An appropriate example of the solidarity between language
experience and the individual constituted in language is
provided by the breakdown of the East European block, and even
more pointedly by the breakdown of the Soviet Union. Nobody
really suspected that once the infamous Berlin Wall came down,
the people who lived to the east of it, trained and educated in
and for a pragmatic framework whose underlying structure was
reflected in their high degree of literacy, would remain captive
to it as their legal, social, and economic conditions changed.
Despite the common language- German is the language through which
national unity was ascertained-East Germans are prisoners of the
structural characteristics of the society projected on them
through literacy: centralism, clear-cut distinctions,
determinism, strong hierarchical structures, and limited choice.
The invisible but powerful inner conditioning of the East
Germans' literacy-categorically superior to that of their
Western brothers and sisters-is not adequate to the new
pragmatics attained in West Germany and raises obstacles to
East Germany's integration in a dynamic society. The illiterate
pragmatics of high efficiency, associated with high expectations
that seem to outpace actual performance, was foisted on East
Germans by the well intentioned, though politically
opportunistic, government from across a border that should never
have existed.
Things are not different in other parts of the world-Korea,
Hungary, Romania, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Croatia,
Serbia, etc., where the rhythms of pragmatic developments and
social, political, economic, national, and cultural developments
are totally desynchronized. The best poetry was written in East
Europe; most of the books ever written were read by its people.
It is impossible to ignore that the best theater in the world,
the most elaborate cinematography, the best choirs and dance
ensembles, and even the highest level of mathematical theory,
physics, and biology became possible in a context of
restriction, oppression, and disregard of individuals and their
creativity. It is also impossible not to finally realize that the
strength built on literacy-based structures was deceiving and
self-deceiving.
In the not-too-distant past, the people of these countries read
books, attended concerts and operas, and visited museums. Now,
if they are not in misery, they are as obsessed with indulging
in everything they could not have before, even if this means
giving up their spiritual achievements. Consumption is the new
language, even before a basis for efficient practical
experiences is put in place, and sometimes instead of it. The
old relation between the language of the individual and the
language of society displayed patterns of deception and
cowardice. The new emergent relation expresses patterns of
expectation well beyond the efficiency achieved, or hoped for, in
this integrated world of extreme competitive impact. The wall
behind the Wall is embodied in extremely resistant patterns of
human interaction originating in the context of literacy- based
pragmatics. With this example in mind, it is critical to
question whether there are alternatives to the means of
expression people use and to the social program they are
committed to-democracy. The experience of language today is very
different from that of the time when the Jacobins asserted a
notion of democracy as the general will (1798), under the
assumption of a literate background shared by all people.