Posts
Oct 8
#dmingml
I found it interesting transitioning from reading James Hunter’s, To Change the World to a book called, The Rebel Sell, by Joseph Heath & Andrew Potter. Hunter reviews and then in essence challenges pre-conceived assumptions by Christians about how best they can change the world, what has worked, and what hasn’t, before proposing that if Christian’s truly want to change the world, they must start with themselves and practice the faithful presence of God in their own spheres of influence. For more on this, you can read my earlier reviews on Hunter’s first and second essays. In Rebel Sell, Heath & Potter review and challenge a more secular perspective on changing the world by adopting a “countercultural” approach. Simply, this is based on the notion that by rebelling against the system or “jamming the culture”, then the system won’t win. What this amounts to, is that anything alternative, more hip, distinctive, rebellious, is going to challenge the consumer capitalism found predominantly in western society. This creates a cultural conflict between members of the counterculture and the defenders of the establishment. Heath & Potter argue however, that, “Decades of countercultural rebellion have failed to change anything because the theory of society on which the countercultural idea rests is false.”
Rather than change mainstream culture or the system through traditional political activism, members of the counterculture have instead sought to rebel against it in a different way. By being distinct, there was the belief that they would not be controlled by the system, and that through their alternative lifestyle they would challenge mainstream society to wake up or look for opportunities to “unplug them” from their consumerist capitalism. This evolved into an attitude, that if you want to be authentic, you have to be unpopular or distinct. Referencing movies such as The Matrix, Fight Club and other French Philosophers, Heath & Potter attribute this philosophy to the work of Guy Debord back in the 1960’s. His thesis was simple. The world that we live in is not real. Consumer capitalism has taken every authentic human experience, transformed it into a commodity and then sold it back to us through advertising and mass media (p. 7)
In analyzing these perspectives about our world, I believe we come face to face with two biblical concepts that should be mentioned. The first one relates to the conflict that exists between our sinful, human nature and God’s desire to defeat the presence of sin in our lives and to see us wholly transformed into the likeness of Christ. However, God’s desire for us is constantly at odds with our own ability to rationalize and redefine sin to fit in with our own situations. Where is the conflict? God has given us the power of choice. We have the ability to measure our responses to any given opportunity or situation. As Heath & Potter point out, being countercultural leads people to discover their “own sources of pleasure, independent of the needs that are imposed upon us by the system.” Inevitably, this leads to individualism and selfishness. The second biblical concept revolves around the culture into which we are born and the tension that exists between the world’s values (“mainstream”) and biblical values (for which an argument could be made that these are “countercultural”). Historically, while many have sought to become isolated from the world, we simply cannot entirely avoid it. We are faced daily with choices to make about how we live in it, and how we allow it to influence the choices we are faced with. Although there is the risk that those who rebel against mainstream by adopting a countercultural stance may sometimes lead to hedonistic or individualistic decisions that can harm others, there is the reality that they have failed to recognize their ineffectiveness in challenging consumerism. Heath & Potter state clearly that those who sought to rebel or jam the system have merely created a new form of consumerism where in their quest for ongoing distinction, it has led to the creation of new market segments. Be that as it may, from my perspective, at least there exists skepticism about mainstream society and its unrelenting pursuit of consumerism. This group appears to acknowledge that there exists among people a blind allegiance to the belief that we are all just part of a system. Jesus was acutely aware of the implications of such an allegiance – What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man exchange for his soul?
These two biblical concepts highlight the tension that Heath & Potter draw out in the battle between those who seek to challenge the mainstream illusion by being countercultural, but in effect do not succeed against it, because they merely replicate consumerism and individualism, albeit grounded from a different philosophy. Unfortunately, I’m not sure that Heath & Potter really present any other solution to this, certainly not in the first half of the book. Are we all just prisoners of a system until we are ready to be set free? In the Matrix, Morpheus’ words to Neo, although somewhat fatalistic, hold an element of truth to Christians, that people are not always ready to be unplugged from something that they have become heavily dependent upon, including consumerism. – The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.
I think we all want to think that there is a little bit of rebel in us and that a true commitment to Christ should be somewhat countercultural. From this perspective, it was very challenging. I found myself asking which group would Jesus identify more with? Mainstream, counterculture, or neither? What do you think?
#dmingml
I found it interesting transitioning from reading James Hunter’s, To Change the World to a book called, The Rebel Sell, by Joseph Heath & Andrew Potter. Hunter reviews and then in essence challenges pre-conceived assumptions by Christians about how best they can change the world, what has worked, and what hasn’t, before proposing that if Christian’s truly want to change the world, they must start with themselves and practice the faithful presence of God in their own spheres of influence. For more on this, you can read my earlier reviews on Hunter’s first and second essays. In Rebel Sell, Heath & Potter review and challenge a more secular perspective on changing the world by adopting a “countercultural” approach. Simply, this is based on the notion that by rebelling against the system or “jamming the culture”, then the system won’t win. What this amounts to, is that anything alternative, more hip, distinctive, rebellious, is going to challenge the consumer capitalism found predominantly in western society. This creates a cultural conflict between members of the counterculture and the defenders of the establishment. Heath & Potter argue however, that, “Decades of countercultural rebellion have failed to change anything because the theory of society on which the countercultural idea rests is false.”
Rather than change mainstream culture or the system through traditional political activism, members of the counterculture have instead sought to rebel against it in a different way. By being distinct, there was the belief that they would not be controlled by the system, and that through their alternative lifestyle they would challenge mainstream society to wake up or look for opportunities to “unplug them” from their consumerist capitalism. This evolved into an attitude, that if you want to be authentic, you have to be unpopular or distinct. Referencing movies such as The Matrix, Fight Club and other French Philosophers, Heath & Potter attribute this philosophy to the work of Guy Debord back in the 1960’s. His thesis was simple. The world that we live in is not real. Consumer capitalism has taken every authentic human experience, transformed it into a commodity and then sold it back to us through advertising and mass media (p. 7)
In analyzing these perspectives about our world, I believe we come face to face with two biblical concepts that should be mentioned. The first one relates to the conflict that exists between our sinful, human nature and God’s desire to defeat the presence of sin in our lives and to see us wholly transformed into the likeness of Christ. However, God’s desire for us is constantly at odds with our own ability to rationalize and redefine sin to fit in with our own situations. Where is the conflict? God has given us the power of choice. We have the ability to measure our responses to any given opportunity or situation. As Heath & Potter point out, being countercultural leads people to discover their “own sources of pleasure, independent of the needs that are imposed upon us by the system.” Inevitably, this leads to individualism and selfishness. The second biblical concept revolves around the culture into which we are born and the tension that exists between the world’s values (“mainstream”) and biblical values (for which an argument could be made that these are “countercultural”). Historically, while many have sought to become isolated from the world, we simply cannot entirely avoid it. We are faced daily with choices to make about how we live in it, and how we allow it to influence the choices we are faced with. Although there is the risk that those who rebel against mainstream by adopting a countercultural stance may sometimes lead to hedonistic or individualistic decisions that can harm others, there is the reality that they have failed to recognize their ineffectiveness in challenging consumerism. Heath & Potter state clearly that those who sought to rebel or jam the system have merely created a new form of consumerism where in their quest for ongoing distinction, it has led to the creation of new market segments. Be that as it may, from my perspective, at least there exists skepticism about mainstream society and its unrelenting pursuit of consumerism. This group appears to acknowledge that there exists among people a blind allegiance to the belief that we are all just part of a system. Jesus was acutely aware of the implications of such an allegiance – What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man exchange for his soul?
(Matthew 16:26)
Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth…. For where your treasure is, there you heart will be also.
(Matthew 6:19-21)
These two biblical concepts highlight the tension that Heath & Potter draw out in the battle between those who seek to challenge the mainstream illusion by being countercultural, but in effect do not succeed against it, because they merely replicate consumerism and individualism, albeit grounded from a different philosophy. Unfortunately, I’m not sure that Heath & Potter really present any other solution to this, certainly not in the first half of the book. Are we all just prisoners of a system until we are ready to be set free? In the Matrix, Morpheus’ words to Neo, although somewhat fatalistic, hold an element of truth to Christians, that people are not always ready to be unplugged from something that they have become heavily dependent upon, including consumerism. – The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.
I think we all want to think that there is a little bit of rebel in us and that a true commitment to Christ should be somewhat countercultural. From this perspective, it was very challenging. I found myself asking which group would Jesus identify more with? Mainstream, counterculture, or neither? What do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment