Editing Max Horkheimer (section)

==== ''Dialectic of Enlightenment'' ====
{{Main|Dialectic of Enlightenment}}
Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno collaborated to publish ''[[Dialectic of Enlightenment]]'', which was originally published in 1944. The inspiration for this piece came from when Horkheimer and Adorno had to flee Germany, because of Hitler, and go to New York. They went to America and "absorbed the popular culture"; thinking that it was a form of totalitarianism.<ref>Mann, Douglas. 2008. "Slamming Society: Critical Theory and Situationism." p. 106 in ''Understanding Society: A Survey of Modern Social Theory''. Don Mills<!--publisher-->; Oxford University Press.</ref> Nonetheless, Dialectic of Enlightenment's main argument was to serve as a wide-ranging critique of the "self-destruction of enlightenment".<ref name="Elliott 1996" /> The work criticized popular culture as "the product of a culture industry whose goal was to stupefy the masses with endless mass produced copies of the same thing" (Lemert). Along with that, Horkheimer and Adorno had a few arguments; one being that these mass-produced products only appear to change over time. Horkheimer and Adorno stated that these products were so standardized in order to help consumers comprehend and appreciate the products with little attention given to them. They expressed, "the result is a constant reproduction of the same thing" (Adorno and Horkheimer, 1993 [1944]). However, they also explain how pseudo-individuality is encouraged among these products in order to keep the consumers coming back for more. They argue that small differences in products within the same area are acceptable.<ref name="Lemert, Charles 2010">Lemert, Charles. 2010. ''Social Theory: The Multicultural and Classic Readings''. 4th ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.</ref>

The similar patterns found in the content of popular culture (films, popular songs and radio) have the same central message; "it's all linked to "the necessity of obedience of the masses to the social hierarchy in place in advanced capitalist societies".<ref>Mann, Douglas. 2008. "Slamming Society: Critical Theory and Situationism", p. 107 in ''Understanding Society: A Survey of Modern Social Theory''. Don Mills<!--publisher-->; Oxford University Press.</ref> These products appeal to the masses and encourage conformity to the consumers. In return, capitalism remains in power while buyers continue to consume from the industry. This is dangerous because the consumers' belief that the powers of technology are liberating, starts to increase. To support their claim, Horkheimer and Adorno, "proposed an antidote: not just thinking the relations of ''things'', but also, as an immediate second step, thinking ''through'' that thinking, self-reflexively." In other words, technology lacks self-reflexivity. Nonetheless, Horkheimer and Adorno believed that art was an exception, because it "is an open-ended system with no fixed rules"; thus, it could not be an object of the industry.<ref>Parker, Noel and Stuart Sim., ed. 1997. The A-Z Guide to Modern Social and Political Theorists. Prentice Hall: London. pp. 1–2.</ref>