According to critical theory, people are dominated by a false consciousness created and perpetuated by capitalism in order to preserve the hegemony of those in power (Meyer-Emerick, 2004). Due to this cause, one can assume that it prevents people from freely pursuing their own interests. This dissent is only dismissed if people begin to see the contradictions between the social construction of the world and their lived experience.
Dialectic of Enlightenment
Here we get the concept of rationalisation described by Kellner (2000), as a force that increasingly dominated western and other societies, limiting creativity and the human spirit. While rationality and domination of nature to pursue human interests is usually considered the aim of enlightenment. With no doubt, one can also describe this process as what men want to learn from nature is how to use it in order to wholly dominte it and other men.
As a result, most critical theorists consider enlightenment reason to not be liberating, but to be a form of totalitarian thought – with reason serving the interests of domination by being part of existing society (Gayer, 2003).
Critical reception
Karl Marx has proved probably the most influential figure of the twentieth century. He developed his scholarly work from political commitment. It is no doubt easier to imagine a world without Marx than a world without revolution, capitalism, socialism, and communism. He may not have coined any of these terms, but he set his seal decisively on all of them, so much so that it remains impossible to discuss them without bringing him in (Carver, 1991:24).
On the other side, Held (2000), explain the epistemological basis of critical theory is metaphysical humanism. In a position saturated with the influence of Hegel, history is portrayed as an all-embracing process, in which an historical subject realizes itself. Society is reduced to a creator-subject. Truth becomes objective only in the metaphysical sense of being inherent in the essence of human reality.
FEMINISM
Similar to Marxism and critical theory, feminism argues that social position largely determines what a person may know; i.e., it is not the consciousness that determines the being, but the being the consciousness (Sanghera, 2004). As commonly known, feminist standpoint theories argue that women as an oppressed class can come to occupy a privileged epistemic position.
The argument as stated by Gutting (2003), is that gender is socially constructed system of values, identities, and activities and sex is biologically determined. Therefore, it is for this reason that feminist theory aims to challenge the prevailing gender assumptions of society and to achieve more liberating ways for women and men to exist in the world.
Some of their claims as stated by Seiler (2004), is that women have fuller and richer experiences (e.g. child-birth, family chores and community networking) than men. They continue stating that material life structures and sets limits on understanding – such as what we do shapes what we know. Judging from these claims, feminists claim that men lack everyday experiences, and do not nor can possess complete and undistorted knowledge. In contrast, women’s knowledge comes from a position of being the subject of domination, and their experiences has the potential to produce more complete and less distorted knowledge claims.
CRITICAL THEORY TODAY
The critical theorists analysed the integration of the working class into advanced capitalist societies and suggested the need for new agents of a social change. They seemed to provide more vivid descriptions of the present configurations of culture and society (Kellner, 2004).
According to my understanding, we look into the critical theory of the past to gain methodological insight and political inspiration to carry on the tasks of critical social theory in the present time. Critical theory is crucial for South Africa including the whole African continent, as we are undergoing vast transformations. Some of these transformations are promising to uplift our standard of living as the society, but others are threatening. Globalisation is one of the new transformations.
Revolutionary Marxists maintain that although change may arise as an unintended consequence of molecular acts of resistance, the importance of resistance is that it can generate collective agents capable of pursuing the conscious goal of social change (Hassard, 2001). This self-limiting resistance, orchestrated from above and aimed solely at affecting them as described by Hassard, is less likely to be successful in achieving even minor reforms than resistance that aims to effect a revolutionary transformation of society.
We have seen an interesting case here in South Africa opposed to what Marxists declared to be politically uninteresting which is labour process theory. Their argument is that it does not engage with the issues of political and trade union organization, which influence the consciousness and unity of workers (Hogan, 2001). COSATU (Congress of South African Trade Union) which is having close ties with the ANC (African National Congress) is making this labour process very interesting. Cosatu fights for the rights of workers while promoting the spirit of unity. They do this in a unified political activity.
