Bradbury's Paradox: the Clash Between Authoritarianism and Democracy
An aura of socio-authoritarian principles, the characteristic the social struggle in Bradbury’s America, is what the perpetuating force of change is in the dilapidated democratic model of governance. Citizens are not cognitively engaged in participatory efforts to actively influence policy making; the democratic model that is nearest to the polity in Bradbury’s America is a single-party democracy that legitimately expresses the overall will of the people. Yet this one-party system falls under heavy criticism, seeing as it degrades the definition of “Democracy” itself by undermining varying expressions of dissimilar yet interconnected ideological groups and implemented as a system of governance by Soviet Union in the latter term of its’ existence. To say that a democracy requires some sense of equality between its’ citizens holds no place in Fahrenheit 451 and the world of the story’s sociality which reigns as a paramount force. With the aforementioned statement, in Marxian terms, capitalism has fostered financial inequalities that create stress within society, immediately creating inequality that is only furthered by society that mistrusts contradictive actions and beliefs. With no real civic virtues, with the exception of those fostered by technology, Bradbury’s America has the aura of a society devoid of the ability to emancipate itself from the chains of technology and to prevent technology’s degradation of society’s human character, that which is an individual’s ability to creatively, with a certain leisure, form a unique understanding of an abstract or concrete subject.
Bradbury takes a Hobbesian stance when regarding the absolutist power of the state by implying that the willing and voluntary transfer of power by the people to the government legitimizes absolutists rule, yet Bradbury unlike Hobbes maintains in his discourse a Monarchial state held up by divine right, yet the contradistinctive Democracy of Bradbury’s America sets Bradbury’s democratic model apart from any other model in the thread of history. It is dissimilar in that he forces the reader to distinguish what makes a decaying democracy legitimate and how the crumbling systems resembles and authoritarian model when absolute power is abused and the minority being suppressed which of course is one of the factors that degrades the nature of democracy.
In Bradbury’s model of the capitalism, he appeals to a Marxist critique of capitalism; specifically in his development of the thread of history which he indicates technology as a driving force. He places capitalism as a system that generates financial inequalities among citizens; this of course is a factor which creates a significant amount of tension in the novel. Bradbury also veils capitalism by placing technology as the cause of the degradation of real freedoms as well as human character. Bradbury’s ‘new’ capitalism is a unique model in that propelled by thread of history that he has forged, speculating the ‘path’ of capitalism. This negative force is only perpetuated by corporations which impose almost compulsory inclinations to consume products, only allowed by the government because of its’ contribution to the economy as well as enabling society to be easily governed.
It is necessary in a democratic system of government that the various ideological sets be almost simultaneously appeased in a conglomerate set of policies. Government is subjective to human values and in Bradbury’s America it stands that a techno-corporatist influence on society brought about by capitalism allows the government to create an authoritarian system backed by corporatism, which reigns paramount as an almost totalitarian force over society. Yet in Bradbury’s America, when society passes a crucial and revolutionary point in their social evolution, characteristics in the government that were once perceived as authoritarian and detrimental to society became part of the American techno-sociality. Technology becomes the successor of creation; a molded mindset becomes a valuable commodity to corporations that can be ‘sold’ to the government, allowing them to rule with an absolutist demeanor, all surmounting to technology undermining the human character, namely ability to actively reason within community.
A Politico-economic benefice exists between corporate entities and the government: technological progression, allowing for the degree of “governability” that Bradbury’s American polity posses. Enabling the government to excessively advertise goods and services of corporations to the point where it can be considered propaganda. Yet if it is to be considered ‘propaganda’, then political face in the world of the story will be forever focused on capitalism and corporatism, for if aggressive advertising is exercised on the part of the government and considered ‘propaganda’, then what is at the pinnacle of Bradbury’s government? It goes to say that capitalism has produced a negative effect on the political, economic, and social spectrum, intertwining them in a web created by American corporatism. This of course cannot be said without noting the degree of influence corporations’ posses in the world of the story. Needless to say this has all gone one only because of the authoritarian hand of the government has instilled in American sociality a negative connotation associated with books as well as a societal fear. This allow for absolute power to be achieved by exploiting the majority’s interests and suppressing minority rights.
A techno-authoritarian government with a corporatist impression veiled by the pseudo-democratic system with the new form of capitalism; or the speculated form of democracy which Bradbury sees to be unfolding in American society in his day. His fears that technology may trigger a societal regression of sorts which is perpetuated by an encroaching and highly influential set of corporate entities. Bradbury goes on after establishing this, that in the years to come, these corporate entities will develop their interests and integrate aggressive marketing techniques that, with the aforesaid status of their influence on public policy. Chiefly that of educational curriculum, can be juxtaposed with techno-authoritarian propaganda—yet this distinction wholly depends upon perspective in regard to whether there exists highly aggressive marketing techniques or propaganda. If one was to side with propaganda they must go forth and justify the benefit of consumption, and how consuming goods, levels with government aims. One can aptly respond by saying the tight-knit relationship between corporations and the government yields a mutual benefit that both parties receive. The government, with its’ citizens fully engaged in consuming corporations’ goods and services maintains "governability". There is no societal concentration that can oppose public policy, furthermore, with the integration of valuing product consumption in the education system, the government, following the engenderment of these values has insured itself a stable populace which can be easily governed as well as ensuring a prosperous economy.
