to the “I and I consciousness” of the divine (and thus the source of truth and life) present within each individual. This expressed subjective agency has a self-actualizing, emancipatory effect. The pronoun “I” – representing respect and dignity for the human person (in connection to Jah/the divine) - is used much in Rasta speech. At the same time there is – through this shared divinity – a connectedness with other humans (and nature)..but on an equal basis.

It seems reasonable that this also contributed to certain ways of dancing to music: individually rather than collectively experienced.

DEEPER CONSCIOUSNESS

There is also another dimension to all this.

Some things you know, but not yet really know. You know them, so to speak, on a subconscious level, you live something, but had no theoretical, textual explanation heard or read as yet. There is a power that precedes words. A deeper power: spiritual and natural. It includes basic, seemingly simple biology and natural forces. Also on the tactical, sensory level.

The music genres I mentioned from the Caribbean: reggae, calypso, salsa – and other genres of course – have partly African origins and influences. Music is by itself a phenomenon that goes beyond words. It touches you also without words/lyrics. The heart beat a unborn child hears though its mother is the first “rhythm” a human being hears and feels, and an essential, life-confirming one at that. This pulse (and breathing) are rhythmic, and at the same time the proof that you are alive.

That brings me to something I recently read. In reality one of the more interesting things I read in the whole year of 2014. It brought so much things home to me, so to speak. It added words and consciousness to what I more or less already lived and “knew” from experience. Still, I valued it and experienced it in that sense as “life-explaining” knowledge (more than as “life-changing”). It brings me back to the theme of “dancing”.

In the book (actually a collection of texts, interviews and photos) ‘The aesthetic of the cool : Afro-Atlantic art and music’ (2011), by Robert Farris Thompson, Thompson explains how music making and dancing differs culturally in Africa from Europe. He points out how musicians play apart in African traditional music, while musicians in European music “play together” (symphony and unison). On the other hand in Africa “music and dance” are not separate, while in Europe music and dance are.

This very fact – that European music is played more “together” - essentially contradicts the common notion that the West is individualistic whereas other cultures are collectivistic: African music, such as on percussion and drums, leave much room for individual improvisation and free deterrence from any meter or norm. Some relate this to the fact that African cultures were long more “oral”, and Western cultures more “scribal” (with fixed texts) leading the latter to more conservatism. Seems reasonable to me, at least as part of the explanation.

Black US (and other) comedians sometimes joked that white people dance irrespective of “the beat” (read: the music), unlike black people. Eddy Murphy had a joke about that, back in the days. More recent comedian Dwayne Perkins said ironically in a comedy bit that white people dance therefore better, freer: not as limitedly confined to the beat. This perhaps relate to this original difference, surviving the times (and the slave trade).

Also regarding that inherent “playing music NOT together/in unison” in African culture, the room for improvisation at least partly survived slavery and colonialism. One only should think of jazz, but also of the percussive polyrhythm and syncope setting Black music in the West apart from music with no African influence. There is an individual freedom there that is lived, sensed, rather than formulated in text, or in some “ism”. Fixed texts tend to systematize, thus constrict.

What’s interesting about this philosophically is that the individual musicians’ freedom shaping African music is celebrated by dancing to it. Dancing to the complex rhythms.

Dancing without set norms (freely yet on the beat/rhythm) is celebrating this individuality even more. Individuality that is – like the Rastafari I-and-I concept - inherently combined with connectedness with other humans, such as the musicians combining patterns variedly in one polyrhythmic whole. In that sense many European dances (not all) are often more collectivistic and in unison, just like the music. Leaving less space for improvisation. In the same book ‘The aesthetic of the cool’, Thompson stresses that even dancers in what are known as African “couple dances” do not embrace each other so much (as in European couple dances). Just to maintain personal flexibility of movement.

At the very least this sheds another light on the commonly formulated difference between individualist and collectivist cultures in this world.

In the same vein, of course, dance is important as part of the spirituality in many African and Afro-American religions, to the point where for instance Vodou (and Santería a.o.) are termed “danced religions”.

This is a deeper, more essential (or “spiritual”) consciousness that is lived, danced, not given power by words or literacy, but naturally by life and the “heart beat” itself. Mere words cannot capture it fully, but only can partly explain it, raise consciousness about it.

SPEECHES

An interesting series of documentaries on Dutch television write now, as I write this, has to do with “word power” in more than one sense: influential speeches by political and other leaders: the series Speeches (VPRO). I recently saw one that centered around the speech H.I.M. Haile Selassie I gave in 1963, at the United Nations in New York. Selassie is of course the most important man/figure for the Rastafari movement.

The speech is the one which Bob Marley made lyrics from, for the song ‘War”: “Until the philosophy that holds one race superior and another inferior.. “.

Selassie’s speech in 1963 was indeed a beautiful, impressive one, due to its content, but also because of its historical time and context. Africa was then in a process of decolonization, and Selassie pointed out that Africans must be respected by the world as equals. He became a spokesperson for Africa, and visited many international leaders. The speech’s content has up to now lost nothing of its necessity. Africa is still not valued as an “equal continent”: an analysis of the world situation makes this clear. The economic and political power of African countries is limited strongly by neo-colonialism and interest of Western/richer countries over African resources. Selassie was early in pointing this out, and to raise consciousness about it. This continued through the Rastafari movement, with Bob Marley’s lyrics made of Selassie’s 1963 speech being one known example of it.

The documentary on Dutch television seemed partly quite neutral and objective, though it repeated some dubious claims made once in a book about Selassie by Ryszard Kapuscinski (a Polish journalist who became known as a fantast). This book by Kapuscinsky unfortunately also has (negative) “word power” it seems. For the documentary further Ethiopians who knew and worked with Selassie, and a Jamaican Rastafari adherent who went to live in Ethiopia, who also helped to spend texts and speeches by Selassie to Jamaica. Some aspects remained too superficial in this documentary, I think. Others were simply mistaken, such as things taken from Kapuscinski’s biography.

The irony was formulated in this documentary (which I heard and read before) that Emperor Selassie I stimulated the education of Ethiopians and that this eventually turned against him. Some of the students and educated people turned against him and sought to overthrow him. While sounding as a somewhat literary “irony of history” – like there are so many historical ironies in world history – it also shows how knowledge and written words can be interpreted differently.

Not just written texts, being the main focus of schools and universities. During the documentary an Ethiopian explained how the situation of a famine in a part of Ethiopia (Wollo) – which he said was in process of ending/being resolved – was nonetheless used by Mengistu, the (Communist) revolution’s leader who overthrew Selassie. The Communist revolutionaries showed an earlier documentary (by an Englishman) on this famine on Ethiopian television, and publicized this much, even organizing public displays in rural areas. Images of the famine in Wollo were in the documentary interchanged with images of wealthy, food-rich banquets Selassie were said to have with foreign heads of state, and how he fed his animals. Of course this manipulated contrast was for propaganda reasons.

This brings me to yet another dimension that since then has only become more influential. The power of images (television, film) as mass medium, surpassing so often those of words. Dictatorships would make use of this “visual” aspect as well. Psychological studies revealed that visual imagery can be much more impactful than words, influencing one even more strongly. “Image power” can indeed be stronger as “word power”. However, like words images and film can be manipulated, used to trick and deceive, hide the truth, as a smoke-screen. The global influence of subtle manipulation via Hollywood, television, or other powerful media parties, on cultural tastes, and shaping prejudices! etcetera should not be underestimated.

WORD POWER AND SOUND

I think that a deeper consciousness, the one that precedes words: pure intuition, the natural heart beat, life itself, may seem (as so-called “subconscious level”) to be influenced by such image or word power play, but is not. Digging deeper within one self I think one is able to learn how to sense the real from the unreal, the lie from the truth, the good from the bad.. you somehow sense that there are wrong intentions, at least eventually. That comes down to really thinking free, thinking for yourself as an individual; genuine intuition (not confused with prejudice). This thinking for oneself in the true sense has become somewhat undervalued in the Western world with the “fixed” written text or “fixed” imagery/film, shaping – eventually oppressive! - political, educational, economic, and media systems. Just like in traditional European music musicians have to play together.

Also, the entire social and economic systems in the Western world are aimed at degrading, limiting as much as possible individual human consciousness. You need for them to contribute to economy, which in most cases comes down to contributing to other people's wealth and power, by accepting a few crumbs from them, figuring as "extra" in their dream. This also belies the self-claimed "individualism" of Euro-Western cultures. At the end individualism is more an "ism" than truly individual.

Rastafari reggae artists speak in their lyrics, by the way, not just of “word power”, but of “word power.. AND SOUND”. That “sound” can be defined as the realm of music and dance, but I argue that it likewise can mean a deeper consciousness, beyond words, that is both natural and individually human..

Of course, you can rightfully argue that humans also have the natural capacity of speech, to talk, use words. It is – like I said in the beginning of this essay - a basic human need too. To speak out against injustice, defend one's rights, confirm one's existence, for self-expression etcetera.. A combination (and interaction) of this with such a nonverbal consciousness, however, can open up boundless creativity, with beautiful effects. Liberating effects. Maybe this can be called a "higher" or "heightened" consciousness as well..