Although the immediate interests of workers in production may diverge, their grievances and interests can be unified into a common political program, but that unification is a political achievement. This is more apparent on what happened recently with the case of Zimbabwe where Cosatu wanted to have talks with Zimbabwe’s congress of Trade Union. Cosatu believes that the unification of workers can have a huge impact on political changes as MDC (Movement for Democratic Change) is aiming at changing the political affairs of Zimbabwe ahead of Robert Mugabe’s Zanu-PF (the ruling party).
MICHEL FOUCALT (1926 – 1984)
His studies challenged the influence of German political philosopher Karl Marx and Austrian psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud. Foucault offered new concepts that challenged people's assumptions about prisons, the police, insurance, care of the mentally ill, gay rights, and welfare (Ron, 2000).
The main influences on Foucault's thought were German philosophers Frederick Nietzsche and Martin Heidegger. The connect.net website, describe Foucault's thought as explored the shifting patterns of power within a society and the ways in which power relates to the self. He investigated the changing rules governing the kind of claims that could be taken seriously as true or false at different times in history.
Power and Biopolitics
Government in a number of countries has changed in response to the dramatic increase in population. This prompted that government needed to control people without appearing to use force, so it (and its institutions) began working directly on human being to make them behave and want the things government provided, thus people became self-disciplining (Schmitz-Emans, 2000).
This process result in government gaining more knowledge about individuals and therefore had greater power over them (Meyer-Emerick, 2004). As people become more and more dependent on what government provides, they lose their ability to define their own interests. Critical theory will call this process will “one-dimensionality” of life.
Foucalt called the above process as biopolitics with looping effect on bureaucracy in achieving domination. Rather than being repressive, you need bio-power. This new power enhances life. Foucault encourages people to resist the welfare state by developing individual ethics in which one turns one's life into something that others can respect and admire (Ron, 2000). In the 21st century, South Africa can relate this bio-power to programmes such as Vukuzenzele (concept which encourage people to collectively do things on their own, and refraim from relying on grants).
Critical theory notes that bureaucrats benefit from their position in society, making it less likely for them to criticize their role in the process (Meyer-Emerick, 2004).
Foucalt’s work is often described as postmodernist. Most of his theories concerns power and the relation between power and knowledge. Power is seen as operating reciprocally, but not equally reciprocally (Gary, 2001). To control others, one must have control over things that they desire or need, but one can rarely exercise that control without a measure of reverse control – larger, small or equal – also existing. A practical example: TUT management may fire a lecturer as they have control over lectures. The lectures, however, hold some reciprocal power, as they may group together to form a union to fight for their rights.
People come to accept the particular views associated with belief system as common knowledge. Belief systems ideas crystallize as to what is right and what is wrong, what is normal and what is deviant (Wikipedia, 2001). This contributes in the way of seeing the world, but power itself lacks concrete form, occurring as a locus of struggle. Resistance, through defiance, defines power and hence becomes possible through power (Gary, 2001). Without resistance, power is absent.
JURGEN HABERMAS (1929- )
The new left
Habermas’s primary difficulty with society is that in modern society human beings lack freedom. He concern is that Marxism fails to consider the scope of this lack of freedom and leaving out the human element (Geyer, 2000).
Habermas work draws on a wide range of thought and presents a coherent view of communication and society (Seiler, 2004). Habermas’s task is to strengthen the ‘project of modernity’ by reconstructing it through his distinctive theory of communication. The theory of communication serves to disclose a profound continuity between human language and the values embedded in the project of modernity (Powell, 2001). Language is the vehicle for the most fundamental form of social action.
He believes that society must be understood as a mix of three major interests: 1. Work, 2. Interaction, and 3. Power.
Meaning the efforts to create necessary material resources due to its highly instrumental nature such as achieving tangible tasks.
Meaning the use of language and symbols for communication due to social cooperation as a necessity for survival.
Social order naturally leads to power distribution. Power leads to distorted communication, but by becoming aware of the ideologies that dominate in society, groups can themselves be empowered to transform society (Seiler, 2004).
For Habermas, this kind of work can empower powerless groups. Human life cannot be conducted from the perspective of only one interest: work, interaction, or power (Seiler, 2004). No single activity is entirely within any one of these but includes some combination of them. In a diverse environment like South Africa, it is important to apply all these three for a complete understanding of society.
Habermas almost completely eliminated the notions of revolution and class struggle from the theory. Instead of these, he introduces the concept of crisis. The crisis is that modern society is not meeting individual needs and that institutions in society are manipulating individuals. People interact to respond to this crisis and Habermas calls this interaction Communicative Action. As far a solution, Habermas’s approach offers the process of Communicative Action as the solution. He implies that implementing his theory, and analyzing it will address the ills created by modern society.
The Frankfurt School viewed mass media as an oppressive institution. Habermas points out that every conversation conducted by certain individuals forms the public body. It is this sphere that mediates between society and state – these conversation are crucial as they contribute towards forming the public. Newspapers are among the drivers who are bringing certain issues to be discussed by the public (Ayers, 1992).
What is stated above automatically include communication as the main driver in attaining whatever is intended. That is why we find Habermas’s definition of communication action described by Powell (2001), as a form of social interaction in which the plans of action of different actors are co-ordinated through an exchange of communicative acts, that is, through a use of language orientated towards reaching understanding. Action orientated to success is measured by rules of rational choice, while action orientated to understanding takes place through ‘communicative action.
DEMOCRACY
Critical theorists have emerged in connection with many social movements that identify varied dimension of domain of human beings in modern societies. Therefore, critical theory provides the descriptive and normative bases for social enquiry aimed at decreasing domination and increasing freedom in all their forms (Gutting, 2003).
Before showing impact of critical theory on democracy, it is important to highlight that critical theory can only be relevant to democracy only if it meets the following criteria: it must be explanatory, practical, and normative, all at the same time (Gutting, 2003). This clearly means that it must explain what is wrong with current social reality, identify the actors to change it, and provide both clear norms for criticism and achievable practical goals for social transformation. When looking the current democratic state in Zimbabwe, critical theory can play a vital role in identifying key indicators that could bring about change, with what needs to be done for social transformation.
Democracy in western countries is slightly moving towards capitalism. Then, critical theory on the other hand views human beings as the self-creating producers of their own history, a unique practical aim of social inquiry suggests itself to transform contemporary capitalism into a consensual form of social life. A capitalist society could be transformed only by becoming more democratic, to make it such that all conditions of social life that are controllable by human beings depend on real consensus in a rational society (Seiler, 2004).
Although South Africa may be seen as one of the most promising countries still developing in terms of being a real democratic state, but some of policies contradicts what is stated by Batho Pele which puts the people’s needs first. Structures like Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) which is painted as giving power to previously oppressed society is just a joke to many South Africans. In its true sense, this is another way of incenticising the fighters of the apartheid stalwarts who couldn’t get top positions within the state.
Yet on the other hand, South Africa is doing well democratically in transforming the society after more than twenty years of apartheid. The focus on democracy as the location for cooperative, practical and transformation activity continues today in many countries. Presently, the real test on democracy in the 21st century is for its survival in the globilised societies.
GLOBALISATION
Globalisation is a multifaceted phenomenon involving challenges at the global, national, and local levels. It involves a change at the level of the mode of social relations of production, which is privileged in any given state formation (Neufeld, 2001). Surely, these different modes of social relations of production can be identified with monopoly of capitalism. Neufeld (2001), clarifies that one mode is that of tripartism in which traditional bipartite relations between management and organized labour are supplemented by active state intervention generally consistent with conceptions and interests of the dominant employer class, but also supportive of concessions to labour as a means of retaining the acquiescence of established workers.
