Professor David Brin’s proposal on memes or ideas implemented throughout society, is broken down into four categories: paranoia, machismo, The East, and dogma of otherness, is a rather simplistic and obtuse. Though there may be characteristics in which a society may take on in relation to Brin's hypothesis, societies are much more diverse and complex than what he proposes.
In all of Brin's analysis, I would say that paranoia and machismo memes are the most apparent in the world. I do not believe on his analysis of The East is applicable and ironically places "otherness" to cultures in the East. Studying cultures in East, homogeneity may have significance in Asian countries but essentializing those cultures may have its fallacies, for since the advent of global capitalism, cultures and individuals become more autonomous and less homogeneous, living by the dog-eat-dog mentality that is encompasses in free market capitalism.
Also, I would have to disagree with his assertion that the dogma of otherness consists of tolerance and political correctness. It was through the ideas of the post-colonial discipline of Frantz Fanon and Edward Said that embodies the spirit of intolerance. With Brin's Eurocentric assertion, I think his essentialist analysis just reinforces the "crass-ness" of a Eurocentric naivete. It's with these false assumptions that reinforces cultural hegemony and the pacification of the Other.
Maybe I'm just recognizing another meme but I think his ideas are a little dated, especially in our current era or hyper capitalism and mass communication.
Of course, those worldviews are very much ideal types in the Weberian sense.
ReplyDeleteAlso, Brin's argument is more social theorist than sociological theorist.