‘Society has now entered a postmodern age and we need new theories to understand it.’ Assess this view.
Society has experienced important changes in recent times. Some sociologists argue that these changes are so reflective that they represent an important shift, from the modern society of the past two centuries, to a new, postmodern society from the era of modernity to the era of postmodernity. Other sociologists disagree and argue that although recent changes have been very significant, these are actually part of modernity itself. In addition to this, opinions are also divided on what theory we need to understand these changes in society. Some have adopted the perspective known as postmodernism to describe society today while others have adopted existing modernist theories such as Marxism.

Most sociologists agree that modern society emerged during the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century in Western Europe. Before understanding whether our current society is modern or postmodern, it is important to define a modern society. Modern societies are nation states; they are a key political unit in a bounded territory ruled by a centralized state and the people usually share the same language and culture. Another aspect of modern societies is capitalism, based in private ownership of means of production, maintaining the conditions under which it operates. Lash and Urry describe this as `organized capitalism. Wealth distribution in modern societies is uneven and Fordist principles are used to produce, involving a production line and cheap, unskilled labour prevent social uprising.
Modern societies are, following the Enlightenment project, rational and secular, consequently encouraging the rise of technology and production and communications. Finally, modern societies emphasise individuality, meaning tradition becomes less important, people experience greater freedom and define their own identity
Sociologists now argue that whilst we used to be confined by nation states we are now opened up by globalization. There are 4 changes that we have been faced with to make the world more interconnectedd. Firstly ttechnological changes: Communication and movement around the world is now fast and vast. Satellites, the internet and global TV have all aided ’time-space compression. Economic changes: The economy has moved to a ‘electronic economy’ instead of goods, it has moved to the production of information like music. 24 access to money and transfer of money across the world in search of profit brings a 'risky society’. For instance Iceland’s economy was brought to the brink as it was dependent on banking. Leslie Sklair (2003) argues there is a new ’global capitalist class’ created by small elites owning huge companies. Political changes: Kenichi Ohmae (1994) argues that we live in a boarder-less world. States are now less able to control the activities of huge capitalist enterprises (TNC’s) and changes in culture and identity: we now live in a global culture fuelled by the western values, because of this it is arguable then, whether this world can be considered modern or postmodern. Although it still gives emphasis to individuality and is even more deeply set in capitalism, it also has lessened the importance of nation states and reduced trust in reason. There are three views on this world: postmodern, late modern, and Marxist, and each will be assessed to determine whether or not the modernist theories from the Enlightenment need to be updated to accommodate to the changing nature of society.

Postmodernism emerged in the 70’s and is considered to be the period we are living in now. It is characterized by being unstable and fragmented but also global. We define ourselves by what we consume. Post-Modernists note that after globalisation, changes in society recently have changed and fragmented society so much that modernism theories are outdated. The changes we have seen in our society and globally suggest that knowledge and reason cannot improve a society that is so fragmented; it is media saturated consumerist and obsessed with image. The postmodern view of anti-foundationalism suggests that nothing can be considered true because nothing can be proven true, and therefore any theories that claim to offer universal solutions for the problems faced by society should not be treated as anything more than meta-narratives – another version of the truth. Focault calls these discourses: different readings of the same world. Postmodernist Baudrillard (2001) says that the mass media is so far into our lives that it begins to shape the way we live. Our society therefore is so saturated with media imagery. Baudrillard called this ’Simulacra’ which means, media images are shown to reflect reality but in reality have no reflection of the real event, and these images are seen all over the world showing people what 'is happening’. For example media image of war zones eliminate the corpses and death before being sent home, only to show war torn streets. Because of this we become unable to reveal the reality of situations from video games and Hollywood films. This system of Simulacra creates a ’Hyper-reality’ where the world becomes defined by the media. Giddens notes, “we are responding to media images rather than real people
Baudrillard sees this as a bad thing: we can no longer distinguish reality and so we can no longer change it and improve society. Postmodernism is an interesting theory and a necessary opinion on today’s society to be aware of. Media, which is glossed over in other theories, is focused on strongly here and the notion of meta-narratives has been adopted by many sociologists today when considering various views on the same topic: there is no right or wrong. Baudrillard (2001) notes that post-modernism involves the consumption of media created desires, having designed clothes which are emphasized in the media. We are no longer constrained to fulfil identities because of class, ethnicity, or gender alone. We can pick and mix between these factors as well as matching the diversity we see in society (due to globalisation) and draw identities from across the globe.
Postmodernism can be criticized on several grounds by Marxists Philo and miller, it ignores power and inequality. The idea that the media is unconnected with reality ignores the fact that the media is controlled by the dominant class. Also saying that we have limitless choice in choosing identities ignores how poverty restricts people. Their views are simply wrong to assume we cannot distinguish reality from media. By saying all views are equally true, it’s like defending how some people can deny the Nazis killed millions of people, which is normally an indefensible position. Also, Best and Keller (1991) argue that Post-modernism is a weak theory; it looks at some social changes and features of today’s society without explaining where they came from. Postmodernists are accused of being too pessimistic about the Enlightenment project by saying knowledge is impossible and nothing can be done to improve society. David Harvey (1989) argues that political decisions do have an effect on all of us, and knowledge can be used to solve human problems. This makes the theory inadequate in understanding the new world.