Globalisation’s shift to protective democracy
Democracy was seen as a process stretching back into society’s past- where today’s democracy was understood as the result of past improvements and forward into society’s future in which liberal democracy was viewed as a means of continuing improvements (Carver, 1991). This calls for modes of democracy to be distinguished by a country through domestic and foreign policy.
Since the general pattern of institutions and relationships is not called into question, particular problems can be considered in relations to the specialized areas of activity in which they may arise. Then, critical theory asks how order can come about? It does not take institutions and social power relations for granted but calls them into question by concerning itself with their origins and how and whether they might be in the process of changing (Berlant, 2004).
When looking at the differences that may arise, traditional/problem-solving theory serves particular national, sectional, or class interests, which are comfortable within the given order. While on the other hand, critical theory seeks to empower those who are not well served by existing arrangements by serving as a guide to strategic action for bringing about an alternative order (Neufeld, 2001). This poses questions on how democratic developing countries may deal with this matter, or they just have to follow the critical theory path?
What democratic states have to do in response to globalisation?
Traditional/problem solving theory looks at globalization as a progressive competitiveness in which efforts to strengthen the corporate sector and therewith, national competitiveness in the global market place are held out as the best hope to preserve and even restore social programmes (Berlant, 2004). According to my understanding, this means that – traditional/problem solving theory takes the world as it is and accepts globalisation as the appropriate framework for action.
What is interesting is the critical theory’s approach to globalization. In contrast with what is stated above – it questions that framework and seeks to clarify possibilities in terms of oppositional practice. Critical theory does this by employing what can be described as a dialectical approach (to be discussed later) to its subject matter. What distinguishes such an approach is an alternativeness to contradictions. These are relational contradictions meaning oppositions which are both necessary for, and yet destructive of, particular processes or entities (Neufeld, 2001). Basically, it is the exploration of resulting crises and ways in which these might resolve themselves.
THE MAKING OF CRITICAL THEORISTS AND FUTURE CHALLENGES
South Africa stands a good chance of producing vibrant future critical theorists whose standard can beat the Frankfurt School due to strong relation to their childhood experiences. Many critical theorists grew up with a visceral understanding of social, economic, and cultural tensions. Heilman (2003), describe this understanding as rooted in both immediate experiences of marginalization and also, for some, in a family culture in which social injustice was a topic of family discourse.
According to my understanding, a defining moment for any critical theorist is their personal understanding of the oppressive structures they formerly or presently live in, be they related to race, class, gender, religion, or any form of stereotypes or discrimination. So, what can really stop South Africa from producing critical theorists of high standard as they are in position to share the above-mentioned experience? Most critical theorists come from poor and working class families and find this experience significant.
Critical theory nurtured a critical approach to social analysis that would detect existing social problems and promote social transformation (Kellner, 2001). This approach can benefic countries like Rwanda and Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), to find ways to deal with problems brought by rebels groups and be able to transform the society.
This is the 21st century – meaning that many things have changed since the years of 1930s. It come as no surprise when you hear other people having less interest on critical theory as the cutting edge. Presently, we are looking at absolute new world of media, computers and new technologies of postmodern scene. This statement illustrates that there has been a change on the issues that needs to be dealt with compares to those of the past.
Postmodernism has rapidly gained currency throughout social and human science disciplines into the 21st century. To mention a few of these disciplines - we have seen how local power is preferred over the centralized power of the nation state, or the process of democratization of power. This is one of the reasons we have seen most African states abusing this veto. Who will forget the Nigerian situation before Olugasam Obasanjo? How Laurent Khabila came into power in the DRC?
Presently, we are seeing the rise and consolidation of consumer culture that tends to put ‘power’ in the hands of the consumers, but can also equally manipulate consumers through marketing ploys and interpolating discourses of consumer freedom by dictating costs in global marketplace (Powell, 2001). Another crucial moved points out by Powell, is how diversity and difference is emphasized and valued above commonality based on homogeneity.
Politically, we have the Zimbabwean situation. Robert Mugabe has been on the helm for more than twenty years. Behind his leadership many citizens are suffering – most farmers are chucked out from their farms; many people are suffering from poverty; and the financial state of the country is in tutus. But, what is most surprising is the fact that people still vote for him. This case also includes other countries which don’t look at the needs of the working class.
What is more painful when the state leadership is corrupt, the society down-there gets affected severely.
This clearly calls for new social theories and politics so the make sense of these confusing events in the 21st century. Kellner (2001), states the fact that critical theory of the Frankfurt School continues to provide theoretical and political resources to draw upon to create theories and politics adequate to the contemporary era, an era of upheaval, unpredictability, utopian possibilities, authoritarian horrors, the resurgence of the radical right, and as yet unforeseen crises and openings for social transformation.
We need to use resources from critical theory precisely in finding our footing so that we can survive as the 21st century is undergoing vast transformation.
COMMUNICATION
Communication in critical theory is centered around insuring finanial health and stability of a cooperation while increasing the representation of the employees and their human interests (Abbuhl, 1997). Critical theory looks at the difference between the information that we receive from our employers and communication between employees and employers. This shows a strategy and involvement that organisation use versus consent and participation that is more desired by the employees that work at every organisation.
When looking at what Habermas calls as discourse, Seiler (2004) describe it as democracy grounded in the intersubjective structure of communication exhibited in the special form of reflective and reciprocal communication and public testing of claims to validity. This gives sense that discourse emerges in problematic situations in which new solutions must be sought in order to continue social cooperation.
This calls for proper reflexive structure to be initiated by a democratic state which thus leads to citizens deliberate as free and equal persons, for whom the legitimacy of the decision is related to the achievement of a rational consensus (Kellner, 2001). The manifestation of communicative action (as discussed under Jurgen Habermas) materialises by mutual and co-operative achievement of understanding amongst collective participants. Rationality here is the key both to domination and to emancipation. For Habermas the rationalisation of the lifeworld social change is the path by which social change, including emancipatory possibility, is said to occur (Powell, 2001).
Ignorance about the complex conditons of modern societies leads to a general uncertainty and anxiety, while creating favorable conditions for the projection of paranoid fears onto imaginary enemies. The ontology adopted by critical theory share much in common with interpretivism; i.e., social reality is socially constructed.
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is a necessity to address the central, urgent, and disturbing questions of a society and culture in the most rigorous intellectual way we have available. This will led to the improvement of human existence. It must be noted that no aspect of life is interest-free. Therefore, an emancipated society is free from unnecessary domination of any one interest, and everybody has the same opportunity to take part in decision-making.
It is highly recommended that this study needs theorists who will place great emphasis on the means of communication in a society. As it is well described by Seiler (2004), that communication practices are an outcome of the tension between individual creativity in framing messages and the social constrains on that creativity. This is recommended with the facts that when individuals are free to express themselves with clarity and reasons will liberation occur.
Critical theorists need to create more new forms that will address the situational context of the 21st century. To maintain democracy while creating a state where there is peace and prosperity, hegemony can be recommended just to bind to society together without the use of force. Nature of this kind will call for the upper classes to supplement their economic power by creating intellectual and moral leadership.
CONCLUSION
It is important to conclude by stating that critical social sciences make a conscious attempt to fuse theory and action. Seiler (2004), states that Critical theories are thus normative; they serve to bring about change in the conditions that affect our lives. Marxism is at the centre of critical theory as it serves as the base for the Frankfurt School which gave birth to this critical theory.
Critical theory enables the development and refinement of our ability to engage as critical citizens, that is as empowered agents able effectively to question, challenge, and contribute toward the progressive transformation. The case of gender inequality is challenged by feminist theory. They are looking at more liberating ways for women and men to equally exist in the world.
The two theorists discuss by this paper include Michel Foucault and Jurgen Habermas. Foucault’s emphases are on power and biopolitics, whilst Habermaus is more on modern society and communication. Democracy is discussed as a channel to accelerate the rate of social transformation with Globalisation’s shift to protective democracy. Critical theory nurtured a critical approach to social analysis that would detect existing social problems and promote social transformation.
Communication in critical theory is centered around insuring financial health and stability of a cooperation while increasing the representation of the employees and their human interests.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABBUHL, S. 1997. Critical theory of communications approach to organizations [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 05/05/05.
AYERS, W. 1992. The shifting ground of curriculum thought and everyday practice [Online]. Available from: http://www.triangle.co.uk/pdf/validate.asp?j=tde& vol=8&issue=1&year=2004&article=6_Swartz_TDEV8. Accessed: 22/04/05.
BASGEN, B. 2005. Foundations of Marxism [Online]. Available from: http://www.marxists.org/subject/students. Accessed: 17/05/05.
BERLANT, L. 2004. Critical Inquiry, Affirmative Culture [Online]. Available from: http://www.uchicago.edu/research/ jnl-crit-inq/issues/v30/30n2.Berlant.html. Accessed: 02/05/05.
, J. 2005. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy [Online]. Available from: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-theory/ Accessed: 20/04/05.
CARVER, T. 1991. The Cambridge Companion to Marx. Cambridge Univ. Press, USA
CLARK, L.S. 2004. Critical theory and Constructivism [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 07/05/05.
CORINNA, L. 1996. How we get there [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 07/05/05.
GARY, G. 2001. Foucault’s Work [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 10/05/05.
GEYER, P. 2000. The critical theory of the subject in the 20th Century [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 22/04/05.
GRIFFIN, A. 1998. Critical approach to organisatons [Online]. Available from: Accessed: 10/05/05.
GUTTING, G. 2003. Michel Foucault [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 26/04/05.
HASSARD, J. 2001. Critical management studies [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 29/04/05.
HEILMAN, E. 2003. Critical Theory as a personal project [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 20/04/05.
HELD, D. 2000. Marxism and Critical Theory [Online]. Available from: http://. Accessed: 28/04/05.
HUNT, A. 2000. Foucaulthabermas [Online]. Available from: .
Jurgen Habermas. On Society and Politics [Online]. Available from: Accessed: 12/05/05.
KELLNER, D. 2000. The structural transformation of democracy [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 15/05/05.
KELLNER, D. 2001. Critical theory today [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 04/05/05.
KELLNER, D. 2001. Critical theory today: Revisiting the classics [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 07/05/05.
MEYER-EMERICK, N. 2004. Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory [Online]. Available from: http://. Accessed: 26/04/05.
NEUFELD, M. 2001. Theorising Globalisation: Towards a politics of resistance [Online]. Available from: www.tc.umn.edu/~unsa/ integrationofdevelopingcountriesintotheworldeconomy.pdf. Accessed: 22/04/05.
NOWLAN, B. 2000. What is critical theory and why study it [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 04/05/05.
PICCONE, P. 2001. The changing function of critical theory [Online]. Available from: http:// . Accessed: 03/05/05.
POWELL, J.L. & MOODY, H.R. 2003. Theory and Science [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 20/04/05.
RAST, H. 2000. Critical theory and alternative modernities [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 03/05/05.
RON, C. 2000. Michel Foucault. [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 15/04/05.
SCHMITZ-EMANS, M. 2000. The Critical Theory of the Subject: A Challenge to Literary Studies [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 10/05/05
SEILER, M. 2004. Human communication in the critical theory tradition [Online]. Available from: . Accessed: 05/05/05.
WIKIPEDIA. 2005. [Online]. Available from: Accessed: 15/04/05.
