What do you think?
Rate this book
The Spirit of Disobedience: Resisting the Charms of Fake Politics, Mindless Consumption, and the Culture of Total Work
Trained relentlessly to work and consume, we make daily lifestyle decisions that promote corporate profits more than our own well-being. We also find ourselves working more, living in fragmented communities, and neglecting our most basic spiritual and political values. As Curtis White puts it, “In order to live, you will be asked to do what is no good, what is absurd, trivial, demeaning, and soul killing.” Although we belong to the world’s most affluent society, somehow we never have the chance to How shall we live?
With his trademark humor and acerbic wit, White raises this impertinent question. He also debunks the conventional view that liberalism can answer it without drawing on spiritual values. Surveying American popular culture (including Office Space and The Da Vinci Code ) to illustrate his points, White urges us to renew our commitment to “human fundamentals” as articulated by Henry David Thoreau-especially free time, home, and food-and to reclaim Thoreau’s spirit of disobedience.
Seeking imaginative answers to his central questions, White also interviews John De Graaf ( Affluenza ), James Howard Kunstler ( The Long Emergency ) and Michael Ableman ( Fields of Plenty ) about their views of the good life in our time.
With his trademark humor and acerbic wit, White raises this impertinent question. He also debunks the conventional view that liberalism can answer it without drawing on spiritual values. Surveying American popular culture (including Office Space and The Da Vinci Code ) to illustrate his points, White urges us to renew our commitment to “human fundamentals” as articulated by Henry David Thoreau-especially free time, home, and food-and to reclaim Thoreau’s spirit of disobedience.
Seeking imaginative answers to his central questions, White also interviews John De Graaf ( Affluenza ), James Howard Kunstler ( The Long Emergency ) and Michael Ableman ( Fields of Plenty ) about their views of the good life in our time.
183 pages, Hardcover
First published November 28, 2006
4 people are currently reading
172 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
December 7, 2020
Quite useful AND enjoyable, but for some reason I put it down two years ago and only returned to it this past weekend. Re-reading through my previous underlinings, it struck me just how forcefully White eviscerates America's pretensions to have inherited the mantles of either the Enlightenment, or Christianity: America, rather (and by barely-attenuated extension its client states, Canada, etc., I should guess), is a hypocritical plutocracy which cloaks its rapacious imperial machinations in the language of these two traditions, whilst increasingly attending to less than zero of their substance.
The critique is most solid in its analysis of particularities on the American scene (ca. the Bush years, which are only amplified by the nightmare of our 2020 present), rather somewhat weaker on certain theoretical levels (e.g. his critique of Marx's supposed mechanistic thinking is a bit of a caricature, and his outright dismissal of leftist political activism seems to make him seem a bit trapped in the amber of 1968 and all that). But he is really good at bringing Thoreau, Emerson and Ruskin (and even Jesus, though not his followers!) to bear on the problems of the present. I hope to write about it after reading his new book, Living in a World That Can't Be Fixed: Reimagining Counterculture Today, shortly.
His solution for the present? In his final chapter he interviews three visionaries who have tried to imagine and/or put into practice different ways of being in the world, vis a vis the work day under capitalism, built space under capitalism, and food production under (you guessed it!). I hope the new book contains more of that disobedient thinking, as it is sorely needed. White's epilogue does hint at it:
I am now sorry that I waited two years to finish this book, but it tees me up nicely for the next one, mentioned above, which just came out this past summer. I am now definitely a fan.
The critique is most solid in its analysis of particularities on the American scene (ca. the Bush years, which are only amplified by the nightmare of our 2020 present), rather somewhat weaker on certain theoretical levels (e.g. his critique of Marx's supposed mechanistic thinking is a bit of a caricature, and his outright dismissal of leftist political activism seems to make him seem a bit trapped in the amber of 1968 and all that). But he is really good at bringing Thoreau, Emerson and Ruskin (and even Jesus, though not his followers!) to bear on the problems of the present. I hope to write about it after reading his new book, Living in a World That Can't Be Fixed: Reimagining Counterculture Today, shortly.
His solution for the present? In his final chapter he interviews three visionaries who have tried to imagine and/or put into practice different ways of being in the world, vis a vis the work day under capitalism, built space under capitalism, and food production under (you guessed it!). I hope the new book contains more of that disobedient thinking, as it is sorely needed. White's epilogue does hint at it:
In the introduction to the paperback version of my book The Middle Mind, I responded to a question that had been hurled at me by many of my readers. "Fine. Now, what am I supposed to do?" [...] I suggested, and suggest still, three things.Misbehave. Make something beautiful. Try to win. Is that a politic or an aesthetic? Is it Christian? Is it even spiritual? For me, it is simply the expression of a loyalty to life in a context that in myriad ways tempts us to be disloyal to life.
I am now sorry that I waited two years to finish this book, but it tees me up nicely for the next one, mentioned above, which just came out this past summer. I am now definitely a fan.
June 30, 2011
I dogeared a lot of pages in this book, as it has some great things to say about alternate living strategies (not lifestyles), the closeness of left and right in politics, the demands of authority that everyone be either a servant or a commodity producer (of even the most radical thoughts), and of the roles of Art and the Spirit of Disobedience. Curtis White interviews three 'outsiders' at the end, and in this he provides examples of those who are thinking in more healthy ways of our relationship to each other, to Nature, and to our own internal needs. He makes the point over and over that workers have, to some degree, internalized the requirements of their bosses, which it's good to be reminded of.
The interviews at the end, while interesting, remove some of the momentum from this combination of wit, humour, intelligence and spleen, but I can see why he included them. A very good book -- yet another good book by White. Highly recommended.
The interviews at the end, while interesting, remove some of the momentum from this combination of wit, humour, intelligence and spleen, but I can see why he included them. A very good book -- yet another good book by White. Highly recommended.
March 8, 2008
Although I thought some of the arguments at the beginning of this book bordered on obnoxious, White ultimately works through some big realities and makes an important case for a return to (or, rather, a reenvisioning of) community life and the joys that come with it.
October 30, 2024
White is critical of Reason, secular liberalism, and Enlightenment, all of which argue that we can do just fine without religion or a spiritual life. In this regard, Kant’s ethical “faculty” figures prominently, leading to the “secular religion of Reason,” “the Goddess of Reason,” “the Church of Reason” and, today, the “cult of science.” *
“What is Reason?” White asks. He answers, quoting Kant, that reason is a “‘prejudice’ that is clung to without sufficient reason. Reason itself is thus unreasonable.” Regarding how Reason is viewed, White is correct when he writes that “Reasons are only good or bad in relation to assumptions, and assumptions are only good or bad cultural, spiritual values.” When one traces reason back to its source, we find, as Nietzsche found, that philosophical ethics provides no foundation for morality, so that, “in God’s absence of any demonstrable moral principle, anything is possible. Anything is doable without ethical blame.” In the end, the Church of Reason reverts to its capitalist underpinnings where self-interest prevails, where inequality is justified because it leads to the good of the whole, and where conformity to this prevailing ethic is enforced, powerfully.
Contemporary Christianity - the “Christian Right,” is no better in promoting an ethical foundation that works for all, White states. Those who adhere to fundamentalism are quick to impose their value system on those who don’t see the world in the same way. So now, White is in a pickle. Capitalist ethos is exploitation. The Christian Right is imposition. Both promote self- and group- interest at the expense of the whole.
For reasons I don’t quite understand, White is not keen on the Golden Rule which he says “is for complex reasons no longer functional in the absence of justice.” He may be saying that the Golden Rule gets caught up in the fundamentals of capitalism and Christian Nationalism where one's own interest reflects those values about how we see others and ourselves. Instead, White says we must renew our commitment to justice, an expression “of communalism and a deep respect for the dignity and worth of all others. It is Justice and it is the only Culture of Life.” The rest of the book is White’s pushing justice, love and community, and his calls for disobedience toward the prevailing norms that are in opposition to those ideals.
This is a noble sounding aspiration but, despite his excellent critique of reason, White does not escape its clutches. He believes that reason rules. Reason for him decides the ultimate value - love, country, justice - and the body follows. But a mind divorced from the body’s interest doesn't work. How does one commit to White’s ideals if one’s - one’s own body - governing center is the self’s interest? Reasonable ideals for White mean nothing for those who are prone to assert their interest regardless of its impact on the broader community.
White says nothing about motive forces that make us tick. He writes about human being as a mind-driven entity when the mind, per Hume and others, is but the means for the body’s interest. For sure, a good part of human nature is about being a member of a community where the Golden Rule prevails. That rule is universal and built into our biology. It is certainly not, as White implies, a Christian creation. The self - this is Darwin’s tribalism - sees its interest tied to the interest of its community. These are the souls who can commit to White’s call.
The problem lies with those whose self-interest or the group’s self-interest, the capitalist and the Christian nationalists, is the dominant motive force. It's where the might-makes-right ethic prevails. The only thing that works for those who do believe in White’s posited values is the presence of a counterforce - good power politics - that pushes them back, that forces them to respect the interest of the whole.
*This was the first time I’ve seen a reference to Kant being an “antireligious” thinker, and “notoriously” so. Tracing what Kant puts forward back to his most fundamental assumptions, I’ve read Kant to be very religious at his core.
“What is Reason?” White asks. He answers, quoting Kant, that reason is a “‘prejudice’ that is clung to without sufficient reason. Reason itself is thus unreasonable.” Regarding how Reason is viewed, White is correct when he writes that “Reasons are only good or bad in relation to assumptions, and assumptions are only good or bad cultural, spiritual values.” When one traces reason back to its source, we find, as Nietzsche found, that philosophical ethics provides no foundation for morality, so that, “in God’s absence of any demonstrable moral principle, anything is possible. Anything is doable without ethical blame.” In the end, the Church of Reason reverts to its capitalist underpinnings where self-interest prevails, where inequality is justified because it leads to the good of the whole, and where conformity to this prevailing ethic is enforced, powerfully.
