Oct. 8, 2024 - The Anatomy of Modern Submission: Living Within the Framework of Institutional Power.

Henry David Thoreau’s dictum that “the mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation” is a proactive diagnosis of our present condition. However, in the current era, this diagnosis requires a more critical and sophisticated lens that reveals the mechanisms through which desperation is systematically produced and sustained. For this, we must turn to a Foucauldian analysis of power and a Bourdieuian understanding of social habitus, recognising that the structures of domination have evolved into complex networks of control, both visible and invisible. It is not merely a question of personal resignation but of a pervasive subjugation by the very apparatuses that claim to promote freedom and self-fulfilment.

Today, the individual is entangled in a complex web of power relations that extend far beyond the traditional confines of state or corporate oversight. We are, in essence, economic subjects, disciplined by the imperatives of productivity, efficiency, and market valuation. It's easy to deceive ourselves, but we are constantly under surveillance, often under the guise of 'more is better '. Our bodies and minds are conditioned to conform to a standard that ultimately serves the interests of capital through education, professional development, and the subtle coercion of social norms. The expectation for teenagers in my classroom to seek permission to use the bathroom in a small, private school is a stark example of this. This is not power exerted through brute force but a more insidious and diffuse form of control—what Foucault termed biopower. It's a power that seeps into the very core of our being, shaping our identities, desires, and aspirations from within. Indeed, its influence leads to the disenfranchisement of individuals and the erosion of any genuine community.

Within this framework, the notion of freedom is hollowed out and reduced to the superficial choices of consumerism and career advancement, perpetuating our dependency on systems of economic subjugation. The corporatist agenda, cloaked in the rhetoric of meritocracy and innovation, demands that we continuously produce, improve, and outperform. Yet, for anyone who believes in the myth of meritocracy - check the background of the limited social and educational circles from which the leaders in your country come.n But who determines these standards? Who benefits from this ceaseless striving? Bourdieu would argue that the answer lies in the reproduction of social hierarchies—an intricate game of distinction where the elite consolidate their cultural and economic capital. At the same time, the majority are left scrambling for recognition and validation within the constraints of a field already rigged against them.

This is not the overt domination of past centuries but a subtler form of domination that appears as voluntary participation. We internalise these expectations, adopting them as our own, and in doing so, we contribute to the perpetuation of our oppression. The outcome is a self-policing society where conformity is achieved through the tacit agreement of its members. Indeed, most major religions (which differ from faiths) must be held to account for the subjugation of the minds, bodies and spirits of their members in the name of a God who may never have intended some of their so-called “rules” and indeed with a closer reading of their sacred text would appear to hold ideas which are the very antithesis of what these institutions called “doctrine”.Thus, we labour not only for survival but for approval, for a sense of self contingent on external recognition. This recognition is, ironically, dictated by those same structures of power that profit from our subjugation.

And then there is the other form of domination—one that emerges through what Bourdieu called symbolic violence, perhaps most evident in the production and dissemination of cultural norms around beauty, success, and status. Through the lens of social media, Hollywood, and mass media, we are presented with an array of images and narratives that set impossible achievement standards. These narratives serve to naturalise a particular kind of social reality that privileges aesthetics, celebrity, and wealth over the more fundamental aspirations of human existence: to know and understand ourselves, connect deeply with others, and find meaning in our experiences. Indeed, the normalisation of the California worldview, as somewhat embodied in the more recent ideals of extreme “wokism”, n points to not only a loss of critical discourse but outright efforts to constrain discourse around some ideas whose complexity are anything but a slogan on a tee-shirt of a re-tweeted tweet with a bespoke hashtag (if that is what they are still called??) on X or Instagram.

Here, power operates not through direct coercion but through the shaping of perception itself. We are taught to see the world and our place in it through the gaze of those who hold cultural power, and in doing so, we become complicit in our marginalisation. This is why social media is so effective as a disciplinary tool with its endless scroll of carefully curated images and constructed identities. It normalises a version of reality that is fundamentally exclusionary, privileging the few while rendering the aspirations of the many inherently insufficient. We are coaxed into believing that our value is contingent on external validation—being seen, followed, and liked. Again, there are multiple lies at play in recent times, many of which hide the fact that an upper, elite class often claim victimhood based upon the recent history of a far-off place which, by sleight of hand, they have claimed as their own, even though they never lived or existed in the historical place they reference. This sleight of hand is epidemic on national and international platforms - yet no one dares to call the emperor out! Yet, this visibility is a trap, for it entangles us in the constant need to conform to ever-shifting standards that serve no purpose other than maintaining the existing power dynamics. Churches were once lambasted for the guilt they imposed upon their followers - we now live in a world where people are called to be embarrassed by actions someone in their genetic soup may or may not have perpetuated during a selective time in history - such logic is emotionally and not found in a true discourse of reason or indeed fact. 

The question, then, is not merely one of resisting these forms of power, but of redefining the terms of resistance. To resist effectively, we must first acknowledge that the aspirations most deeply connected to the human condition—falling in love, the pursuit of impossible dreams, the acceptance of failure as a site of growth, and the simple act of helping others—are systematically devalued by a social order that privileges quantifiable achievement over qualitative experience. When pursued authentically, such aspirations disrupt the smooth functioning of power, for they cannot be easily co-opted or commodified. What if we realised that, for example, falling in love could be a liberation for so many regardless of the circumstances upon which it occurs - love can be a verb - but it demands great courage, for to love also means to exert respect, control and recognise the fundamental sacre4dness of the other - indeed such ideals are anathema to the vacuous, husks which the legal and corporate world sell and shape us with.

The state, the corporation, and even the religious institution each impose a distinct mode of control, a litany of laws and moral codes designed to align individual behaviour with their strategic imperatives. However, the biases and symbolic hierarchies within these structures are more pernicious. They create a stratified field where the song of the human spirit is maligned, its rhythm distorted to fit the melody of a sanctioned ideal: that of the productive worker, the obedient citizen, the morally compliant subject. In each case, what is at stake is the sovereignty of the individual, the ability to engage with life on one’s terms, free from the constraints of institutional demands that seek to subsume the personal under the political or economic.

To reclaim our humanity within this landscape of systemic power is not a matter of outright rebellion—an action that power structures anticipate and can readily absorb—but of subtle subversion - a revolution of the soul or spirit of what it means to be human. It is found in the refusal to accept the reduction of our lives to metrics of success dictated by others, in the quiet assertion of alternative values that do not fit neatly into the logic of market or state. It is in the decision to love despite the impossibilities, dream in the face of failure, and offer a hand to another not out of obligation but out of shared humanity. These acts resist categorisation and defy the quantifiable; in doing so, they assert a form of autonomy that power cannot entirely subsume.

Yet the final, most potent site of resistance is the internal shift in our disposition—what might be termed the embrace of a life of quiet inspiration. While external forces seek to confine, shape, and restrict us, we retain one inalienable power: choosing how we engage with the world and responding to its impositions. To live a life of quiet inspiration is to deliberately and consciously decide to reframe the conditions of existence imposed upon us. It is to reject the narrative of perpetual striving and embrace a mode of being that honours life's fragility, beauty, and imperfection. This life of quiet inspiration becomes an act of liberation—a form of resistance that is not spectacular or loud but steadfast and profound.

In choosing to live this way, we begin to dismantle the shackles that seek to bind our spirit. For it is in this choosing—this refusal to accept the narratives of desperation and inadequacy—that we reclaim our autonomy, and in doing so, we create a space for the true self to emerge. In the midst of quiet inspiration, it is here that the song of our spirit can finally be sung.

代社会における服従の構造：権力と社会的支配の枠組みの中で生きること
ヘンリー・デイヴィッド・ソローの「大多数の人々は静かな絶望の中で生きている」という言葉は、現代社会の状況を的確に捉えています。しかし、現代においては、この診断をより批判的で洗練された視点から見つめる必要があります。それは、絶望がどのように体系的に生み出され、維持されているかというメカニズムを明らかにすることです。そのためには、フーコーの権力分析とブルデューの社会的ハビトゥスの理解を取り入れ、支配の構造が目に見える形と見えない形の両方で、どのように進化してきたかを探る必要があります。個人の諦めの問題に留まらず、自己実現を約束するはずの仕組みが、いかにして広範囲にわたる従属を生み出しているかを理解することが重要です。
今日、個人は、国家や企業の監視を超えて拡大した権力関係の網の中に絡み取られています。私たちは、効率性と市場価値の命令によって規律された経済的主体です。私たちの身体と精神は、教育や職業訓練、そして社会規範の微妙な強制を通じて、資本の利益に奉仕する基準に適応するよう訓練されています。これは、フーコーが「生権力（biopower）」と呼んだ、個人の存在そのものに浸透し、私たちのアイデンティティや欲望、志向を内側から形成する権力の形態です。
この枠組みの中で、自由という概念は中身を失い、消費主義やキャリアの成功といった表層的な選択に還元され、それが私たちの経済的従属を維持する仕組みとなっています。ブルデューの見解によれば、社会的階層の再生産は、文化的および経済的資本を蓄積するエリート層に有利に働き、大多数の人々が、すでに不利に設定されたフィールドの中で認知や評価を求めて奔走する結果を生み出します。
これらの支配は、以前の世紀のように露骨な形では行われず、むしろ自発的な参加という形を取ります。私たちはこの期待を内面化し、それを自分自身のものとして採用することによって、自らの抑圧の再生産に加担しているのです。社会はこうして、個々の成員の暗黙の合意によって達成される自己規律化された存在となります。したがって、私たちは単に生き延びるためではなく、承認されるため、外部からの評価によって規定される自己感覚を求めて労働するのです。しかし、その外部からの評価は、皮肉にも、私たちを従属させるこれらの権力構造によって決定されるのです。
それでは、いかにしてこれらの権力に抵抗すべきでしょうか？私たちが最も深く人間性に結びついている願望、例えば恋に落ちること、不可能な夢を追いかけること、失敗を成長の機会として受け入れること、そして純粋に他者を助けることといった価値が、社会秩序によって系統的に軽視されていることを認識することから始めるべきです。
究極的には、自己解放への道は内面的な転換にあります。それは「静かなインスピレーションに満ちた人生」を選択することです。外的な圧力が私たちを制限し、形作り、拘束しようとする中で、私たちには一つの不変の力が残されています。それは、世界との関わり方やその中での生き方を自ら選択する力です。静かなインスピレーションに満ちた人生を生きることは、意識的に存在の条件を再構築し、絶望と不足感の物語を拒否し、現代社会が私たちに押し付ける枠組みを超越する行為です。これこそが、自己の解放を成し遂げ、真の自己が現れるための選択であり、静かなインスピレーションに満ちた人生こそが、権力の鎖を断ち切り、私たちの精神がその歌を自由に歌うことを許す唯一の道なのです。

---