The key aspect in assessing this text is to understand, within the world of the story, the societal perception of technology and its’ relation to the state. Technology, in the case of Fahrenheit 451, brings about a sense of fear, for books as the majority speculates can damage society, but as does everything else, enabling a stable society free of critical thought—thus the “governability” of Bradbury’s American society in Fahrenheit 451 is only achievable via their complex sociality. This sociality has its’ origins in the technocratic and corporatist Sphere on Influence which at the earliest stages of an individual belonging to Bradbury’s pseudo-democratic society would be instilled with a sense of values via technocratic socialization.. Individuals within this “Sphere of Influence” are allowed individual freedoms, granted to them by the Pseudo-democratic state. Only appearing as such to the public because of their perception and understanding of government models yet the primary Force is society. The sphere of influence is an abstract model which holds technology be to be an anti-emancipator, chaining individuals’ concentration level and focusing it upon goods and services mass produced by corporations. Yet this market system is seemingly controlled by corporations; the market being stimulated by a wildly consumptive populace that has almost compulsory requirements to consume—this is what gives the market economy the characteristics of a new model of capitalism.
Sociality in Bradbury’s America prohibits, via technocratic socialization, minorities to act out of the interests of those within the sphere of interest which runs parallel with public policy and the legal system. Bradbury has created a society which deteriorates in his paradoxical government model by forming a majority interest group which is ‘protected’ by an authoritarian government. Yet with society’s interests being ‘protected’, this fulfills the role of government though it is done in such a way that contributes to its’ authoritarian character. This brings into question Democracy: how does such a system of government at one point in the thread of history, in the world of the story, become corrupt and authoritarian yet later suddenly becomes ‘democratic’. All those who exhibit counter-cultural values, those of the minorities such as the band of intellectuals in the woods, are to be dealt with by the state—a characteristic of the authoritarian state yet the outcries of the majority being addressed by the government are characteristic to a democracy. The primary function of the state is to ensure social stability as well as relieving a crying society of a few splinters, bringing about an artificial stability. Furthermore there is a strong relationship between corporate entities and the crumbling democracy. With this being said, the public, within the technocratic sphere of influence via socialization methods hold interests, that when addressed by the government, which in some sense is quite weak acting as a vehicle for the public by burning books. This brings up a crucial question: on the validity of Democracy in the world of the story and of the reach of corporatism—is the government censoring thoughts is the techno-sociality that is instilled in just about every being in society in Bradbury’s America crying out to the government to relieve them of some tiny splinter in their midst, thus allowing them to return to their daily routine.
The human element—the decision-making processes is corrupted by technology. American corporatism holds an authoritarian grip over society, yet the American sociality in Bradbury’s world of the story sees the authoritarian hand of corporatism as protective force which holds up their sense of newly born “traditionalism”, fostered by technocratic socialization which is the imposition of values by a dominant institution. The preservation of societal values and the ability to ostracize splinters in the system and suppress them if necessary are what link this decayed democracy to authoritarianism, creating the paradox. The authoritarian extension of society is the government, for society’s values are born out of technocratic socialization, for which American Corporatism has brought about by creating a mutual benefice which has allowed corporations to influence public policy. In the world of the story there exists a societal state, only brought about by an enslaving technological force, which perpetuates the mass withdrawal in concentration creativity, and creates a artificial perception of reality. This technological complex—being societal inclinations to consume, place a deistic value on technology, and hold a perceived belief that they are endowed with individual freedoms and ability to participate in governance, this is an artificial sociality known as the sphere of influence which in essence undermines democracy. The sphere of influence, in perpetuating the aforementioned social values, essentially undermines democracy by allowing for non-abstract entity to artificially create a mentality that is congruent to corporatism’s interests and via the democratic principles that America had been founded upon, allowing for the body of the people to cry out to the government create an authoritarian-like set public policies that would preserve Corporations interests that would fuel the fire of this mutually beneficial relationship. Thus a powerful technocratic state had been founded, pinned up on the wall by American corporatism, kept alive by a new form of capitalism, which was all veiled by the widespread belief in pseudo-democratic state. A ‘Democracy’ only exists within the sphere of influence, for within this artificially molded thought set society can participate in governance ‘knowingly’ aware of policies that they affirm or deny.
“This collusion between corporations’ interests and government interests in the technocratic state only perpetuates the degradation of the human-element, the aforementioned being creativity and the acquisition and application of knowledge.” This summary being taken from the introduction of Luis Suarez-Villas’ Technocapitalism illustrates a paradoxical government model which accepts the majority’s transfer of power, yet once this power had been acquired the democracy soon became to crumble abused this authority to suppress minorities. A skeleton is all that remains of Democracy in the world of the story.
The state does exhibit the characteristics of a welfare state; to further this proposition, Bradbury indicates that the youth in the world of the story are educated at the youngest age, this education being compulsory. This is crucial in maintaining social stability and "governability". Education, in principle, is to engender to populace with a firm perception of the reality in which they dwell yet in the Sphere of Influence this education, funded by taxation, invests the state’s capital in the youth, particularly in setting up a value system which triumphs a withdrawal of the individuals concentration This is also significant in that it paints a picture of Bradbury’s American economy: a system founded on the principles of capitalism yet it is stimulated by technocratic socialization pinned up on the wall by American corporatism; socialization engendered within the populace an inclination to consume a corporate entities’ goods and services, yet this is only the tenor of the argument, while the vehicle is public policy. American Sociality in Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, social norms being heavily swayed by technology, only prohibit in a sense and individual’s freedom of speech if their diction is outside of the corporatist sphere of influence.
