Brian Holmes on Wed, 12 Nov 2008 03:23:46 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> Keynesianism is IN |
Alex Foti wrote: > Polanyi is superrelevant (wish had studied him more) and i think the > self-defence of society to shape and mould the emerging pattern of > regulation is what will determine whether this return to keynesianism is > to the left or to the right. union struggles are in the ascendant, new > unionization will occur. we'll have to start thinking organizing millions > of unemployed. the shift to the right, in europe especially, is an > imminent danger, you're right. but ideas especially today, in times of > historical bifurcation when ideology affects the emerging makeup of new > institutions for macro and microregulation, are the ones that determine a > dramatically polar political outcomes. This is the basic point for the next 5 years, and I think the general trend will mostly be decided in the US in the first year of Obama's presidency, and also in China under conditions which very few of us will even be able to understand, let alone influence. Society is rather seriously in danger right now. The logic which guided it for some thirty years has proven insufficient to the task. This neoliberal logic is at its most visible in the financial markets, but as Foucault shows in his two courses of 77-78 and 78-79 (thankfully available in English now) that same logic extends deep into subjectivity, it forms a calculus of the individual and his/her life decisions. The neoliberal idea is you calculate for your personal chances on the market and basta. For decades, fools like Giddens accepted this logic and taught us how to abide by it. But today it is broken and almost no one is prepared for that. Today we have no calculus of society. What should union movements call for? What should environmentalists and cultural critics contribute to a crisis situation? I think the first thing is to make it clear that we are facing a historic crisis and that this means a general change in the social deal will occur, like it or not. Given the kinds of racism that any surge in the unemployment rate could so easily fuel, this overarching change is gonna be on the order of a socio-political crisis, pitting the generosity of the left against various kinds of middle-class and rightist self-interest, rapidly verging on security-panic and national-fascism. Extreme leftists may not like to work (I don't either by the way) but a lot of the crisis is going to be about the kinds of work that government can offer and to whom. The green rhetoric of the new job programs has to be intelligently criticized and improved, that's what Alex means when he says let's struggle against green capitalism. This is the voice of someone who has thought long and hard about every option, and worked on them with concrete struggles. Politics is not just reacting with the prejudices of your own identity, it's about foreseeing possible futures and weighing in where you can for the best of outcomes. The real struggle is the one that makes changes in reality! The other major issue, in my opinion, is for regional codevelopment. In every rich country, the work is increasingly done by immigrants. The alternative to poisonous racism is a pattern of regional ecodevelopment that eases the economic divide on both sides of the borders and gets people ready to collaborate on surviving and thriving in the twenty-first century. To open up such possibilities means solidarity with other laborers, the regional horizon of a global New Deal. It won't happen tomorrow but struggle for regional social justice (US-Mexico, EU-North Africa and Middle East) can be a beacon, a regulatory principle for every political platform and labor philosophy. Only the left has the generosity to conceive this, and that should be our historic mission, not some foolish disaster-mongering, some idea that it will have to get worse before it gets better. The possibility of disaster is now obvious. The easiest thing is for it to get much much worse. Let me dot the i's and cross the t's. It is possible that none of this latter-day Keynesian stuff will even see the light of day. If our governments were allowed to go on pumping up a dysfunctional financial sector, the only way to pay the social price would be through extreme repression of all the protest and desperate acts that are sure to follow. The capacity for a super-police state is out there, and it is the most likely extrapolation from current trends. In the face of that likelihood, the position that refuses any compromise with social democracy is not the one that I would support. Such a position guarantees that you will be in a total minority, facing a state of terrifying power whose abuses you will help justify. You can see this scenario coming on in France right now, with the sabotage of the train tracks. Sarkozy and his police will become immensely stronger that way! What we need now is not that kind of extremism, but a principled Ghandian extremism with a deep economic, ecological and ethical understanding that can actually shift the majority viewpoints. Anything less is the narcissism of the powerless and it is not on my agenda for the upcoming years. solidarities, Brian # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org