The One-Dimensional Man: How Did We Lose Our Freedom of Choice?
Herbert Marcuse, a German philosopher and sociologist, called the total programming of society toward false values that guarantee material abundance “neo-totalitarianism.” He believed that the downside of technological progress, democracy, and capitalism was the loss of individual thinking and the ability to live by one’s own rules. Let’s explore what processes in society led Marcuse and other thinkers to these conclusions, why, in his view, material well-being brought about a spiritual crisis, and how the “one-dimensional man” emerged—someone who is afraid to be alone with themselves, because if you take away both informational and material consumption, almost nothing remains that is truly their own.
The Rise of the One-Dimensional Man
The technological progress that rapidly transformed the lives of millions at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries inspired hope for liberation from class dependence and outright slavery. With the development of technology, the world partially rid itself of child labor, violations of labor rights, and the need for most people to work nearly around the clock just to avoid starvation.
But the rapid growth of production eliminated not only the tragic realities of the past. In a short time, the world became “universal”: store shelves filled with thousands of identical items, flooding tens of thousands of similar homes. With the advent of television and radio, millions listened to the same information and unconsciously absorbed repeated messages. For the first time in history, humanity faced the threat of losing individualism.
Interestingly, this situation went unquestioned for a long time, since technological progress freed people from poverty and survival, simplified communication, and united billions through media. Only decades later did leading philosophers, psychologists, and sociologists—such as Freud, Fromm, and Marcuse—raise the alarm.
The Trade-Off: Independent Thought for Material Comfort
Experience showed that exhausted people gladly traded independent thinking for material benefits. This is confirmed by the results of political propaganda in any country. Voters are known to support leaders who promise to solve their everyday problems, often turning a blind eye to political atrocities committed by those same leaders. For example, during Nazi Germany, the “radio in every home” policy turned Germans into a guided mass, believing the government cared for their well-being.
According to Marcuse, in such situations, due to dependent media, there is not a real choice, but only the illusion of choice. The widespread use of television, radio, and now the internet, means that people are bombarded daily with a torrent of repetitive information. Through repetition, people become programmed: hearing the same message—whether it’s advertising or political propaganda—so often that they begin to believe their actions are acts of free will.
The Cult of Consumption and the “Happy Consciousness”
In this one-dimensional reality, where personal thinking is pushed aside, the cult of consumption plays a crucial role and grows stronger every year. Major philosophers repeatedly point out that false needs imposed by media and advertising overshadow individuality and drive people to act irrationally. It’s no coincidence that so many work for income they plan to spend on unnecessary things, piling up in their closets. The cult of consumption has reached such a level that the average buyer often can’t explain why they bought a particular item. According to the UN, a third of all food produced globally is thrown away. Yet, the modern consumer, shaped by advertising, is not interested in global issues like world hunger or environmental problems, because they possess what Marcuse called a “happy consciousness.”
“Happy consciousness is the belief that what is real is rational, that the system embodies the good.”
Formally satisfied rights and freedoms have led those with “happy consciousness” to accept society’s crimes, regardless of their severity. Marcuse notes that this signals a decline in personal autonomy and understanding of reality.
Neo-Totalitarianism and the Loss of Individuality
Thus, “one-dimensional people” are completely unaware that they do not live in a truly democratic reality. Marcuse called the total programming of society toward false values that guarantee material abundance “neo-totalitarianism.”
Moreover, Marcuse argued that the principles of this new reality have become recognizable not only in the visual sameness of things filling almost every home and in predictable human behavior, but also in language itself. Like George Orwell, Marcuse believed that modern language is filled with contradictory concepts, abbreviations, and all-consuming tautology, making it impossible to find the truth and leading to mass confusion and the substitution of concepts.
“They believe they die for the Class, but die for party leaders. They believe they die for the Fatherland, but die for Industrialists. They believe they die for the freedom of the Individual, but die for the freedom of dividends. They believe they die for the Proletariat, but die for its Bureaucracy. They believe they die by order of the State, but die for the money that owns the State.”
Escaping the One-Dimensional Reality
Of course, not everyone in society agrees to live in a one-dimensional reality. But critics note that escaping it is nearly impossible. In the information age, people are overwhelmed by the quantity and quality of information poured onto them. Interestingly, the more facts a person learns from the media in a day, the emptier they feel. Journalists working in newsrooms often complain of inner emptiness, saying they are forced to process a flood of information that doesn’t concern them, exhausts them, and is quickly forgotten, leaving no time or energy for their own thoughts.
If someone decides to think independently and refuses to participate in global consumption, they face the challenge of finding reliable information. Searching online, they find thousands of supposedly true but often contradictory opinions. Most people simply give up on seeking the truth and find it easier to trust federal media, advertising, and mass culture.
Political scientist Sergey Kurginyan notes that the modern global political system tacitly forbids individuals from living by their own rules. As long as Orwell’s “Animal Farm” listens to outside voices, it can be convinced that by serving private interests, it is supposedly serving its own. Kurginyan describes the attempt to make sense of this as follows:
“So many pseudo-means must be thrown onto the market that you get lost in them, and your mind must lack the criteria to distinguish the genuine from the fake, the necessary from the unnecessary. You must be deprived of the tools of choice, you must have no teachers, all teachers must be discredited, and the difference between a teacher and a charlatan must be completely erased.”
Sociological surveys show that despite an outward appearance of happiness, more and more people feel lost in a sea of information, empty, and unhappy. Suicide and violence statistics indicate that “happy consciousness” does not save individuals from total dissatisfaction. Years of accumulating informational “junk” in the mind make people afraid to be alone with themselves, as they have almost nothing of their own left. This happens because, in a one-dimensional reality, people identify more with their possessions than with their thoughts.
In his book To Have or to Be?, Erich Fromm writes:
“If I am what I have, and if what I have is lost, then who am I?”
Kurginyan notes that in a world of abundance, many feel dissatisfied, but not everyone is ready to undertake the difficult journey of self-discovery.
“All that is genuine is difficult, slow, requires your whole self, and is painful. But they offer you something simple… People feel the incompleteness of life, they want to connect with themselves. They sense that the means for this are nearby, but then they are shown false means. Those who want will grab onto the false means, and the rest must stop wanting.”
Is There a Way Out?
It’s notable that the current opposition cannot change the situation, as it plays on the same one-dimensional field. So what can be done in a world of rose-colored glasses and a consumerist cult that makes us ignore global problems and the loss of individuality?
Marcuse believed that the only way out of this reality is the “Great Refusal” of consumption—of both things and imposed information.
“Turning off television and similar sources of information could, therefore, trigger what the fundamental contradictions of capitalism could not—a complete destruction of the system.”
Clearly, this conclusion is utopian and will never become reality. But it’s also clear that today, an escape from one-dimensionality is still possible, though it applies to only a small number of people and does not change the system as a whole.
Fortunately, the very internet and the protected rights and freedoms of the individual allow people to voluntarily reject some of society’s norms, such as uncontrolled consumption or swallowing propaganda. Obviously, the only way out of the “one-dimensional man” trap is self-development, consciously comparing multiple sources of information, developing the ability to think, and refusing to blindly trust the media. As long as historical conditions allow access to diverse information and there are no banned book lists, the escape from one-dimensionality depends entirely on the desire and persistence of the individual.