Contemporary Christianity - the “Christian Right,” is no better in promoting an ethical foundation that works for all, White states. Those who adhere to fundamentalism are quick to impose their value system on those who don’t see the world in the same way. So now, White is in a pickle. Capitalist ethos is exploitation. The Christian Right is imposition. Both promote self- and group- interest at the expense of the whole.
For reasons I don’t quite understand, White is not keen on the Golden Rule which he says “is for complex reasons no longer functional in the absence of justice.” He may be saying that the Golden Rule gets caught up in the fundamentals of capitalism and Christian Nationalism where one's own interest reflects those values about how we see others and ourselves. Instead, White says we must renew our commitment to justice, an expression “of communalism and a deep respect for the dignity and worth of all others. It is Justice and it is the only Culture of Life.” The rest of the book is White’s pushing justice, love and community, and his calls for disobedience toward the prevailing norms that are in opposition to those ideals.
This is a noble sounding aspiration but, despite his excellent critique of reason, White does not escape its clutches. He believes that reason rules. Reason for him decides the ultimate value - love, country, justice - and the body follows. But a mind divorced from the body’s interest doesn't work. How does one commit to White’s ideals if one’s - one’s own body - governing center is the self’s interest? Reasonable ideals for White mean nothing for those who are prone to assert their interest regardless of its impact on the broader community.
White says nothing about motive forces that make us tick. He writes about human being as a mind-driven entity when the mind, per Hume and others, is but the means for the body’s interest. For sure, a good part of human nature is about being a member of a community where the Golden Rule prevails. That rule is universal and built into our biology. It is certainly not, as White implies, a Christian creation. The self - this is Darwin’s tribalism - sees its interest tied to the interest of its community. These are the souls who can commit to White’s call.
The problem lies with those whose self-interest or the group’s self-interest, the capitalist and the Christian nationalists, is the dominant motive force. It's where the might-makes-right ethic prevails. The only thing that works for those who do believe in White’s posited values is the presence of a counterforce - good power politics - that pushes them back, that forces them to respect the interest of the whole.
*This was the first time I’ve seen a reference to Kant being an “antireligious” thinker, and “notoriously” so. Tracing what Kant puts forward back to his most fundamental assumptions, I’ve read Kant to be very religious at his core.
May 28, 2016
Another great book by White, this time discussing the lack of a spiritual imagination on the Left. He is interested less in organized forms of religion than he is in the notion that the Left already presumes a spirituality, particularly of liberation and equality, that they then pretend is entirely secular. The book is both a call for Leftists to stop pretending they are secular when they presuppose spiritual values, and to self-consciously build their movement on these principles. He provocatively asks the question of how we can even "love our neighbor," as Jesus advised, when our culture prevents us from even noticing, let along connecting, with our neighbors. Jesus's call comes in a context where community is presumed to exist, which is precisely what Americans have lost. His response is to argue for a "spirit of disobedience" toward the existing order of things, a disobedience which he draws from the likes of Emerson and Thoreau as distinctly American voices of resistance to the culture of consumption and commodification.
September 9, 2016
"Misbehave. Make something beautiful. Try to win." White's three maxims end a brilliant, important book. White has the audacity to write the truth of the matter. He criticizes politics (liberals and conservatives), economics (corporations, consumers), society (suburbia, lazy thinkers, Fundamentalists, and rationalists) in such a way that I attest to his being the progeny and spiritual heir to Paine, Emerson, Thoreau and Whitman.
Reading this was like taking a cold plunge in stream deep in a valley before sunrise. Awake, sleepers! We need to be reading the books of White, Berry, Jensen, Hedges, Chomsky, and Jamail.
Reading this was like taking a cold plunge in stream deep in a valley before sunrise. Awake, sleepers! We need to be reading the books of White, Berry, Jensen, Hedges, Chomsky, and Jamail.
January 19, 2016
Rage against reality. There are a lot of people who think differently and it angers him that they impose their system onto him and the few who agree with him. Of course according to the author everyone deep down feels like him except they're too stupid to realise that; he's refusing to even consider that in fact people do all these things because they choose to. After a thoughtful critique of reality he fails to offer anything in return, thus ending on a depressing whimper. Pity.
January 28, 2011
It is as if someone dumped a years worth of peg words from our media discourse and attempted to knit it into something about disobedience. Seems contrived. Curtis admits in one chapter that he is, in spite of all appearances, a holy whore. My hat off to that, I guess.
November 6, 2008
This is the best book I've read this year. This fellow is really great. Deeper than the usual songs to the quire. White is a clear, compelling voice for the sentient life.
Want to read
November 16, 2010Still trying to figure out what Curtis White vision of the future would be like?
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews