Social and Political Philosophy of Herbert Marcuse:

“One-Dimensional Man”

MSP – ESHT 3RD Years

QUILATON, WINSTON

MARTINEZ, ADRIAN

Dr. James Loreto Piscos, Ph.D.

Political and Social Philosophy Subject

Outline of the Report

Parts of the Report Person – In Charge

Abstract Adrian Martinez
World of the text Winston Quilaton
World Behind the text Adrian Martinez
Word Before the Text Adrian Martinez

Abstract

Herbert Marcuse (of the Frankfurt School) examines the situation of advanced industrial
society under capitalism in his 1964 book "One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of
Advanced Industrial Society." Marcuse defines the "one-dimensional man" as someone who is
subjugated to a new sort of authoritarianism in the guise of consumerist and technological
capitalism. Capitalism is "softly enslaving us," not via brutal tyranny, but rather by pleasant
persuasion. This strategy encourages compliance and is intended to prevent resistance. Thus, a
revolutionary philosopher articulated his expectations that human freedom and happiness may be
substantially enlarged beyond the controlled thought and conduct typical in established society.
His work quickly became an ideological handbook for the growing New Left (Great Refusal). On
the other hand, Marcuse’s call to war endangered the fundamental foundations of society,
according to those in positions of authority. For many others, though, it represented previously
inconceivable freedom.

Key words: Marcuse, One-Dimensional Man, Great Refusal, capitalism, media

I. WORLD BEHIND THE TEXT

Who is Herbert Marcuse?

Herbert Marcuse gained world renown during 1960s as a

philosopher, social theorist and political activist, celebrated in the
media as “father of the new Left.” University professor and author
of many books and articles, Marcuse won notoriety when he was
perceived as both an influence on and defender of the "New Left" in the United States and Europe.
His theory of "one-dimensional" society provided critical perspectives on contemporary capitalist
and state communist societies and his notion of "the great refusal" won him renown as a theorist
of revolutionary change and "liberation from the affluent society." Consequently, he became one
of the most influential intellectuals in the United States during the 1960s and into the 1970s.

Heidegger, Marxism, and Philosophy

Marcuse was born in 1898 in Berlin and after serving with the German army in World War
I, he went to Freiburg to pursue his studies. After receiving his Ph.D. in literature in 1922, and
following a short career as a bookseller in Berlin, he returned to Freiburg in 1928 to study
philosophy with Martin Heidegger, then one of the most influential thinkers in Germany.
Marcuse's first published article in 1928 attempted a synthesis of the philosophical perspectives of
phenomenology, existentialism, and Marxism, a synthesis which decades later would be carried
out again by various "existential" and "phenomenological" Marxists, such as Jean-Paul Sartre and
Maurice Merleau-Ponty, as well as American students and intellectuals in the New Left.

Marcuse continued to maintain throughout his life that Heidegger was the greatest teacher
and thinker that he had ever encountered. The Marcuse archives contain a full set of his lecture
notes from the late 1920s until he left Freiburg in 1933 that document the intensity of his interest
in Heidegger's philosophy and his devotion to his lectures. Yet Marcuse was highly dismayed
concerning Heidegger's political affiliations with national socialism and after completing a
"Habilitations Dissertation" on Hegel's Ontology and the Theory of Historicity, he decided to leave
Freiburg in 1933 to join the Institut fur Sozialforschung (Institute for Social Research) which was
located in Frankfurt, but which would soon open branch offices at Geneva and then at Columbia
University, both of which Marcuse would join. renaissance that was taking place in Europe by
stressing the importance of Hegel's ontology of life and history, as well as his idealist theory of
spirit and his dialectics.

Critical Theory of Society

As a member of the Institute for Social Research, Marcuse soon became deeply involved
in their interdisciplinary projects which included working out a model for critical social theory,
developing a theory of the new stage of state and monopoly capitalism, articulating the
relationships between philosophy, social theory, and cultural criticism, and providing a systematic
analysis and critique of German fascism. Marcuse deeply identified with the "Critical Theory" of
the Institute and throughout his life was close to Max Horkheimer, T.W. Adorno, and others in the
Institute's inner circle.

Next, Marcuse published a wide-ranging critique of both advanced capitalist and

communist societies in One-Dimensional Man (1964). This book theorized the decline of
revolutionary potential in capitalist societies and the development of new forms of social control.
Marcuse argued that "advanced industrial society" created false needs which integrated individuals
into the existing system of production and consumption. Mass media and culture, advertising,
industrial management, and contemporary modes of thought all reproduced the existing system
and attempt to eliminate negativity, critique, and opposition. The result was a "one-dimensional"
universe of thought and behavior in which the very aptitude and ability for critical thinking and
oppositional behavior was withering away.

Marcuse's Legacy
 Since his death in 1979, Herbert Marcuse's influence has been steadily waning. The extent
to which his work has been ignored in progressive circles is curious, as Marcuse was one of the
most influential radical theorists of the day during the 1960s and his work continued to be a topic
of interest and controversy during the 1970s. While the waning of the revolutionary movements
with which he was involved helps explain Marcuse's eclipse in popularity, the lack of new texts
and publications has also contributed. For while there have been a large number of new translations
of works by Benjamin, Adorno, and Habermas during the past decade, few new publications of
untranslated or uncollected material by Marcuse have appeared, although there has been a steady
stream of books on Marcuse.

In addition, while there has been great interest in the writings of Foucault, Derrida,
Baudrillard, Lyotard, and other French "postmodern," or "poststructuralist," theorists, Marcuse did
not fit into the fashionable debates concerning modern and postmodern thought. Unlike Adorno,
Marcuse did not anticipate the postmodern attacks on reason and his dialectics were not "negative."
Rather he subscribed to the project of reconstructing reason and of positing utopian alternatives to
the existing society a dialectical imagination that has fallen out of favor in an era that rejects
totalizing thought and grand visions of liberation and social reconstruction.
 II. WORLD OF THE TEXT

CONCEPTUAL/THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Social and Political Philosophy of Herbert Marcuse:

“One Dimensional Man”

THE TWO DIMENSIONS

Civilization Culture

Advanced Industrial
Society

Totalitarian Social Integration

Rise of Consumerism Administrative Social Functions

Thought

Dominion of 'Public
Repressive Tolerance Technological Rationality
Opinion'

PUBLIC OPINION
(mass media)

One-Dimensional Dialectical Thinking

Thinking (social control) Vs.

Affecting Private False Needs Real Needs

Sphere vs.

FALSE FREEDOM Real Freedom

Economic Freedom Political Freedom Intellectual Freedom Two-Dimensional

Welfare-Warfare State The Great Refusal

 Herbert Marcuse explains the state of society under capitalism in his 1964 book "One-
Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society." Marcuse defines
the "one-dimensional man" as someone who is subjugated to a new sort of totalitarian or
authoritarian rule in the guise of consumerist and technological capitalism. For Marcuse,
rationalism is a sort of domination or suppression that rejects the possibility of transformation,
self-consciousness, and freedom (Cultural Studies, 2018).

Human civilizations, according to Marcuse, are made up of two aspects that are always at
odds with one another: civilization and culture. This contradiction between civilization and
culture is being deliberately lessened in advanced industrial societies. The gap has been bridged
by a process of totalitarian social integration that has occurred via the coordination of social
functions, the rise of consumerism, and administrative thought. This process took place in a
variety of ways: Dominion of 'Public Opinion', Repressive Tolerance, Technological Rationality,
etc. All of these forms are aimed towards Dimensional Thinking (social control), a pessimistic
perspective of irrational human thought that differs from Dialectical Thinking. In the process, the
human understanding of identifying their own needs in the capitalist society are unnecessary,
which could lead them to acquiring false needs, rather than true needs. In line with this, false
needs can be generally viewed as ‘false freedom’ rather than ‘true freedom’. False freedom can
be classified in terms of economic, political, and intellectual freedom. However, there is still a
chance to discover true freedom. Marcuse felt that once technocracy was defeated, individuals
would be free to realize their real and authentic needs. As a result, Marcuse's influence extended
well beyond the limits of political activism, positively (The Great Refusal) and negatively (Pope
Paul Vi, Yuri Zhukov, and capitalist movements).

One-Dimensional Man's tone is undeniably negative. According to Marcuse, history

appeared to be progressing in the direction of the "omnipresent system that swallows up or repels
all alternatives," putting us in a condition of dominance and eternal ‘unfreedom’ (Trappen, 2016).
The Two Dimensions

“The two dimensions of thought — that of the essential and that of — the apparent truths — no
longer interfere with each other, and their concrete dialectical relation becomes an abstract
epistemological or ontological relation.” – (Marcuse, 1964:92)

Human civilizations, according to Marcuse, are made up of two aspects that are always at odds
with one another. Civilization and culture are the two aspects. In our universal understanding,
civilization and culture are sometimes used interchangeably. Marcuse invites us to think of them
as two separate ideas.

This contradiction between civilization and culture is being deliberately lessened in advanced
industrial societies. The tension is alleviated by a form of colonization of the culture's real
essence. For Marcuse, the distinction between these two dimensions (the gap) is critical to the
potential of social transformation.

Marcuse contends that the gap has been bridged by a process of totalitarian social integration
that has occurred via the coordination of social functions, the rise of consumerism, and
administrative thought. Marcuse depicts this process as taking place in a variety of ways:

1. Dominion of 'Public Opinion'

One is that consumer culture infects life worlds and public opinion (via mass media) enters
the private sphere: the system's worldview enters the home though the television, radio, and
consumed goods and services with specific messages; it enters communities through inevitable
news headlines beyond newsagents, the dominion of 'public opinion,' and state officials'
interventions.

Because of their technical capacities, advanced industrial societies diverge in their

absorption of the two dimensions into the one dimension (i.e., civilization/established order).
According to Marcuse:

“This liquidation of two-dimensional [reality] takes place not through the denial and rejection of
the ‘cultural values’, but through their wholesale incorporation into the established order,
through their reproduction and display on a massive scale.” – (Marcuse, 1964:57)
 2. Repressive Tolerance
“THIS essay examines the idea of tolerance in our advanced industrial society. The
conclusion reached is that the realization of the objective of tolerance would call for
intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance
to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed.” – (Marcuse, et.
al., 1969)

Marcuse's renowned and contentious article "Repressive Tolerance (1969)" is another

example of one-dimensional thinking. Marcuse demonstrates how phrases, ideas, or concepts
originating in liberation struggles may be co-opted and utilized to legitimize oppression. Tolerance
was historically viewed as a key value by marginalized socioeconomic groups. According to
Marcuse, the word is currently being utilized by the Establishment to justify its own repressive
viewpoints and actions. In simple terms, it is the submissive acceptance of societal and
governmental norms, laws, and policies that severely limit freedom. The concept of pure tolerance,
or tolerance for the sake of tolerance, ignores the real tangible social struggle that gave rise to the
term. Marcuse recommends "discriminating tolerance" rather than "pure tolerance" (Farr, 2019).

3. Technological Rationality

Quoting Marcuse's essay, "From Ontology to Technology (1960)”:

“Technics is the methodological negation of nature by human thought and action. In this
negation, natural conditions and relations become instrumentalities for the preservation,
enlargement, and refinement of human society (Marcuse 1960: 45).”

So ‘technics’ here refers to the instruments we employ to manipulate nature. Finally, in

One-Dimensional Man, Marcuse is concerned with the instrumentalization of not only nature
(using it to our advantage as humans), but also of man (for example, in the workplace, where
oppression/poor working conditions or living standards in general are accepted as an "inevitable
by-product" of technological progress). With technology enabling enormous mass communication,
"the growing one-dimensional society" threatens to wash away any traces of historically important
cultural value content.
 As a result, people behave like an automated machine with a restricted set of reaction
behaviors. All of these forms are aimed towards Dimensional Thinking (social control), a
pessimistic perspective of irrational human thought that differs from Dialectical Thinking. Thus,
he said,

“No wonder then that, in the most advanced areas of this civilization, the social controls have
been introjected to the point where even individual protest is affected at its roots. The intellectual
and emotional refusal “to go along” appears neurotic and impotent. This is the socio-
psychological aspect of the political event that marks the contemporary period: the passing of
the historical forces which, at the preceding stage of industrial society, seemed to represent the
possibility of new forms of existence.” - (Marcuse, 1964:13)

One-Dimensional vs. Dialectical Thinking

One-Dimensional SIMILARITIES Dialectical

No Historical Consciousness
Lives on civilization only
(status quo)
Happy Consciousness (false
consciousness)
Ends of Spectrum Historical Consciousness
Solve problems and issues Lives on both civilization and
culture
Consciousness Negative Consciousness
(self-consciousness)

Marcuse's framework, in which he establishes two poles that symbolize opposing ways of
thinking – one-dimensional and dialectical (two-dimensional) – has fallen into disuse in recent
years since it reduces conflict to a basic sociocultural context. His kinds, though, can still be
valuable if viewed as opposite ends of a spectrum. As social creatures, we do not participate in
either one-dimensional or dialectical thought as a pure ideal type, but rather shift from one to the
other depending on the social situation.
"When historical content enters into the dialectical concept and determines methodologically its
development and function, dialectical thought attains the concreteness which links the structure
of thought to that of reality. Logical truth becomes historical truth.” – (Marcuse, 1964:95-96)

Dialectical thinking has historical consciousness, whereas one-dimensional thinking does

not. According to Marcuse, historical consciousness “discovers the elements that created the
realities, which established the manner of existence.” The one-dimensional kind, on the other
hand, cannot see beyond the ‘given.’ The current state of civilization reflects the present economic,
political, and social natural order. Dialectical thinking has the negative consciousness of the status
quo while one-dimensional no longer questions the status quo but is happy with it.

“The Research of Total Administration Functional communication is only the outer layer of the
one-dimensional universe in which man is trained to target – to translate the negative into the
positive so that he can continue to function, reduced but fit and reasonably well.” – (Marcuse,
1964:72)

As a result, the one-dimensional type exists in the dimension of civilization rather than
both civilization and culture. One-dimensional thinking cannot go beyond the realities of the
existing status quo (i.e., civilization) (Trappen, 2016). Here, he noted that:

“However, the authoritarian ritualization of discourse is more striking where it affects the
dialectical language itself. The requirements of competitive industrialization, and the total
subjection of man to the productive apparatus appears in the authoritarian transformation of the
Marxist into the Stalinist and post- Stalinist language.” – (Marcuse, 1964:70)

As the two-dimensional way of thinking and activity is reduced to a one-dimensional way

of thinking and behavior, we notice that the one-dimensional type becomes more dominant. In
the meantime, the current human understanding as one-dimensional of identifying their own
needs in the capitalist society are unnecessary, which could lead them to acquiring false needs,
rather than true needs.
True Needs vs. False Needs

“We may distinguish both true and false needs. ‘False’ are those which are superimposed upon
the individual by particular social interests in his repression: the needs which perpetuate toil,
aggressiveness, misery, and injustice. Their satisfaction might be most gratifying to the
individual, but this happiness is not a condition which has to be maintained and protected if it
serves to arrest the development of the ability (his own and others) to recognize the disease of
the whole and grasp the chances of curing the disease. The result then is euphoria in
unhappiness. Most of the prevailing needs to relax, to have fun, to behave and consume in
accordance with the advertisements, to love and hate what others love and hate, belong to this
category of false needs.” – (Marcuse, 1964:10)

FALSE NEEDS (UNNECESSARY) REAL NEEDS (BASIC NEEDS)

Relaxation and comfort food
fun shelter
consumption of advertisements clothing
euphoric nourishment

Marcuse discusses a crucial part of his work - the distinction between real and false needs,
as well as the repercussions of this distinction. He observes that needs are always historically
formed, as well as socially formed and restricted (critical standards). That is, while real needs as
basic needs or biological parts of demands exist (food, housing, clothes, and nutrition), the way
these are supplied is historically and socially determined. Marcuse contends that while a person
may feel euphoric, have fun, relax, and be comfortable, there are "false needs" as long as these
demands are related with advertising, consumer culture, and structured by the new totalitarian
society (capitalism) (Turner, 2000). Hence, he said:

“The only needs that have an unqualified claim for satisfaction are the vital ones - nourishment,
clothing, lodging at the attainable level of culture. The satisfaction of these needs is the
prerequisite for the realization of all needs, of the unsublimated as well as the sublimated ones.”
– (Marcuse, 1964:11)

In line with this, false needs can be generally viewed as ‘false freedom’:
Types of Freedom:

There are different types of freedom, however, our freedom is still under control in the
advanced industrial society.

“Thus, economic freedom would mean freedom from the economy - from being controlled by
economic forces and relationships; freedom from the daily struggle for existence, from earning a
living. Political freedom would mean liberation of the individuals from politics over which they
have no effective control. Similarly, intellectual freedom would mean the restoration of
individual thought now absorbed by mass communication and indoctrination, abolition of
‘public opinion’ together with its makers.” – (Marcuse, 1964:10)

• Economic Freedom: Marcuse notes that with the advent of automated machines, economic
freedom today implies freedom from the economy and freedom from the everyday battle
to earn a livelihood for the individual.
• Political Freedom: Marcuse says that political freedom is "...liberation of persons from
politics over which they have no effective control" (Marcuse, 1964).
• Intellectual Freedom: This form of liberty would include rehabilitating individual thought,
which Marcuse says has been tainted by public opinion. (Stern, 2014).

How to Achieve Real Freedom from Social Control

Marcuse was less devoted to the status quo and often more prepared to consider the fall of
the liberal state as a benefit - a means of discovering and exploring the instinctive life of freedom.
People's power would allow them to break free from the infamous "mind-forged shackles".
Marcuse felt that once technocracy was defeated, individuals would be free to realize their real
and authentic needs (Trappen, 2016).

To overcome domination, he proposes the idea of "negative thinking" (two-

dimensionality); nonetheless, the term negative does not indicate "bad," but rather negation in a
dialectical sense. (Lee, 2020).
Impacts of Marcuse’s Philosophy: The Great Refusal

At the height of the long 1960s, Herbert Marcuse surveyed the revolting societies. In An
Essay on Liberation (1969), he wrote:

“The Great Refusal takes a variety of forms. In Vietnam, in Cuba, in China a revolution is being
defended and driven forward which struggles to eschew the bureaucratic administration of
socialism. The guerilla forces in Latin America seem to be animated by the same subversive
impulse: Liberation. . . The ghetto populations may well be the first basis of revolt (though not of
revolution). The student opposition is spreading in the old socialist as well as capitalist
countries... It would be irresponsible to overrate the present chances of these forces . . . but the
facts are there, facts which are not only the symbols but also the embodiments of hope. They
confront the critical theory of society with the task of reexamining the prospects for the
emergence of a socialist society qualitatively different from existing society.”

– (Marcuse, 1969: vii–ix)

Marcuse became renowned as a ‘guru’ of the New Left for his investigations into the
alienation and exploitation of the human condition in modern industrial society, as well as the
circumstances and techniques required to create a new world. In many respects, his study provided
a counterweight to the eruption of demonstrations and struggle fronts that developed in the 1960s.
As a result, Marcuse influenced (and was affected by) a new generation of organizers and activists
engaged in a wide range of radical political endeavors (Funke, et. al., 2017).

Marcuse's influence extended well beyond the limits of political activism. In 1969, Pope
Paul VI specifically criticized Marcuse, accusing him, along with Sigmund Freud, of encouraging
"disgusting and unrestrained" displays of sexuality and the "animal, barbarian, and subhuman
degradations" known as the sexual revolution. Marcuse instilled animosity that was ideologically
universal. Soviet writer Yuri Zhukov called him a "false prophet" in Pravda, and South Africa's
apartheid administration prohibited the importation of any of his works (Whitfield, 2014).
 Conclusion

In general, through Marcuse’s theory on “One-Dimensional Man”, we can now identify

his social and political philosophy:

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY: The Welfare State & The Warfare State

“However, with all its rationality, the Welfare State is a state of unfreedom because its total
administration is systematic restriction of (a) "technically” available free time; (b) the quantity
and quality of goods and services "technically” available for vital individual needs; (c) the
intelligence (conscious and unconscious) capable of comprehending and realizing the
possibilities of self-determination.” – (Marcuse, 1964:35)

According to Marcuse, the Welfare-Warfare state is the type of political integration that
occurs in advanced industrial societies. He claims that the Welfare-Warfare state produces a
controlled existence for the individual, making it futile for them to insist on self-determination.
We assumed that totalitarian oppression, which controls our freedom, no longer existed;
unfortunately, capitalism now controls our freedom. As he said, “Democracy would appear to be
the most efficient system of domination (1964:37),” current democracy is still based on Capitalism.
Marcuse believes that western democracies are not truly democratic because individuals are
silently discouraged from thinking critically and persuaded to make choices that, in any case,
remain within the systemic norm. Because it is the result of silent manipulation, and because it is
based on a social order that is essentially authoritarian, it does not support any claims to systemic
legitimacy (Robinson, 2010). Capitalism's impact on freedom (as well as revolution) has rendered
it irrelevant. Keep in mind that Marcuse is now calling into question the Marxist notion that a
historical or capitalist crisis is unavoidable. Hence, it is clear in his statement that:

“One-dimensional thought is systematically promoted by the makers of politics and their

purveyors of mass information. Their universe of discourse is populated by self-validating
hypotheses which, incessantly and monopolistically repeated, become hypnotic definitions of
dictations.” – (Marcuse, 1964:15)
SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY: On the Concept of Self-determination and Consciousness

Unfortunately, he indicates that many individuals can no longer think for themselves. This
is due to the fact that man in mass society has no inner identity but preoccupied. He believes he is
happy or he could have just turned uncertain. In any case, this sort of individual is the result of
what Marx referred to as false consciousness. Individuals that suffer from false consciousness find
it difficult to create a revolutionary consciousness as a result. Slaves are no longer confined by
tangible shackles but the mind creates its own. People discover methods to be content with their
position in life (Trappen, 2016). Freedom does not exist in today's sophisticated civilization, which
is heavily impacted by technology and the media. Thus, he stated:

“In any case, the combination of centralized authority and direct democracy is subject to infinite
variations, according to the degree of development. Self-determination” will be real to the extent
to which the masses have been dissolved into individuals liberated from all propaganda,
indoctrination, and manipulation, capable of knowing and comprehending the facts and of
evaluating the alternatives. In other words, society would be rational and free to the extent to
which it is organized, sustained, and reproduced by an essentially new historical Subject.” –
(Marcuse, 1964:163-164)

Thus, in terms of social and political notion, he said notably, “In the medium of
technology, culture, politics, and the economy merge into an omnipresent system which swallows
up or repulses all alternatives. The productivity and growth potential of this system stabilize the
society and contain technical progress within the framework of domination. Technological
rationality has become political rationality.” - (Marcuse, 1964:6)
Exegesis

The main point of Marcuse's notion of One-Dimensional Man is that the current reality of
domination (contemporary manner of authoritarian social control through capitalism), which is
embedded in people' instinctive nature, is more difficult to eliminate than prior economic
exploitation. Domination conceals exploitation under the guise of false harmony and material
wealth, but it does not eradicate it.

“The capabilities (intellectual and material) of contemporary society are immeasurably greater
than ever before - which means that the scope of society's domination over the individual is
immeasurably greater than ever before. Our society distinguishes itself by conquering the
centrifugal social forces with Technology rather than Terror, on the dual basis of an
overwhelming efficiency and an increasing standard of living.” – (Marcuse, 1964:2)

It is vital to consider that the Frankfurt scholars were not claiming that capitalism had
settled its internal problems and overcome alienation, but rather in its more "mature" stage, it
secured itself internally by transmitting alienation further into the deeper parts of character and
intuition. In order to maintain social control in a progressively technologically advanced system
and to assure perpetual consuming, which is founded in the separating of work-time and leisure-
time, intuition and experience must be mobilized. Previously, bourgeois mentality created what
Marx referred to as "false consciousness."

“The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man.
Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won
through to himself, or has already lost himself again.” - (Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of
Right, 1844)

This ideology pervades the very center of human personality in late capitalism and cannot
be directly eradicated by logical analysis. Whereas Lukacs believed he could cut through the
obscurity of an internalizing false consciousness by simply conveying the proletariat's world-
historical duty to it.

“The highest degree of consciousness, the crassest form of 'false consciousness' always
manifests itself when the conscious mastery of economic phenomena appears to be at its
greatest.” – (History and Class Consciousness, 1968:64)
 Individual workers of the world are now entangled in a continuous web of control. Their
compliance is no longer an issue, and the dreams of a socialist future are met with skepticism. This
deepening of alienation connections was mainly unanticipated by Marx and the early Marxists.
However, it does not, in and of itself, demolish Marxian conceptions. Marcuse and his Frankfurt
comrades did not deny Marx's goal of labor liberation or the structural theory of capitalism internal
conflicts. They were hesitant to accept the text of Marx's understanding of capital crises as
presented in Capital.

“The ultimate reason for all real crises always remains the poverty and restricted consumption
of the masses as opposed to the drive of capitalist production to develop the productive forces as
though only the absolute consuming power of society constituted their limit.” – (Capital, Volume
III Part V, 1894: 484)

Rather, they saw history as a developing process that was vulnerable to multiple substantial
changes. Hence, depending on the phase of development of the social structure in consideration,
the system's fundamental structural tensions appear in a range of socio-cultural patterns. The crises
might differ between cultures and historical times. For example, it may be claimed that the
machinations of Keynesian technocrats have now manipulated the possibility of another stock
market disaster. According to James M. Buchanan's Keynesian Follies Book:

“As I have emphasized, Keynes sought to change the basic perception of the economic process;
he sought to bring employment, as such, onto center stage as a variable subject to direct
manipulation. He sought to overthrow the classical model of market equilibrium in which
employment is determined only as an emergent result or consequence of the interaction among
the demand and supply choices made by market participants.” – (Buchanan, 1999)

This is not to say that late capitalism has been without crises. Marcuse's theoretical work
since Eros and Civilization has been to represent the new set of forces in advanced capitalism, the
changes of social structure, expanding on but also going beyond Marx's categories. As a result, the
idea of dominance just expanded Marx's previous notion of alienation.

“Men do not live their own lives but perform pre-established functions. While they work, they do
not fulfill their own needs and faculties but work in alienation.” – (Marcuse, 1974: 45)
 This rise of dominance, or more fully internalized alienation, was a result of ever-tightening
ties between political economy and culture, which Marcuse referred to as the "first" and "second"
dimensions in One Dimensional Man. The changes of capitalist social structure were such that the
relationship between base and superstructure was tightened, both for social control and increased
profitability. Marx did not anticipate the extent to which the second component of culture and
personality might be incorporated into the necessities of political economy; for him, logical
critique and awareness-raising could remove the working class's false consciousness. Admittedly,
excessive unemployment, which was the dominant manifestation of crisis under an earlier
capitalism that was not shielded by a Keynesian state, would immediately inspire deep working-
class hatred. However, Marx did not anticipate the checks and balances that a Keynesian state
could put in place to preserve the system from inside. As a result, he failed to grasp the depths to
which false awareness would reach in order to achieve what Frankfurt philosophers referred to as
domination.

“They are never rationally reconciled to civilization. Instead, they bow to it, secretly accepting
the identity of reason and domination, of civilization and the ideal, however much they may
shrug their shoulders. Well-informed cynicism is only another mode of conformity. These people
willingly embrace or force themselves to accept the rule of the stronger as the eternal norm.” ―
(Max Horkheimer, Eclipse of Reason 1947: 77)

Marcuse's main topic, explaining why the working class had not rebelled and indicating
future liberatory potentials, required him to more completely develop the theory of dominance on
the basis of a development of his own idea of false needs. Above all, Marcuse attempts to explain
in One-Dimensional Man how positivism, a philosophical philosophy of scientific enquiry,
became a dominant type of ideology and reinforced dominance by compressing the first and
second dimensions. In this approach, he employs categories derived from his studies of German
idealism and psychoanalysis to describe how these two aspects might truly merge. The result of
this investigation is a one-dimensional hypothesis. Thus, Marcuse goes beyond pure philosophical
categories and claims, based on his work on idealism and instincts, that one-dimensionality is a
prevalent aspect of modern capitalism, used to hold human desires and consciousness in control.

The collapse of bourgeois' interior life, as charted philosophically and psychologically in

his earlier work, results in what Marcuse regards as "false" context of human needing in advanced
capitalism; indeed, domination is "corporealized" in this translation of deeply institutionalized
false consciousness (via what Freud refers to as surplus repression in his book) into false needs.
And this transition from false consciousness to false needs is consistent with Marcuse's late-1950s
attempt to explain new socio-historical processes; he breaks out of the philosophical loop exactly
where he feels philosophical concepts have become political ones.

Furthermore, Horkheimer and Adorno's 1944 publication of "Dialectic of Enlightenment,"

widely regarded as the Frankfurt School's classic book, might be interpreted as a more
sophisticated version of Marcuse's later One-Dimensional Man. Marcuse acknowledged
Horkheimer and Adorno's work in Eros and Civilization, and it is evident that he based
significantly on it for his own ideas. Horkheimer and Adorno's major point was that when
positivism is expanded from a conceptual principle of rational inquiry into a lived principle of
culture and ideology, it becomes a formidable force of dominance.

“Perhaps no other writing shows Freud closer to the great tradition of Enlightenment; but also,
no other shows him more clearly succumbing to the dialectic of Enlightenment. In the present
period of civilization, the progressive ideas of rationalism can be recaptured only when they are
reformulated. The function of science and of religion has changed- as has their interrelation.
Within the total mobilization of man and nature which marks the period, science is one of the
most destructive instruments - destructive of that freedom from fear which it once promised.” –
(Eros and Civilization, 1955:72)

Such technological rationality works to establish "economic-technical coordination" of

human needs, weaving a seamless web of dominance in which humans, once trapped, are unable
to think sensibly or critically about their needs.

Furthermore, Marcuse saw Weber as one of the most brilliant positivist sociologists, an
early defender of capitalist rationality but also an impending critic of it. Thus, Marcuse's critique
of the one-dimensional is a criticism of Weber. What they have in common is a sorrow for the
demise of transcendent culture's second dimension but they differ about the role of this second
dimension. Cultural values, according to Weber, were to leaven the pure purposefulness of
instrumental rationality; they were to be superimposed on the grim realities of material
reproduction in such a way that industrialists may indulge in philosophy and go to the opera.
 “The intellect, like all cultural values, has created an aristocracy based on the possession of
rational culture and independent of all personal ethical qualities of man. The aristocracy of
intellect is hence an unbrotherly aristocracy.” – (Essays in Sociology, 1946)

But, according to Marcuse, this is doomed to fail since the second dimension, and the
important bourgeois inferiority it preserves, will fall to the gravitational pull of political
economy. Weber fails to maintain culture as a world apart by dividing material reproduction and
a "higher" realm of cultural values. This gravitational attraction can only be resisted by refusing
to trade in a "pure" technology apparently free of values. So, Marcuse contends, what appears to
be a value-free rationality of purpose, pragmatism, method, and efficiency nonetheless
incorporates the substantive ideology of profit maximization; indeed, it is the objectivity of
enlightenment in this sense that allows it to become an ideology implicitly. There is no such
thing as fully rational thought.

While Marcuse's theory as a whole remains inadequately coherent and socio-historical in

this regard, it is worth noting that he imagined a dialectic of individual and class and did not limit
transformational action to "change of awareness" or merely personal choice. Marcuse simply
realizes that unless people actively desire the revolution, it will fail.

This sketch of the dialect of individual and class, based on the Great Refusal, is Marcuse's
critical theory's strength and weakness. It is a strength in that it attempts an individualistic
definition of reason to restore subjective autonomy in the face of total governance. Marcuse
provides a means to solving philosophical dualism and hastening the restoration of the striving
person as the core resource of a non-authoritarian Marxism through his profound integration of
German idealism and psychoanalytic theory. However, Marcuse's analysis is limited to the
dominated person, and he does not seek important mediations that might link the Great Refusal to
a transindividual social practice. Marcuse misses the mark by being too individualistic and hence
too abstractly negative in his rejection to the standard Marxist notion of automatic class conflict
occurring above the consciousness of men and women.
 III. WORLD BEFORE THE TEXT

Eisegesis

A. Politics and Capitalism in the Philippines

Marcuse's insight is revolutionary in that it provides us with a new perspective on numerous

difficulties in our society. Even if the times have changed, we can still state that we live in an
advanced industrial society where capitalism rules the global system. The inhabitants of the
advanced industrial society are prone to, as well as the forces in society that lead people to acquire
one way of thinking over the other, are enlightening in such a way that they yield important insight
into problems we face today. Forces can utilize justice as a significant historical notion to convert
it into its total opposite. If we saw political advertisements in which the state colonized the notion
of justice and used it to push objectives that were really working against the genuine meaning of
the word in the culture, we would be witnessing the systematic decrease of the conflict between
civilization and culture. According to Marcuse, "the result is the familiar Orwellian language
('peace is war' and 'war is peace,' etc.), which is not confined to terroristic totalitarianism (One-
Dimensional Man, 1964:63)." Not thinking on the hidden meaning of the notion of justice while
having a passion for it, after all, we are taught to love such things unneeded, which opens the door
to a certain risk. We may be led by a misguided understanding of justice to enact a fundamentally
unfair reality (Hartley, 2011). The human rights situation in the Philippines eventually degraded
in 2020. President Rodrigo Duterte's violent "war on drugs," which has been underway since he
took office in June 2016, has primarily targeted underprivileged Filipinos in urban areas.
Thousands of extrajudicial killings have been carried out by the police and unidentified gunmen
associated to the authorities. Killings escalated drastically during the Covid-19 lockdown,
increasing by more than 50% from April to July 2020 when compared to the preceding four
months. For the most part, these killings have gone unpunished. He has often attacked and rejected
organizations who condemn the "war on drugs," accusing them of "weaponizing human rights,"
such as ABS-CBN network.

The government allows us to express our ideas, thoughts, and sympathies; nevertheless,
our freedom has been constrained to the point that we are weaponizing our own rights, despite the
fact that they themselves use it. Great critics of the terrible war on drugs, such as activists, have
already attempted to critique the system, but have been unsuccessful due to political assassinations,
threats, and harassment. As a result, Leftist activists and human rights activists have become
prominent targets of physical and online assaults. This is an illustration of Marcuse's point
regarding social control through public opinion manipulation. The military, public security
services, and police have aggressively utilized social media to disseminate threats that have
resulted in the deaths of tens of red-tagged persons in the last years (Human Rights Editors, 2020).

As of now, the Duterte administration's approach to the Covid-19 outbreak has been headed
by former military leaders, who have used police backed up by the military, resulting in grave
human rights violations. The COVID-19 law, approved by President Duterte on March 24, 2020,
punishes the dissemination of "false information" with up to two months in jail and a 1 million
peso (US$19,600) fine. This rule has been used to limit individual freedoms in lawsuits brought
against social media users, including journalists, who have criticized or even mocked the
government's conduct. It is not just politics that dominates society, but also capitalism, which is at
the heart of the scheme. This is associated to the COVID-19 problem. If Marcuse was still living
today, he could argue that, while the COVID-19 epidemic was a cause for the current global crisis,
capitalism is to blamed. As the epidemic progressed over the previous two years, we saw several
instances when political and business interests were emphasized. First, the flood of healthcare
supplies such as body suits, gloves, face masks, and face shields, as well as the procurement of the
Sinovac vaccine, whose efficiency rate is quite low, demonstrates how the government favors
China politically and economically. Underdevelopment theorists such as Frank, Wallerstein, and
Amin claimed that the best solution to solve capitalism's issues is to replace the capitalist world
order with global socialism. It is tempting to assume that without capitalism, we can create
resilience, better handle calamities, and prevent large losses in resources and life in general.

B. Freedom in the Seminary Context

The concept of Marcuse’s critical theory can be effectively applied in the seminary context.
Most people nowadays could not find their real identity in this world. In most cases, some of them
already committed suicide while others are frustrated in life. When they get tired, they resigned
from their work and relaxed for a bit in order to search for happiness and contentment. After being
aware of their life, they detached themselves from the worldly allurements and focused on the
spiritual consciousness. This is the reason why seminaries opened the gate for adult vocations.
Some adult vocations finally realized that they could not find happiness in the outside world. They
felt that they were being controlled by the society, with their boss, daily schedules, and
monotonous activities. The social control of the society is manipulating their lives and so they
could not have the time to think critically for themselves. They thought that the seminary can help
them find their freedom and discover the authentic truth within themselves. After refusing the
domination of the status quo, they realized and discovered the real freedom they were looking for.

However, even in the seminary, some still thought that their freedom is still controlled by
money. It is very important to note that capitalism uses money to dominate and control the society
in whatever means. It is undeniable that some seminaries who are financially stable could spend a
lot of money for recreation, projects, community bonding, and celebration. On the other hand,
some seminaries who does not have enough money to support the needs of the seminarians and
even find it hard to improve their projects. Thus, seminary development is still being controlled
by capitalism.

In the end, we could not find freedom because all the dimensions of earthly living are still
in the hands of capitalism. Individual great refusal is not enough as long as capitalism is the basis
of the society for development.

References
Primary Sources:
Marcuse, H. (1964). One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced
Industrial Society (Trans. by Douglas Kellner). Beacon Press. https://b-
ok.asia/book/784632/1920f7
__________ (1969: vii–ix). An Essay on Liberation. Beacon Press.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/marcuse/works/1969/essay-liberation.pdf
__________ (1974). Eros and Civilization. The Beacon Press. http://freudians.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/09/Marcuse-Eros-and-Civilization-Part-I-Under-the-Rule-of-the-Reality-
Principle1.pdf
Marcuse, H., Wolff, R.B., & Moore, B. (1969). A Critique of Pure Tolerance. Beacon
Press. https://www.marcuse.org/herbert/publications/1960s/1965-repressive-tolerance-
fulltext.html
Secondary Sources:
Agger, B. (1988). Marcuse's "One-Dimensionality:" Socio-Historical and Ideological
Context.
https://www.marcuse.org/herbert//booksabout/80s/Agger1988MarcusesOneDimensionality.pdf
Buchanan, J. (1999). The Logical Foundations of Constitutional Liberty. Liberty Fund,
Inc. https://austrianeconomists.typepad.com/files/buchanan--keynesian-follies.pdf
Farr, A. (2021). Herbert Marcuse. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marcuse/#Rep
Funke, P., et. al. (2017). Bouazizi’s Refusal and Ours. Temple University Press.
http://tupress.temple.edu/uploads/book/excerpt/2382_ch1.pdf
Hartley, M. (2011). Marcuse on The Two Dimensions of Advanced Industrial Society
and The Significance of His Thought Today. Senior Honors Projects.
https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1242&context=srhonorsprog
Horkheimer, M. (1947). Eclipse of Reason. Oxford University Press.
https://austrianeconomists.typepad.com/files/buchanan--keynesian-follies.pdf
Human Rights Editors (2020). Philippines Events of 2020. Human Rights Watch.
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2021/country-chapters/philippines
Lee, N. (2020). On Herbert Marcuse’s “One-Dimensional Man”. Revolution and
Ideology. https://medium.com/revolution-and-ideology/on-herbert-marcuses-one-dimensional-
man-9dea4672fa89#f1d0
Lukacs, G. (1971). Rodney Livingstone. The Merlin Press Ltd.
https://monoskop.org/images/3/3b/Lukacs_Georg_History_and_Class_Consciousness_Studies_i
n_Marxist_Dialectics.pdf
Marx, K. (1894. A Critique of Political Economy. International Publishers.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-III.pdf
Pante, M.B. (2021). The links between COVID-19 and global capitalism. Rappler.
https://www.rappler.com/voices/imho/opinion-links-between-covid-19-global-capitalism
Robinson, A. (2010). In Theory – Herbert Marcuse: One Dimensional Man? Ceasefire
Magazine. https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/in-theory-6-marcuse/
Stern, M. (2014). One-Dimensional Man. Prezi Inc. https://prezi.com/z4vhtusjg0hv/one-
dimensional-man/
Trappen, S. (2016). Marcuse’s One-Dimensional Man. Penn State University.
https://sandratrappen.com/2016/03/11/one-dimensional-man/
Turner, B. (2000). Sociology 319: Herbert Marcuse. Winter 2000.
http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/m1400.htm
 Weber, M. (1946). Essays in Sociology (Trans. by H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills).
Oxford University Press.
https://ia902705.us.archive.org/12/items/frommaxweberessa00webe/frommaxweberessa00webe_
bw.pdf
Whitfield, S. (2014). Refusing Marcuse: 50 Years After One-Dimensional Man. Dissent
Magazine. https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/refusing-marcuse-fifty-years-after-one-
dimensional-man
_________ (2018). Short Summary: One Dimensional man / Marcuse. Cultural Studies.
https://culturalstudiesnow.blogspot.com/2018/03/short-summary-one-dimensional-man.html