Cultural Pro Hegemony is the title of my new book in my head. The title is actually old, between 60’s and seventies.
The title tracks back to pre pro Marxism along the lines of Marxist Pro Hegemony. I thought it suited the style that I have fallen into here on Democracy and World Peace. First I explain why then will go into more about where I will have picked up this stance, then hopefully I will explore more of getting out of this rut.
Cultural pro hegemony as I see it is part of urbanisation. Pro Marxism hegemony came about during a critical time in history when economically lots of people were struggling to make ends meet. Arguably it was also a time of great prosperity, take baby boomers for example. During the sixties and seventies I sure you agree ‘baby boomers’ did really well. The critical train of thought was developed out of necessity for change. A handful of scholars took what they liked from Marx’s historical citations about how urbanisation works and blended it with politics. Which is why it’s become prominent in this day and age.
By unearthing the problems and going on about problems in a light hearted way the media use this model and sensationalized the mundane political policies. This is understood still by politicians and media involved servants. Both understand the model but may not be consciously aware of using it. Media studies during the eighties came about from Cultural Studies that had to look at these things.
This was at a time when Indiana Jones would have taught in colleges. Anthropology and exploring the world for artifacts became popular, whilst in the entertainment sphere popular music was taking of in a big way. Musicians were avoiding political baise in the lyrics to sell records to the mass youth market. Youth empowered by reasonably priced wireless radios. Radio stations funded by political donations were able to leverage opinion and test lots of ideas out. And one of them was the witty side of Carl Marx. Carl Young and Einstein all have similar faces, the three all have that Santa Clause look about them. With that said bearing in mind the industrial era of the workhouse had by then phased out. In order to get things in shape I observe this is why perhaps all the literature of use in Marx’s words perspective had value. Labour was still the stable occupation and higher education was far more elite. The memories of two world wars left an imprint on hearts and minds of citizens. They learned new ways of staying cheerful and it’s these coping strategies that gave metropolis nations an appetite for critical theory.
Van Gogh coined a great term about his art. He said: “…If I could eat my paintings I would…”
We all know the low ebbs people in the lime light comedians and musicians go through. Similarly regardless of class structure we all experience ‘Hard Times’ even politician’s, lawyers, bankers and public services. So what we needed was something to take the edge of serious subjects. Satire grew in the city as it did in France during the French Revolution. Linear texts adopted taking things through a fine tooth comb.
This is something I would just like to explore in a book. If anything it as it did in the beginning generate peace, just depends on your own cultural humour. That is why a discipline is formed. The cans and cannots. These sorts of experiments although unearthing appeal to the masses.
A justified argument to throw in the mix is that there are not enough solutions found.
So where should I draw the line in the sand? All over the world everyone want a piece of this knowledge, but culturally there are all sorts of cultural and theological hang ups. If you can think of some examples from any era or present I invite you to leave them below in the comments. Thanks.