Subjectivity (Culture)

How do ‘we’ in the wealthy parts of the world rationalize our constant deferral of doing anything much, beyond symbolic moments of ameliorative action, about the problems starkly presented every night on the world news? Intensifying globalization, from electronic capitalism to techno-science, has drawn the fate of the world into an ever-tightening orbit. Indeed, the plight of others has become increasingly immediate. Images of crisis abound. However, despite the presence of these crises—including projections of global climate change, food insecurity and the deaths of over three million children a year from malnutrition in the global South—life goes on in the North. While there are many ways to approach such an issue, this article asks, ‘What kind of individualism, and what kinds of values and norms, allow for the deferral of an alternative politics of consequence?’ Part of the answer, it argues, is found in a form of projective individualism. This we suggest is a dominant condition of the autonomous personhood long associated with modernization and globalization. It is asserted that desires for self-improvement and self-affirmation have emerged as commonsense understandings of life’s possibilities. In this situation, persons are confronted with a tension between the joyfulness of achieving desires and the world-weariness which accompanies awareness of the scale of global problems. The article examines how the purveyors of a form of soft consumption have stepped in to ameliorate this tension, offering new places and experiences—third spaces of comfortable pleasure, ethically adjudicated experiences—that address the cultural and political needs of projective individuals. Through a series of examples, the article argues that projective individualism prompts a form of sympathy-without-empathy that undermines possibilities for solidarity with the Global South on social and environmental issues.