The Political Economy of Narcissism: Reflections on Narcissism and Self-Destruction, III

As I continue to read in Jean Twenge’s and Keith Campbell’s The Narcissism Epidemic, one of the criticisms I have of it is that the book is heavy on the psychology of narcissism and rather light on the sociology of it. Although I would recommend the book (with some reservations) it seems to me that the authors still lack a comprehensive model that would also include what we might refer to as “the political economy of narcissism”.

It seems, indeed, no accident that the authors’ own data set for tracking the rise of narcissism to its present “epidemic” scale since the mid-70s strongly correlates with the corresponding rise of neo-liberal economics and therefore with Thatcherism and Reaganomics, too. Margaret Thatcher’s notorious remark that “there is no such thing as society” necessarily even throws the individual back upon himself or herself. The shipwreck of society — its dissolution and atomisation on the reefs of an exaggerated egocentric individualism that Thatcher announced — even appears to have induced an attitude of every man for himself.

This is particularly true in the case where the principle that “there is no such thing as society” becomes government policy, for you then tend to frame legislation and social policy that reflects the perceived reality. Much of the present social malaise in the UK, and elsewhere, is traceable to this neo-liberal/neo-conservative conceit. And it is ironic, indeed, that Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative Party heir at 10 Downing Street, Mr. David Cameron, now speaks of the need for “The Big Society” without, apparently, the slightest awareness of the irony and the contradiction of reconstructing society after his “conservative” predecessor annulled and negated it.

That approach is ultimately self-defeating. “All the king’s horses and all the king’s men couldn’t put Humpty together again”. And I predict that such contradictions in British society will become even more explosive than they have been to date until there is an essential transformation or restructuration — and not just in the UK either.

The question still arises, however, whether “the culture of narcissism” has been deliberately engineered, and I believe the answer must be in the affirmative. This is not something Twenge and Cameron seem to be willing to directly entertain. Although there are occasional allusions in the book to the role of present-day neo-liberal economics, advertising, and television in spreading the epidemic, these remain largely peripheral to the model they use. Instead, they tend to focus on “the usual suspects” — poor parenting, peer group pressure, flawed pedagogy — while only occasionally conceding that television and advertising, or the artifices of the culture generally, might be the true “parent” today, overpowering even the abilities of biological parents to steer their children rightly, even while recognising their difficulty in doing so in the context of a system-wide culture of narcissism. As Nietzsche also once quipped, in the future “the sane will voluntarily commit themselves to the madhouse”.

Narcissism is a learned behaviour and an adaptive or survivalist response (however self-destructive it is in the long-term, as the Myth of Narcissus bears witness). This, too, the authors frequently acknowledge. Even the self has become a commodity to be produced and consumed, bought and sold, on the “free market” as intellectual capital or labour. Selling oneself through the exaggerated egoism of self-promotion (the “Me brand”) and fakery turns the self into an object, an artifact, and an artifice — the self-image as a “genuine imitation”, as it were. In those terms, the market and money economy encourages narcissism as a survivalist response and, ironically, still a “rational pursuit of self-interest” within the context of the system of prevailing social relations. The delusion and phoniness of the narcissist is that he or she is “self-made”, whereas the narcissist is merely another commodity and artifact, mass produced cookie-cutter fashion by a political and economic system that requires this socio-historical type for its own perpetuation.

In effect, to say that we are now in a “post-Enlightenment” era is to also say that the emphasis of human self-understanding has shifted from the Cartesian “I think, therefore I am” to “to be is to be perceived” — and to be perceived as a “somebody” (or, perhaps even an “anybody”).

Thus, consumerism and “conspicuous consumption” is a necessary adjunct to the culture of narcissism. This is where so many books on the problem of consumerism (and the attendant indebtedness) seem to go astray. It has its roots deeper still in narcissism. The self-promotion, self-branding, and self-aggrandisement of the self-image (which is virtually the entire message of all advertising and even so-called “reality TV”) is practically the whole of today’s strategy of promoting “economic stimulus”. The consumer as historical type has displaced the citizen, who no longer counts in the accounts except in terms of his or her capacity to consume (a word which means originally “to lay waste or destroy”). Infantilisation, consumerism, and what Nietzsche called “herd animalisation” are all, at root, issues arising from the problem of narcissism.

Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy once remarked that Late Modern Man only really faces his authentic self in the commute between home and work, and between the different roles he plays out in both. Even then, it is possible to drown out this possibility of genuine self-encounter by playing the radio or the stereo in the vehicle. That transitional time can therefore be used merely as a rehearsal of the self-image for the pending every day social presentation of self — to polish and buff one’s self-image. In effect, the narcissist is a clone who has been culturally generated and constructed for the very purpose of serving the system. Their vaunted individualism is as much a mirage as their idealised self-image.

Despite its merits, this is one of the shortcomings of Twenge’s and Campbell’s book — its lack of a greater context for interpreting narcissism as an epidemic arising from a sickness of the system of late modern capitalism itself and it’s attempt to reconcile its own Jekyll and Hyde contradictions. It is not only “post-Enlightenment”, but also post-Christian, too. What otherwise do we conclude from their observation that “[t]he 7 deadly sins are…. a succinct summary of the symptoms of narcisssm”? Indeed, and so are the named three evils of Buddhism: greed, malice, and delusion.

This does not bode well for the future of democracy, or even life and the earth. At one time, economics and economy had to justify itself to society and to democratic principle and values — ultimately to the service of life itself. The inversion that is occurring today is that society and democratic principle and values — and even life itself — have become accountable only to economics and the economy. It’s an attitude presently called “economism“. It describes even the tendency to now refer to nations as “economies” — a corporatist model which even revisions the statesman as Chief Executive Officer of society and the nation in the image of America, Inc., Canada, Inc., etc. This is why Maggie Thatcher found it so easy to dismiss society from relevancy. There was only individuals and the market. But that is revealing in itself. For in this word “market”, society as a whole has been subsumed. And what that means is that all human relations and associations have been finally economised, commodified, and quantified in terms of monetary values. “Every man has his price”, and is either an asset or a liability in the context of the corporate state.

Can such a society long endure? Not bloody likely. For in such a competitive society of every man for himself and the war of all against all, no true friendship, which requires empathy, can thrive. The incapacity for empathy (and thus for friendship) is one of the chief traits of narcissism, in which other people are valued only in terms of their utility — as means.

Advertisements

10 responses to “The Political Economy of Narcissism: Reflections on Narcissism and Self-Destruction, III”

  1. misterdirk says :

    Yeesh. If, as my anthropologist friends would have it, all human relations can be reduced to competitive strategies for status and resources, then the strongly empathetic person is maladapted in this cultural environment. But even so, isn’t empathy an inherent (almost defining) human trait?

    • Scott Preston says :

      Hi misterdirk: curious thing isn’t it? Rats have recently been shown to demonstrate strong empathy with other rats. But human beings? Once the ego boundaries emerge, that “connection with the life-giving centre” (as Gebser put it) seems to be severely severed. Once children discover the “Me” and “Mine” (or it crystallises or precipitates), it seems to consume them entirely, in a lot of cases. The parenting task (made quite difficult by the present cultural environment anyway) is to guide the budding egoic being into a more balanced way of being by discouraging the child from indulging in this fascinating new thing called “I” or “Me”. That’s the flipside of ignorance — indulgence (but also indigence, in the sense of lack or neediness).

      You could say that “the rational pursuit of self-interest” as a socio-cultural assumption and guiding principle contained an infantilising tendency as well, one that has led, logically, into the “culture of narcissism”. But, before that, it led into Nietzsche’s pronouncement of “the death of God” and Nietzsche’s attempt to work out the consequences of that. If you read Rosenstock’s essay “Farewell to Descartes”, you’ll find it there as well, when it discusses the deficiency of Cartesianism and it’s pernicious influence on cultural developments.

  2. Karen says :

    I haven’t read the book, but am adding it to my list. I’ve been really interested in narcissism, not only as a sociological aspect, but also because I’ve been personally affected by it. My ex-husband was a narcissist, and his inability to feel empathy was the main reason for our divorce. There’s also some interesting info at http://onlineceucredit.com/edu/social-work-ceus-nar, if you’re interested in learning more about it.

    • Scott Preston says :

      Hi Karen. I had to unspam your comment. For some reason (probably the hyperlink) the spamguard thought it was spam.

      The Narcissism Epidemic has its merits. It also has a lot of demerits, in my view. The best book on narcissism yet is A.H. Almaas, The Point of Existence: Transformations of Narcissism in Self-Realization. Something of the flavour of Almaas’s approach is contained in an essay by Ann Gleig on the Almaas website: http://www.ahalmaas.com/PDF/culture_narcissism.pdf

      Hope you find something useful there.

  3. TheLittleBigMan says :

    “And what that means is that all human relations and associations have been finally economised, commodified, and quantified in terms of monetary values.”

    How true that is! Over a decade ago, when majoring in MBA, I was taking a course in marketing. The class had about 35 students in it. In one class meeting, I began posing a question to the professor. About two-thirds through my question, in one single moment the entire class and the professor interrupted me and roared in unison: “customers!”, as if they were all programmed to speak at the same time and with one view! This was a surreal moment of revelation for me.

    It was only then that it dawned on me that I didn’t belong to the MBA crowd. Without realizing, in my question I had been using the word “people” several times and that seemed to have prompted the loud roar, which was uttered not as a response, but as a way of correcting my perception of the world out there. In that moment, in that class, I was the only one who viewed ‘people’ as ‘people.’ I left the MBA program for good after that candid episode.

    • Scott says :

      I know the feeling. There is a tendency, today, to confuse what people do on occasion with what they are in essence, and I believe this is called “essentialism”. I’ve sometimes heard this complaint from some Muslims…. Islam is their practice, not what their identity. I listened to part of a radio discussion today during the commute about whether “criminals” who had served their time were entitled to their unemployment insurance benefits upon their release, because the present reactionary government in Canada feels that “criminals” apparently should pay and pay and pay — like Hell on Earth, regardless of whether they paid their debt to society. In that view, a man is sentenced not for what he (or she) did, but because of who they are. They didn’t just commit a crime, they are criminal.

      Just so, we are only “customers” when we actually engage in a transaction. I’m not a customer when I’m not engaged in a transaction with the owner of a service or the proprietor of a shop. It’s what I do at that moment, not what I am 24/7. Same with “consumer” and “citizen”. There’s a lamentable tendency to replace the whole use of the word “citizen” today with “consumer” — its called “reification”.

  4. Scott says :

    Primarily posted here for misterdirk to find — an interview with William Irwin Thompson which I found quite engaging, all the more because of John David Eberts’ introduction, which is an excellent summation of so many things. I have a lot of sympathy for W.I.T.’s views… but have had so little time to revisit some of his works.

    http://www.williamirwinthompson.nstemp.com/Interviews/witjdeint.htm

  5. TheLittleBigMan says :

    As clear and precise as ever. Thanks, Scott!

    • Steve Lavendusky says :

      Scott – Edith Stein, who’s dissertation director was Edmund Husserl, wrote a fine dissertation called ON THE PROBLEM OF EMPATHY. Stein was made a Saint by Pope John Paul II. A fascinating and brilliant person.

      Steve

      • Scott Preston says :

        Odd you should mention that, Steve. I’m just in the process of writing up something on that, for I just yesterday came across Edith Stein’s name in “God and the Fascists”. Until yesterday, I didn’t know about Edith Stein. I won’t be mentioning her my name in my forthcoming post (“Red Scare, Black Terror”), but it will set the context for understanding Stein’s life and death, her vain attempts to intercede with the Pope to raise his voice against the Black Terror, etc.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: