Theory, myth, and ideology

POST-INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY

91

Post-Industrialism As An Ideology

If the "theory" of post-industrial society has so little to recommend

it logically or empirically, why is it so popular? The answer is obvious.

It functions—or has functioned—as a useful ideology for certain

social forces and interests. It is an ideology in that it supports and

justifies a certain way of looking at what is happening or what it is

hoped will happen, a way of looking at social change congenial to per-

sons and groups with particular interests and predelictions." This is

not to say that it is exceptional, as social theories go, in this respect.

Nor, it should be stressed, is this to say that Bell and his followers are

necessarily consciously seeking to mask reality for sinister purposes.

But neither persons nor groups can totally abstract themselves from

their backgrounds, interests, and life experiences, direct or vicarious.

What functions does the post-industrial ideology serve in contem-

porary intellectual politics? It is first and above all an attempt to

refute classical Marxism, not by denying its validity but by going

beyond it. Neither Bell nor most other post-industrial proponents

would consider themselves conservatives or "right-wingers," nor

would they and their ideas probably be welcome in traditional conser-

vative circles. Not for them Burke or De Maistre or Calhoun,

Goldwater or Charles Maurras or Russell Kirk. They are "liberals"

and/or, to varying degrees, "social democrats." Yet they accept the

existing Western capitalist order—especially as they see it evolv-

ing—as both desirable and inevitable. The early stages of in-

dustrialism may have led to oppression and misery, making class con-

74. On Bell as an establishment ideologist see Kleinberg, 

op. cit., 

esp. Pp. 22-23 and

Michael Marien, "Daniel Bell and the End of Normal Science," 

The Futurist 

VII

(1973): Pp. 262-268. Marien elsewhere speaks of 

Coming 

as "a venture in welfare-state

ideology." "The Two Varieties of Post-Industrial Society," 

Futures 

9 (1977) P. 426.

Touraine also sees Bell as " 'an ideologist,' or, as he is personally independent, 'a doc-

trinaire'." "Review Symposium: The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism," 

op. cit.,

P. 470. Giddens describes Bell as "advanced capitalism's most successful advertising

man," 

op. cit., 

P. 21, while Michael Miles argues "Official liberals have ready in the vi-

sion of a post-industrial society a theory of social and economic change by which they

can dismiss in advance any opposition to the corporate state." 

The Radical Probe: The

Logic of Student Rebellion 

(New York: Atheneum, 1971) P. 80. Even a sympathetic

critic holds that "Although Bell seeks to provide an objective analysis, his approach is

somewhat distorted by certain• implicit normative biases of an Establishment intellec-

tual." Jones, 

op. cit., 

P. 20.

---

92

THE POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEWER

flict a moral and' political option. But capitalism by unleashing the

powers of science and technology has, through economic growth,

made possible enough prosperity and through the rise of the (carefully

managed) social welfare state enough equality (of opportunity—the

only legitimate aspiration, as Bell especially insists)" to satisfy any

legitimate aspirations of the common man. Whether or not this

economic utopia has in fact been achieved in the United States or in

any of the other industrial democracies is beside the point; it is ob-

vious why those who are well-off in these societies would like to

believe that it has been and that industrialism 

along with its

discontents 

has been superceded by history. Post-industrial ideology

triumphs over Marxist ideology by rendering it simply 

vieux jeu.

The second ideological function of the ideology of post-

industrialism is the defense of the "new class" in American society

and its current status and aspirations.

76

 Deep down inside virtually

75. See "Coda," to the 

Coming, op. cit., 

Pp. 408-451

76. There is much confusion on this issue among post-industrial theorists because of

the fact that the "new class" is divided—to vastly oversimplify—between technocrats

and what are often styled "literary intellectuals," the latter group being allegedly large-

ly adherents of an "adversary culture" hostile to many elements of technocracy. As

Jones states, 

op. cit., 

"Bell presupposes that his projected meritocratic elite is likely to

succeed in its use of intellectual technology to cope with societal problems. With some

qualification, he glorifies the knowledge elite and manifests belief in the efficacy of

established institutions." Yet 

Cultural Contradictions 

is largely devoted to the theme

that the intelligentsia is a menace to the society Bell envisages, leading to a disjunction

between the cultural and societal realms. Bell's friend Kahn devotes much energy and

fervor to discussing the dangers posed by important elements of the new knowledge

elite, 

Things to Come, op. cit., 

Pp. 88-113. Similarly, S.M. Lipset writes "...Daniel

Bell...and others have identified the intensified strength of this leftward tendency, as a

reflection of structural changes in advanced or 'post-industrial' society, which have

created a massive intelligentsia, a highly educated oppositionist class." "The Paradox

of American Politics," 

The Public Interest 

No. 41 (Fall, 1975) 172. Apparently post-

industrialism, like capitalism, creates its own gravediggers. Arch-conservative political

theorist and tactician Kevin Philips accepts the concept of post-industrial society and

uses it to explain how post-industrialism has led to the domination of politics by a

knowledge elite hostile to traditional American values, one which must be politically

combatted. "The Post-Industrial Revolution has created a new knowledge elite heavily

liberal in politics." 

Mediacracy. American Parties and Politics in the Communications

Age 

(Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1975) P. 31. Philips virtually identifies the post-

industrial society with the "Communications" revolution. 

Ibid., 

P. v as of course Bell

himself does at times. 

Coming, op. cit., 

Pp. 214, 479. One observer sees resentment

against liberal post-industrial elites leading to fascism. Dale Vree, "A Fascism in Our

Future?" 

Worldview 

20 (November 1977): Pp. 14-23. For a balanced view of the "new

class" see James T. Barry, "Welcome to the New Class," 

Commonweal 

CVI (1979):

Pp. 73-77. See also B. Bruce-Briggs, (ed.), 

A New Class? 

(New Brunswick, N.J.: Trans-

action Books, 1978).

---