<\/a>The 1950s was a time of mass conformity. Americans thought, acted, and looked the same.<\/p><\/div>It took another century, but post-WW2 social scientists became increasingly alarmed by a prevailing mass conformity<\/i>\u2013to mindless patriotism, the targeting of dissenters (blacklisted socialists), hypocritical sex-norms (shaming of unwed mothers but titillating movies), and mindless acceptance of the benevolent, paternalistic corporations which had brought Jello <\/i>and Life Magazine <\/i>into their lives.<\/i> William H. Whyte\u2019s The Organization Man<\/i> (1956) was about the suburban executive-class which willingly accepted a kind of Faustian bargain: follow the boss, accept the hierarchy, always <\/i>be cooperative\u2013and you will \u201csucceed,\u201d thereby giving your (white) family the split-level home and two-car garage indispensable to social status. (The price?: one\u2019s \u201csoul\u201d–but what did that matter!). Eminent sociologist David Riesman, deploring the decline of \u201cinner-directed\u201d individualists, wrote his scathingly influential The Lonely Crowd <\/i>(1950). Like his friend Riesman, radical psychoanalyst Erich Fromm deplored the decline of autonomous character in favor of what he termed \u201cthe marketing personality\u201d–i.e., the role-play or \u201cpresentation\u201d of an outward persona<\/i> finely-honed to win approval, acceptance and \u201clikability\u201d (cf. also: Erving Goffman, Donald Winnicott, Dwight MacDonald).<\/p>\n
But their critiques proved short-lived: after all, by the late Sixties, the consumerist cornucopia made possible myriad, alternate \u201clifestyles,\u201d most of which encouraged more hedonistic consumption, including sex (thanks to Kinsey, Hugh Hefner, and the birth control pill). In fact, while disillusioned, idealistic youth bitterly rejected the racist, materialistic, and pro-war conventions of their elders, others embraced a conformist, <\/i>hedonistic subculture <\/i>(i.e., low-grade rock music, semi-promiscuous sex, disdain for work, and foolish drug use\u2013the latter of which differed little from the alcohol over-use of their older generation). Rather than seeking intense enlightenment through the disciplined study of philosophy and literature, they often opted for the latest fad of LSD \u201ctrips\u201d (little realizing the irony that the hallucinogenic drug was first developed by the CIA to brainwash its former agents). Communitarian belonging<\/i>, no matter how small one\u2019s commune, included sharing<\/i> of assets, childcare, even sex\u2013and inevitably led to disagreements and eventual dissolution. To be fair, young people of the time had read humanist intellectual Paul Goodman\u2019s Growing Up Absurd<\/i> (1960), and on the whole showed a generosity of spirit which contributed to the civil-rights movement, and mobilized the campus-wide anti-war revolt.<\/p>\n
So here we are, some fifty-plus years later, with a constant media-blitz about celebrities <\/i>and billionaires<\/i>. Hardly envied role-models to those rebellious youth of yesteryear, they are now, for the most part, cultic <\/i>super-human figures worshiped by their awestruck, \u201cinsignificant\u201d acolytes. Yet even a \u201cnobody\u201d–especially an adolescent plagued by peer-pressure and parental demands\u2013would love <\/i>to be \u201cfamous for 15 minutes\u201d (Andy Warhol). To be liked and admired<\/i>\u2013very human longings, but not the end-goal of a maturing, authentic selfhood.<\/p>\n
Over a century ago, sociologist Charles Cooley introduced a highly influential but pernicious concept: the looking-glass self<\/i> (1902). This theory claimed that the \u201cself\u201d is shaped entirely by: how I think I appear<\/i> to others, what I imagine their judgment <\/i>of me is, and how I respond by \u201cpresenting a self\u201d which conforms to their expectations. Social psychologist G. H. Mead\u2013and more recently, a bevy of deluded anthropologists\u2013have promoted similar views. Although humanistic psychologists of the Sixties rejected this approach entirely, emphasizing self-awareness, meditation, and growth-oriented, often solitary, study, Cooley\u2019s conformist outlook, demeaning to the dignity of self-directed, singular persons, has prevailed. (By contrast, Abraham Maslow wrote: \u201cFar from needing other people, growth-motivated people may actually be hampered by them.\u201d