In the war for hegemony, when guns are blazing and victims are falling like nine pins, mayhem tends to overwhelm every stratum of society — except the ruling class — with democratic disregard. The dispossessed and the expropriated ones are more prone/likely to suffer the plague. The capital is in recession and the system under its command is crumbling. Hence, all niceties and subtleties, which once characterised the capitalistic mode of production, have become onerous for its survival. Nearly one and a half century ago, Marx had foreseen this contradiction quite clearly and succinctly analysed it in the following words: “At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters.” Democracy akin to other slogans such as liberty, equality and fraternity has become a fetter for bourgeois interests. This is why, even in the most developed nations, the concept of democracy finds itself under siege. The nations that once advocated and sanctified it now seem weary and finding its ersatz since its continuation has become counterproductive for their hegemonic designs, which are closely aligned with the ‘free’ movement of capital. For their hegemonic designs, the very concept is turning out to be an obstacle, an impediment that needs to be reshaped. Its meanings, functions and content all have to be redefined. Even its heavily manipulated and indoctrinated form has outlived its utility since its subversive content, its truth refuses to be invalidated by the powers, which, to attain their objectives, distort it through the ‘cunning of reason’, a weapon that they own in the shape of the media. For its realisation and reproduction capital needs absolute control over the toiling mass of ‘free’ labour and unfettered movement across the globe. This is the only way this system can work. Democratic freedom can only be tolerated if it does not cause a conflict of interest. Low-key tension and contradiction in words and not in deeds is acceptable. Anything beyond this has to pass through the scrutiny of ‘responsibility’; it has to adjust itself with the rationale of existing reality based on property relations. Over the years, western democracy developed a culture of free association of ideas. After the demise of the Soviet Union, this culture too became outmoded if not pernicious. Through the jugglery of words and/or sleight of hand, the culture was diluted first and distorted later. The concept of refusing to exercise one’s right of freedom as an act of freedom was advanced, augmented and insinuated in public mind. Servitude was renamed liberation while heteronomy became autonomy. Hence, distortion of the rationale of capitalistic irrationality reached its acme. Freedom became a cliché to “choose what was always the same”(Adorno). Herbert Marcuse has attributed this madness brimming with method as “the delinquency of civilisation”. To elaborate my point I am quoting what Bill Kelly, the editor of the New York Times, in his response to the revelations of Wiki Leaks stated in 2010. He wrote, “We agree wholeheartedly that transparency is not an absolute good. Freedom of the press includes freedom not to publish, and that is a freedom we exercise with some regularity.” This Orwellian language confirms the hegemony of the dominant class with an interesting melange of coercion and chicanery. It is fascism, pure and simple. Perhaps in the same spirit, Pinochet, the merciless butcher of Chile, stated his hideous remarks “democracy occasionally must be bathed in blood’. In the blood of whom? Certainly not the ruling class. A prescription akin to this presents a brilliant cure in which the patient — in this case democracy — invariably ends up losing his life. How the superstructure/the ruling class, which rules an unhappy base permeates and dictates the media can specifically be seen by the role played by the latter in Iraq and Ukraine. The myths woven around weapons of mass destruction, the concocted stories and doctored pictures of Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine are cases in point. How the most influential newspaper of the US manipulated the facts is one example of the way media conforms a hegemonic universe. It only produces what Roland Barthes states is “a para-literature, which does not dare any longer to tell its name”. It numbs the minds, turns the thought process hazy and blurs the reality. With constant repetition and forceful advertisement, communication develops a hypnotic character. False becomes true, dirt and blots turn into symbols of neatness, coup d’état becomes the people’s uprising hence opposites are reconciled. Language becomes a tool for domination. While concealing the facts, it reveals half truths, which lead society no where but to the state of utter confusion. As Adorno states, “Every detail is so firmly stamped with sameness that nothing can appear, which is not marked at birth, or does not meet with approval at first sight.” This totalitarian terror is exactly what the hegemonic class demands from the media, which mediates between a master and the slave and keeps the latter consciously unconscious from the facts. A tawdry tactic but deemed necessary to keep the hegemony of ruling class intact. Even otherwise “a definite consciousness of and a general belief in authority have been characteristic of modern society from the beginning”. Hence, in capitalist society, freedom and reason, “from the outset (are) a contradiction” (Herbert Marcuse). For perpetuating this ‘authority’ the media acts as its veritable tool. It maliciously insinuates and/or reaffirms to a false belief that humanity has always retained servility as its innate quality. A false proclamation of humanity’s invariable connatural submission to an authority, real or sham, mortal or immortal, human or divine is advanced. Once submission is injected into the unconscious it is convenient to project domination as natural, rational and real. This reality is then presented as irrevocable, immutable and inescapable. Reality and rationality are intertwined in such a complex and tedious way that their separation demands a concerted reason. A capitalist society for its progress necessitates “men without memory”. Hence, in a society akin to this, neither reason nor memory stays intact. The unlimited terror of the market carries emotional violence at its heels. Few glimpses of it can be seen during the incidence when a leading journalist of Pakistan was put to sword both by hegemonic forces and figuratively by many a media corporation. How quickly the latter came to rescue the former is both amazing and amusing. The master-slave relationship became instantly evident. Civil society, which is barely civil, too found itself weighing with its antagonist, the army. The royal and the loyal both shrieked simultaneously. The war of words overwhelmed the wail of the victim. For the wounded journalist, not survival as himself but mere survival appears to have become a task improbable. It was the consequence of calling an institution into question. Had he attempted to threaten the system one could easily imagine the gravity of his fate. Constitutional and superimposed equality turned out to be an institutionalised inequality and the myth of freedom crashed and revealed itself as servitude. In a split of moment the reality hidden behind an aura of liberty and the façade of democracy became apparent with nonchalant ease. The man who nearly though valiantly lost his life was dubbed a traitor. Bludgeoned, bruised and betrayed, he found himself in bewildering isolation. Was he rebuked and rebuffed by the dunces or was he a victim of fuzzy analysts playing grubby tricks on him? No analysis can be more distant from reality than this. He railed against the rules hence the impotents were turned omnipotent by the power that considers itself invincible. What is the other and real force stimulating this buffoonery? Perhaps necessity, which makes the man buy, sell and barter himself. To confront this necessity Faust exchanged his soul for some form of immortality. Understanding and overcoming the necessity is a feature of humanity. Only living beings toil to overcome the constraints imposed by nature. Cadavers do not and cannot respond. For our valiant journalist and for all those who still have not turned into cadavers this tragedy carries a lesson: “To democratise the villages without altering the property relations is absurd” (Barrington Moore). The property-owners, the hegemon will neither allow the one nor the other to realise. “Freedom from want, freedom from the daily struggle for existence, from earning a living is the only concrete freedom. The unrealistic sound of these propositions is indicative, not of their utopian character, but of the strength of the (hegemonic) forces, which prevent their realisation” (Herbert Marcuse). The writer is based in Australia and has authored books on socialism and history. He can be reached via email at saulatnagi@hotmail.com or on his personal blog saulatnagi.com