Vol. 9 No. 11 (November 1999) pp. 482-485.
THE HORIZONTAL SOCIETY by Lawrence M. Friedman. New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1999. 310 pp. Cloth $29.95.
Reviewed by Herbert M. Kritzer, Department of Political Science, University
of Wisconsin-Madison.
Lawrence Friedman's work is always interesting to read. In THE
HORIZONTAL SOCIETY, he has produced what might best be described as a
meditation on modernity (or, stealing from Sigmund Freud, "modernity and its
discontents"). Friedman's metaphor for late 20th century modernity is the
"horizontal society" which he contrasts to the more vertical structure of
society of earlier days. By horizontal society, Friedman is referring to a
social structure in which relationships link largely to persons similarly
situated and identified through categories such as gender, ethnicity, or
nationality; this social structure, he argues, differs from vertical
structures built around family, extended kinship, and authority relationships
(master-servant, landowner-tenant, priest-parishioner, etc.). The book is an
analysis of the implications of this restructuring of society. The thrust of
Friedman's argument is that "modernity has two faces: it homogenizes and
differentiates. It pulls people apart and pushes them together. It
accentuates ethnic differences, but in the context of a single (and powerful)
world culture" (p. 132). THE HORIZONTAL SOCIETY develops this argument over
nine chapters that combine history, law, and rumination.
Central to Friedman's discussion is the concept of identity
discussed
in detail in chapters 5 and 6), and how the structure of identity both
reflects and affects society. Identity, he observes, "is not just a sense of
who we are...it is a lens through which we see the world." What has changed,
according to Friedman, is that "modern men and women are much freer to form
relationships on a plane of equality," and people are much more able to make
choices in their identity and relationships. This mobility of identity comes
from both knowledge and opportunity (i.e., people are aware of options and
frequently have the opportunity to make choices among those options),
reflecting economic growth and communication growth. Importantly, the
vertical identities and structures continue to exist, and form part of the
set of choices facing 21st century women and men.
As I write this review, news reports discuss assassination in
Armenia,
conflict in Chechnya, and Pat Buchanan's jump to the Reform Party (see p. 117
for Friedman's thoughts about Buchanan, circa 1996). These are phenomena
that Friedman would link to the horizontal society. In Armenia one sees the
struggle to rebuild an independent society in the wake of the dissolution of
the Soviet Union. In Chechnya, the conflict is between a people long part of
Russia but which has never felt fully part of it (in significant part because
of religious differences). In the United States Buchanan seeks to find a way
to fulfill his presidential ambitions through what may or may not become a
significant long-term force in American politics; what kind of ultimate
identity will the amorphous group
Page 483 begins here
associated with the Reform Party create; will it be the social
conservatism of Pat Buchanan, the seeming libertarianism of Jesse ("I want to
come back as a 38DD bra") Ventura, or something altogether different? These
are the kinds of issues and phenomena that motivate Friedman's inquiry.
A central element of horizontal society is the growth of global
culture, what Barber (1995) refers to as "McWorld." Technology is the major
vehicle for the spread of this culture, but it is largely a product of
Western urban society. Integral to today's global culture is change, chaNGE,
CHANGE; ever present, ever accelerating, ever more encompassing change. This
changing global culture is a mass culture; it may be driven by images of
celebrity, but the average person embraces it. If Americans are today
"bowling alone" (Putnam, 1995; but see Ladd, 1999), it is probably electronic
bowling (or electronic golf, or electronic chess) in their homes using the
same electronic toys that are being used in Japan, Latin America, Australia,
Europe, South Africa, and Singapore. Friedman notes that this globalization
of culture is met with resistance in various quarters, particularly where the
perception that it is largely Americanization rather than globalization
raises particular strain (e.g., Canada and France).
Where in the past, access to leisure and the toys of leisure were
closely linked to class, today the consumer society has made these available
to the majority of persons living in economically developed societies.
Furthermore, those living outside those societies are increasingly aware of
what they do not have, and large numbers of people seek to partake in the
global culture by immigrating to societies where they will have access. This
movement of people creates one of the great tensions of the horizontal
society: to admit or not admit these immigrants into a society. The
immigrants want to exercise choice and identify as part of the United States,
or Germany, or England, or France, or Finland, or Japan. Some societies,
particularly those that themselves were fashioned by immigrants, are more
accommodating that are others.
Two phenomena connected to horizontal society are of particular
interest to Friedman: the development of rights and rise of nationalism. One
reflects the justification for the freedoms of horizontal society and the
other a consequence. American exceptionalism in the realm of constitutions
and rights is no more; among democracies, it is today the exception to be
without written constitutional structures guarded over by some form of
judicial body. The new democracies of Latin America and Eastern Europe have
strongly embraced this model of nation building. These developments do not
go unchallenged. Perhaps the strongest resistance lies in the rise of
religious fundamentalism, particular in Islam, but also as found in
Christianity, Hinduism, and Judaism. Fundamentalism reflects a desire to
hold on to vertical society, and the apparent certainties it provides. One
of the reasons that resistance is rooted in fundamentalism is that rights are
so closely tied to individualism, and individualism both challenges core
tenets of fundamentalism and is central to horizontal society (it is the
right of individuals to choose their identification that makes horizontal
society horizontal). In some way the signature institution of vertical
society is the traditional marriage where paternal dominance and hierarchy
were the rule, and choice was minimal; fundamentalism seems closely aligned
with a desire to maintain (or return to) this image of the family rather
Page 484 begins here
than to accept the modern family structure based on companionate
marriage (p. 76).
