Revolutionary Movements

How the Elite Reframed Enlightenment Ideals to Limit Class Mobility

The Enlightenment era brought forth ideals that have shaped modern democracy, capitalism, and our understanding of individual rights. Philosophers like John Locke and Adam Smith championed reason, personal liberty, and free markets—values that promoted not only the advancement of individual merit but also the breaking down of rigid class structures. These ideas paved the way for increased class mobility by emphasizing personal responsibility, limited government, and free trade. However, history reveals that many revolutionary movements, despite appearing to advocate for the common man, often reframed Enlightenment ideals in ways that served the interests of a new or existing elite. This article explores how these movements, from the Bolshevik Revolution to neoliberalism, were used to consolidate power in the hands of the few, limit individual autonomy, and restrict upward mobility.

The Enlightenment Era: A Challenge to Elite Control

The Enlightenment introduced revolutionary ideas that were a direct threat to the traditional power structures of monarchies, aristocracies, and religious institutions. Central to these ideas was the belief that the individual—not the state or a hereditary class—was the primary agent of society. By promoting individual rights, freedom of speech, private property, and free markets, Enlightenment thinkers laid the foundation for a society where merit, not birthright, determined social standing. These ideas empowered the growing middle class, creating opportunities for upward mobility.

This newly empowered class, driven by Enlightenment values, posed a threat to the established elite, whose power depended on maintaining a rigid social hierarchy. As a result, elites faced the challenge of either embracing these ideals or finding ways to reframe and subvert them in order to maintain control.

The Reframing Enlightenment Ideals

Looking at modern revolutionary movements collectively, a pattern emerges in which elites, whether old or newly established, have sought to reframe Enlightenment ideals to serve their own interests. While each movement used the rhetoric of equality, freedom, and anti-elitism, the outcome was often the consolidation of power in the hands of a few, with the suppression of individual autonomy and social mobility.

These movements promoted centralized control over political, social, and economic life, limiting the opportunities for the average person to rise through merit or innovation. Instead of promoting a meritocratic society, these revolutions ensured that power remained in the hands of a small ruling class, whose interests were protected by the state.

The Cloward and Piven Strategy: Problem-Reaction-Solution

One prominent example of how elites manufacture consent and public narratives is the Cloward and Piven strategy, originally designed to overwhelm the welfare system to create a crisis that necessitated radical change. The Cloward-Piven strategy demonstrates a clear problem-reaction-solution approach, wherein elites create or exacerbate societal problems, then offer solutions that centralize their power and control under the guise of addressing public needs.

By pushing a system to the brink, whether through welfare overload, economic instability, or political chaos, elites can provoke a public reaction that demands immediate intervention. This manufactured demand allows those in power to implement policies that, rather than solving the problem, consolidate power further, often reducing individual autonomy and class mobility.

This strategy has been mirrored throughout history and can be seen in how modern elites manage public crises. Whether by invoking fear or presenting their solutions as the only viable path forward, the manipulation of problems to prompt public reaction has been key to preserving elite control in various revolutionary movements.

Examples in the Modern Era

The Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 is often heralded as a victory for the working class, overthrowing the Russian aristocracy and the tsarist regime. However, under closer scrutiny, the revolution quickly gave rise to a new elite in the form of the Communist Party. The principles of Marxism and class struggle were invoked to justify the centralization of power, but in practice, the state limited individual freedom and crushed any semblance of class mobility.

Leaders like Lenin and Stalin promised to redistribute wealth and power to the proletariat, but what emerged was a highly centralized state apparatus that controlled every aspect of society. The Communist elite enjoyed privileges far removed from the working class they claimed to represent. Intellectuals and dissenters were persecuted, ensuring that only the Party’s view would dominate, and any potential upward mobility was curtailed under the iron fist of the state.

In China, Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution (1966–1976) was framed as a movement to rid the country of “bourgeois” influences and to promote the ideals of equality. However, like the Bolshevik Revolution, Mao’s campaign primarily served to consolidate power within the Communist Party by eliminating those who could challenge its dominance. Intellectuals, educators, and professionals were targeted as enemies of the state, effectively crushing the middle class and preventing the rise of any potential challengers.

The Cultural Revolution sought to “cleanse” society, but its true purpose was to suppress individual autonomy and intellectual freedom. By attacking those who were educated or aspired to social mobility, the Communist Party ensured that the masses remained subservient and dependent on the state for their livelihoods. This had the effect of not only stifling class mobility but also creating a culture of fear, where dissent was punished severely.

Fascist movements in Europe, particularly in Nazi Germany and Mussolini’s Italy, represent a dramatic reframing of Enlightenment ideals. Though fascism promised national unity and strength, it did so by centralizing power within authoritarian regimes and promoting rigid social hierarchies. While fascism superficially promoted “national greatness,” it betrayed the Enlightenment principles of individual freedom and the protection of personal liberties.

Under Hitler and Mussolini, the state became the dominant force in society, dictating economic, political, and even personal life. Dissent was not tolerated,

and those who might promote social mobility—such as intellectuals and political opponents—were systematically eliminated. The fascist regimes’ focus on state control and the glorification of a national elite effectively prevented any real empowerment of individuals, ensuring that power remained concentrated at the top of society.

Cultural Influence and Media Control

Literature, film, and art have played pivotal roles in shaping public perceptions, often reinforcing elite control through subtle manipulation. Mainstream media, dominated by corporate interests, frequently promotes narratives that align with the goals of powerful elites. This is particularly evident in the way films, television shows, and news media portray dissent or alternative viewpoints.

In modern times, corporate-sponsored films tend to glorify wealth, power, and consumerism, reinforcing the notion that individual success is tied to material accumulation and conformity to societal norms. Blockbuster movies often depict protagonists overcoming obstacles through personal ambition rather than collective action, subtly promoting classist, elitist ideals where systemic critique is absent. For instance, franchises like The Avengers and Iron Man, while entertaining, frequently frame their heroes as wealthy, powerful individuals using their resources to ‘save the world,’ thus normalizing the concentration of power in the hands of the elite.

The mainstream news media, particularly outlets owned by large corporations, plays a critical role in shaping public opinion by marginalizing dissent. For example, the coverage of the Occupy Wall Street movement in 2011 offers a clear case of how elite-controlled media can downplay or discredit grassroots movements that challenge corporate power. Initially, news outlets either ignored the protests or portrayed the activists as disorganized and unfocused, minimizing the movement’s critique of growing corporatist influences on politics and the monopolistic consolidation of our economy. This framing served to delegitimize the movement in the eyes of the broader public, making it easier for elites to suppress its impact.

This marginalization is further amplified by the rise of 24-hour news cycles and social media. These platforms have contributed to the promotion of sensationalism and easily quotable quips and one-liners over substantive debate. By focusing on clickbait headlines, emotional stories, and divisive commentary, corporate news networks and social media algorithms promote a culture of reaction rather than reflection. This discourages critical thought, as viewers are bombarded with constant stimuli designed to keep them engaged without encouraging deeper inquiry into systemic issues. In this environment, dissenting voices are often drowned out by the noise of the entertainment-driven news format.

At the same time, dystopian works of fiction serve as warnings about where our embracement of neoliberal ideals might take us. Novels like George Orwell’s 1984 and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World offer powerful critiques of centralized power and propaganda. These works resonate with ongoing concerns about surveillance, propaganda, and the erosion of individual autonomy. However, modern corporate media often lacks this critical edge. While 1984 and Brave New World caution against the very systems that concentrate power, their lessons are increasingly diluted by corporate interests that co-opt countercultural aesthetics to sell products or promote the very systems these stories critique.

Additionally, advertising within media often promotes a consumerist mindset, subtly playing on audiences’ insecurities, encouraging the belief that social problems can be solved through personal purchases or lifestyle choices rather than through deeper reflection or systemic change. This is particularly visible in the wellness and self-improvement industries, where solutions to stress or dissatisfaction are framed as individual responsibilities that can be addressed through fleeting consumerism rather than by addressing the broader inequalities and stresses of an increasingly unequal economic system.

Ultimately, mainstream media and cultural products reinforce elite narratives by limiting the space for genuine critique or rebellion. Alternative or independent media outlets, which challenge these narratives, often struggle to gain visibility due to corporate monopolies on distribution platforms. By controlling both content and the means of dissemination, elites ensure that their version of reality dominates public discourse, shaping perceptions in ways that maintain the status quo and discourage collective action.

Neoliberalism, Global Corporatism, Technology, and Our Future

Broad economic and social conditions, such as globalization and technological advancements, have significantly influenced elite control and class mobility. Globalization, while opening new markets and opportunities, has also allowed multinational corporations to amass unprecedented power. This power is often used to suppress competition and maintain dominance, exacerbating income inequality and limiting opportunities for social mobility.

Technological advancements, particularly in automation and artificial intelligence, have contributed to economic upheaval by displacing workers in traditional industries. This shift has further entrenched elite control as the owners of technology and capital reap the majority of economic gains, while the working and middle classes are left with fewer opportunities to advance. The impact of technology has created a new elite class, made up of technocrats and corporate executives, who now wield immense influence over global economic and social policies.

The rise of neoliberalism and global corporatism follows a similar pattern. Neoliberal policies, while promoting free markets and economic integration, often benefit large corporations and the wealthy, limiting opportunities for true class mobility. By reducing the role of the state in protecting individual rights and promoting market deregulation, neoliberalism allows corporate interests to dominate, creating economic conditions where the gap between the elite and the general population widens.

As in past revolutions, the media and political systems work to marginalize dissent and paint critics of neoliberal policies as either reactionary or irrational. This pattern of demonizing opposition to elite control mirrors the historical efforts to suppress Enlightenment ideals in previous eras. Instead of a society based on merit, individual freedom, and personal responsibility, we are left with systems that promote corporate dominance and limit the potential for meaningful social mobility.

Looking ahead, future technologies such as artificial intelligence, big data, and surveillance technology are poised to further entrench elite control. AI and automated systems, controlled by a few large corporations, have the potential to eliminate millions of jobs, particularly in sectors that have historically provided pathways for upward mobility. These technological advancements could exacerbate existing inequalities, as access to wealth and power becomes even more concentrated among the elite.

The use of surveillance technologies by both governments and corporations poses new threats to individual autonomy. The ability to monitor and control populations through digital platforms could enable elites to suppress dissent more effectively and manipulate public narratives in real-time. This combination of AI and surveillance may create a future where social mobility is stifled not just by economic barriers, but by constant monitoring and control of individual behavior.

On the flip side, emerging decentralized technologies such as blockchain and peer-to-peer networks may offer a way to resist elite control. These technologies, which promote transparency and distribute power across networks rather than concentrating it, could provide a counterbalance to the centralization of power by elites. However, whether these technologies will be co-opted or suppressed by those in power remains to be seen.

Reclaiming Enlightenment Ideals and Resisting Elite Control

To counteract the ongoing consolidation of power by elites, there are several concrete steps that can be taken to reclaim Enlightenment ideals and resist centralized control:

1. Decentralized Technologies: The emergence of decentralized technologies such as blockchain and peer-to-peer networks offers a promising way to resist elite control. By distributing power across networks, these technologies can reduce the ability of corporations and governments to monopolize information, resources, and influence. For example, decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms offer an alternative to traditional financial systems dominated by central banks and corporate interests, promoting economic freedom and autonomy.
2. Independent Media: Supporting and promoting independent media outlets is crucial to countering the influence of corporate-controlled mainstream media. Independent journalists, alternative news platforms, and decentralized content distribution systems like IPFS (InterPlanetary File System) can help create a more diverse and balanced media landscape, encouraging critical thinking and offering perspectives that challenge elite-driven narratives.
3. Education and Critical Thinking: Reforming education to emphasize critical thinking over rote learning is essential to empower individuals to question authority and resist manipulation. By fostering a culture of intellectual independence, schools and universities can promote the development of informed citizens who are better equipped to recognize and challenge elite control. Civic education focused on Enlightenment principles, such as personal liberty, individual rights, and meritocracy, could help nurture future generations to uphold these values.
4. Localism and Community Empowerment: Encouraging localism—where power and decision-making are decentralized to local communities—can help resist the centralization of power by elites. Building strong, self-reliant communities that focus on local production, decision-making, and resource management can reduce dependence on global corporations and national governments, thus enhancing individual autonomy and community resilience.
5. Promoting Transparency and Accountability: Demanding greater transparency from both governments and corporations is another key step in resisting elite control. Transparency initiatives, such as open data movements, can expose the workings of centralized power structures, helping citizens hold elites accountable for their actions. Increased public awareness of government and corporate activities can drive more informed public discourse and push for systemic changes.

TL:DR

Throughout history, revolutionary movements have often been used to reframe the ideals of the Enlightenment, limiting individual autonomy and reducing class mobility. From the Bolshevik Revolution to the rise of fascism, these movements promoted a vision of equality that ultimately centralized power in the hands of an elite few. In the modern era, neoliberalism continues this pattern by promoting systems that benefit large corporations and prevent true upward mobility.

Recognizing this historical pattern can help us better understand the present-day challenges of maintaining individual freedom and social mobility in a world dominated by elite interests. A return to classical liberal principles—grounded in Enlightenment ideals—offers a pathway to resist this centralization of power and promote a society where individuals can thrive based on their merit, rather than their place in a rigid social hierarchy. By incorporating the concrete steps we reviewed, we can create a cultural bulwark and begin making steps towards reclaiming the Enlightenment ideals we’ve lost, resisting centralized control, and halting the ongoing consolidation of power by elites.

Read More:

• “Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media” by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman: A deep dive into how the media serves elite interests by shaping public opinion in favor of neoliberal policies.
• “The Power Elite” by C. Wright Mills: An exploration of how corporate, military, and political elites dominate society and suppress social mobility.
• “The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism” by Naomi Klein: How neoliberal elites exploit crises to implement policies that benefit themselves at the expense of the working class.
• “Propaganda” by Edward Bernays: A classic on how propaganda is used by elites to shape public opinion and reframe history.
• “The Century of the Self” (Documentary by Adam Curtis): An exploration of how psychology and marketing have been used by elites to control social movements and public perception.
• “The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations” by Christopher Lasch: A critique of how consumer culture and media have been used to stifle collective action.
• “The Corporation” (Documentary): A critical look at how corporations have gained unprecedented power in shaping society, politics, and economic systems.
• “One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society” by Herbert Marcuse: A look at how modern industrial societies suppress dissent and maintain elite control by limiting critical thinking.
• “Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution” by David Harvey: A study of how neoliberalism co-opts social movements and limits urban resistance.
• “The New Spirit of Capitalism” by Luc Boltanski and Ève Chiapello: An analysis of how capitalism incorporates counter-cultural ideals to neutralize revolutionary potential.
• “The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters” by Frances Stonor Saunders: An exploration of how the CIA funded intellectuals and social movements during the Cold War to control cultural narratives.
• “How Propaganda Works” by Jason Stanley: An examination of how propaganda distorts history and prevents effective social movements by framing narratives to benefit the elite.
• “HyperNormalisation” (Documentary by Adam Curtis): A documentary that examines how elites simplify complex issues and manipulate media narratives to maintain control.