Thoughts on Readings 2/11/09

The Public and Its Problems by John Dewey

This week, we were required to read John Dewey's "The Public and Its Problems", which was originally published in 1927 by Henry Holt. Called "a classic in social and political philosophy", Dewey carefully deconstructs such commonly used words as "the public", "the state", and "political democracy".

While I found the text to be a bit overly dense and repetitive (and with a lack of clarifying examples of the principles outlined), one thing that kept coming to mind when I was reading was: Are these definitions relevant today? And to what extent has communication in today's age changed these definitions (if at all)? More on that later...

Dewey begins by distinguishing between communications that are considered public (those that have consequences that affect a wide range of people and thus are relevant to a wide range of people) vs. those that are private(usually considered to be between a few people and generally are of no interest to the wider public). Most interactions would be considered "private"-although we often fail to see the public consequences to private interactions. For example, if two neighboring business owners decide to use a local field to dump waste that is a byproduct of their industry, they might have a private communication agreeing to this. However, these actions could have negative consequences for the people in the community-the waste could potentially poison the water system and cause health problems for decades.

Dewey argues that when such private actions have consequences for the larger public, than this action becomes public. It is then up to the state to utilize governing officials to get involved and enact regulations to stop the action in question. A collection of these officials constitute a government (private and representative roles of officials) which is organized "to care for the extensive and enduring indirect consequences of transactions between persons". They do this be emplying the resources (buildings, property, funds) that are known as the common wealth. And when the public is so organized (by the actions of officials) to control the consequences of such actions-it is referred to as the Populus.

Problems arise when you mix the human condition with the use of political power (and wealth). This generally leads to a public official using his position with the state to further personal objectives. Dewey argues that this is an integral part of human nature.

As Dewey states:
"The same causes which have lead men to utilize concentrated political power to serve private purposes will continue to act to induce men to employ concentrated economic power in behalf of non-public aims." (p. 82)

Simply put, power can corrupt public officials to act irresponsibly and disregard public consequences of their private actions based upon personal gain. This is unfortunately very true, and I would argue more so in the past year or so. I am thinking of special interest lobbyists and their monetary "consulting fees" paid to various politicians to affect the outcome of the voting on a bill.

When new publics come together in response to negative consequences that can be local in nature, new governments are formed to respond but often don't address the consequences for which they were formed because of instability or lack of focus due to pursuit of internal personal gain.

The formation of Deomocracy is in part a reaction to these problems which has merits, but has been underminded by collective forgetfulness of the founding democratic principles.

As Dewey puts it:
"Political democracy has emerged as a kind of net consequence of a vast multitude of responsive adjustments to a vast number of situations, no two which were alike, but which tended to converge to a common outcome".(p. 84)

In discussing the democratic state, Dewey brings in the example of a laissez-faire capitalist economy (which is based upon "the harmony of personal profit and social benefit"). It is a doctrine of Individualism, which signifies a minimum amount of governmental "interference" with industry and trade.

He then discusses "The Search for the Great Community"-the idealistic attachment of fundamental democracy as being based on a utopian ideal of "community". As he puts it"

"Wherever there is conjoin activity whose consequences are appreciated as good by all singular persons who take part in it, and where the realization of the good is such as to effect an energetic desire and effort to sustain it in being just because it is a good shared by all, there is in so far a community. The clear consciousness of a communal life, in all its implications, constitutes the idea of democracy". (p. 149)

Dewey argues that Science and the elite knowledge of technology have been controlled and manipulated by a ruling class of the elite, and until access is widened to the general public-this ruling class of the elite will retain power and will impact the formation of the "Great Community".

To quote Dewey again:

"But even the most shrewd and successful man does not in any analystic or systematic way-in a way worthy to compare with the knowledge which he has won in lesser affairs by means of the stress of experience-know the system within which he operates" (p.165)

This is exponentially resonant today-when you consider the speed in which technology (especially information technology) is advancing today, it is getting more and more impossible for even highly educated people to find the time to keep up with working knowledge to recent advancements.

What does this mean for the future? Will economic and political power be transferred to a smaller group of the educated elite? This has already happened to a large degree. Look at the incentive packages paid to the elite executives of Silicon Valley. Look at the millions that are paid to the founders of Facebook, a social networking site that is revolutionizing the way that Americans interact daily with each other. We are in an age of increasing social and economic Darwinism, where the brass ring is available to a smaller pool of eager hopefuls. In this sense Dewey's theories were frighteningly prophetic.