The rise of nationalism grows from the right to choose with whom or
what one identifies. Although at one level individuals in the horizontal
society identify with global culture, at another level individuals want to
choose their ethnic group identification, and want that identification to
play a large role in their lives. The vehicle for ethnic identification is
the nation, and so we no longer have Czechoslovakia or Yugoslavia, both
perhaps somewhat artificial in their structure. But this breakdown extends
further as witnessed by developments within Russia and elsewhere. New
nations, or demands for new nations, have ceased to be news. It is a common
occurrence, and garners little note unless accompanied by outbursts of
violence. Some of these developments reflect resurgence in language
consciousness (how long before Welsh returns as the dominant language of
Wales, or Gaelic of Ireland, or Yiddish of Brooklyn?). Others reflect
religious divisions; and others a renewing of historical memories of long-ago
violations of group symbols. It is enhanced by the fact that many of the new
nations of the first three quarters of the twentieth century (and a good bit
of the nineteenth century in Latin America) were artificial creations of
colonial powers rather than natural groupings of a single "people" (Friedman
points out that this artificialness can be found also in recent developments
such as "panethnicities," where dominant cultures lump together disparate
"outsider" groups to create groupings that lack internal coherence, "Asian-
American" representing a prime example). Further analogues to "nationalism"
lie in groups that have long existed (women, the deaf, etc.) but which today
take on significance in ways that reflect the structure of horizontal society
and its emphasis on individualism and individual choice (p. 105).
The impact of this surge of nationalism is to create new
boundaries (p.
106). Where a central boundary used to be class, today a multitude of
dimensions (social, cultural, etc.) serve as boundaries, and those boundaries
seem to be ever shifting as new groups arise seeking to secure the benefits
of recognition. These boundaries need not reflect traditional geographic
separation but exist internally to states. Groups often choose to oppose or
oppress others with whom they disagree (Jerry Falwell's recent meeting with
gay activists notwithstanding), and this oppression often takes violent
turns. In fact, one feature of many new nations is the apparent need to find
some internal group to label as outcasts (homosexuals in Africa, or "gypsies"
in the Czech Republic, being good examples recently in the news). It would
be incorrect to say that Friedman sees nationalism as entirely negative; he
recognizes the positives it brings in terms of giving value, and purpose to
life (p. 111).
Given that Friedman is a legal historian, it is not surprising that
some of the most interesting sections of the book reflect the specific mix of
law and history. In chapters 5-7 one finds discussions of the history of
identity categories such as race and citizenship, how those identities have
been reflected in the law and policies adopted by various nations, and the
linkage of these to the history and law of immigration. Central to
Friedman's discussion is the decision both as to who to include and who to
exclude. Law can be created based around inclusionary goals, such as when
citizenship laws are structured to let people into national identity, jus
soli (as in the United States and other immigrant countries); alternatively
the law can be
Page 485 begins here
designed to exclude, such as by effectively limiting citizenship to
those born into a category, jus sanguinis (so those of Japanese ancestry who
are returning to Japan from South America after their families have lived
outside Japan for several generations can become Japanese citizens while
those of Korean ancestry who have lived in Japan for several generations
continue to be excluded). Similarly, ethnic labeling is a highly contentious
issue, whether it be the "one drop" rule for excluding someone from the
"white" community or the "born to a Jewish mother" rule governing Israel's
"right of return." As Friedman makes clear, American legal history is rife
with examples, including miscegenation laws, immigration laws explicitly
excluding persons from China, the Dawes Act which intended to break up Native
American tribes, and, most recently, the English-only or English as "official
language" laws.
To reprise, although historically divisions were based on legally
defined nation states and on ethnicity, contemporary divisions reflect
identities that go "beyond ethnicity" (the title of Chapter 8). Today, we
see demands for "plural equality"; that is, the recognition of divisions,
categories, and identities defined along multiple dimensions coexisting with
traditional categories. These "all bubble up out of the culture of
modernity; they all reflect the power of expressive individualism; they are
all aspects of the horizontal society" (p. 223). The forces of modernity
have created what we know as the modern nation-state. These same forces,
communication and transportation, in particular, have created the demands for
new forms of identification and new bases of group autonomy. These new
groups function much as a nation when the "generate a strong sense of
belonging and demand high levels of commitment" (p. 231). They are often
prime forces pushing for separation, and challenging modernist views of the
value of assimilation. The modern consciousness of rights has created
demands from individuals, and those rights allow individuals to form new
groupings that can in turn threaten the very rights that allowed groupings to
form.
What Friedman has done in THE HORIZONTAL SOCIETY is to lay out in his
own way the modern dilemma. Although for most of the second half of the 20th
century, the dominant story was the Cold War, the demise of the Soviet Union
has brought to the forefront the tensions created by modern western culture
and technology. Friedman does not have any clear answers to the question of
where we should seek to go to get out of the prisoners' dilemma we have
created for ourselves. He does, however, provide a powerful portrait of that
dilemma. As one would expect, this book is a lively read; it would be a
great book to use in an undergraduate liberal arts course where the goal is
to get students thinking and talking about the world in which they live and
about the dilemmas that their generation faces.
REFERENCES:
Barber, Benjamin R. 1995. JIHAD VS. MCWORLD. New York: Times Books.
Ladd, Everett C. 1999. THE LADD REPORT. New York: Free Press.
Putnam, Robert. 1995. Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital.
JOURNAL OF DEMOCRACY 6: 65-78.
Copyright 1999