In contrast, late modernists reject that we have moved from a modernity period of time to a post-modern time, instead they say that things like social change and globalisation are just intensifications of modernity itself not a whole new era. They call this intensification ‘Late Modernity’ and it is believed we are experiencing it now. They also like the enlightenment project and believe we can discover objective knowledge and use it to better society. This view argues that theories of modernity are still valid and useful, as is the Enlightenment project. Late modernist Giddens, accepts that there have been some changes in society but rejects that we have moved into a new era; instead we are in a stage of late modernity or high modernity. Giddens argues that we are now in a stage of high modernity which can be categorised in two ways; Disembedding, we no longer need face to face contact in order to communicate with each other and so we are 'lifting out of social relations from local contexts of interaction’. Disembedding breaks down geographical barriers in late modernity and interaction was impersonal. And reflexivity; we are no longer as constrained by traditions and we are more individualistic, so we need to constantly monitor our behaviour. Giddens sees Late Modernity as characterised by ’reflexivity’- knowledge we gain from society shapes how we act in it. In modern times social institutions are constantly reflecting on what they do and how they do it, and people are having to reflect on the circumstances in which they live their lives. In modern times personal reflexivity means looking at freedom and fulfilment, he calls this their ’life projects’. The reflexivity of institutions can act to change and improve society

Similar to Giddens, Beck believes in the power of reason to create a better world. However he argues that we are in a new period of modernity called ’reflexive modernity’. He argues that we are in a new society, ’risk society’ which faces new dangers than before; we face manufactured dangers; MRSA, Super drug resistant bugs, as well as climate change through technology. Because today is more individualistic, we constantly have to reflect on the risks of action we take or different opportunities we have open to us. This is reflexive modernity. Risk consciousness becomes more apparent, we are aware of more risks are try to avoid them, but our knowledge base is the mass media which is distorted. Beck is sceptical of the benefits of science because it brings so many manufactured issues, but believe we can use rationality to overcome them. The theory as a whole shows that we have some free will in our actions, noting the ones that benefit us or hinder us and changing or improving our behaviour because of this. However it ignores how not everyone has the same option, for instance the poor might face more environmental issues and not be able to move out of heavily polluted city areas. In terms of Beck it is argued by Mike Rustin (1994) that it is capitalism with the pursuit of profit at all costs that creates risk not technology directly. In addition, Hirst (1993) rejects the view that rationality attached to science in the form of environmentalism will bring about change as it cannot challenge capitalism as it (environmentalism) is too fragmented.

Finally, Marxists believe in the enlightenment project, but unlike Beck and Giddens, some Marxists like Jameson and Harvey believe that society has broken away from Modernity into Post-Modernity, but rather than just a break it is the result of the recent stage of capitalism. They are similar to Post-modernism, however different in that they have faith in Marxist theory to explain changes, and that society can still be improved. They explain the importance of media images, diversity and instability through its relation to capitalism. For Harvey capitalism is ever changing and evolving new technologies to make profits. But capitalism is prone to downfalls, Post-Modernity is believed to have arisen from the 1970 capitalist crisis. This crisis gave rise to a new regime of accumulation. This was a new way to make profit after the crisis, Harvey described this as Post-Fordism or flexible accumulation. Flexible Accumulation involves ICT, expanded service sector and job insecurity, it requires employees to be flexible to employers’ needs. This enabled non-standardised products to be made for smaller markets and encouraged diversity of consumption, choice and instability. This process of profit made leisure, culture and identity into commodities. Jameson argues that Post-modernity reflects developed capitalism as it has commodifies every aspect of life. Harvey argued that this capitalism leads to more of post-modern theories in that global financial markets and foreign holidays have ’shrunk the globe’ and compressed time and space. Both Harvey and Jameson argue that flexible accumulation has brought post-modern type political changes, in the way of weakening working class movements and creating fragmented smaller movements. But both Harvey and Jameson are hopeful these smaller changes will form on big ’rainbow alliance’ to change the world.

In conclusion it’s clear our society is changing, but that does not require new theories. While we are no longer living in ‘modern society’, as a result of the forces of technology and globalisation, we have not certainly entered a postmodern society. Actually, whether or not we had entered a postmodern society we would not know because the major falling of postmodern sociologists is that they do not clearly define society enough for us to be able to exceptionally follow their theory. Also Post-modernism is a meta-narrative in itself and so we can dismiss it. For that reason, it is useful to follow theories of late modernity or of Marxism in this state of society, because both visibly clarify why and how we have reached such a state and how we can advance and improve society from this situation.