Re: Pierre Bourdieu est mort

["Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

As Keynes said: "In the long run, .........."

"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:

>      While we are at it, the important libertarian
> philosopher, Robert Nozick, est mort aussi.
> Barkley Rosser
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <gang8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> <TheNewForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 10:31 PM
> Subject: Pierre Bourdieu est mort
>
> > Pierre Bourdieu est mort
> >
> > Pierre Bourdieu est mort, mercredi, à 23 heures, à l'hôpital
> > Saint-Antoine de Paris. Atteint d'un cancer, il était âgé de 71 ans.
> > Internationalement reconnue et discutée, son oeuvre a fondé, d'un point
> > de vue académique, une école de sociologie critique de la modernité qui
> > s'est accompagnée, ces dernières années, d'un engagement de plus en plus
> > prononcé en faveur des mouvements sociaux. Directeur d'études à l'Ecole
> > des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS), élu au Collège de France
> > en 1981, il réunit autour de lui une école sociologique dont la revue
> > "Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales", fondée en 1975, sera la
> > vitrine. Pour ses disciples, sa théorie du monde social constitue une
> > "révolution symbolique", semblable à celles qu'ont pu connaître d'autres
> > disciplines.
> >
> > The essence of neoliberalism
> >
> > Pierre Bourdieu
> > Professor at the Collège de France
> >
> > Le Monde, December 1998
> > La globalización en La BitBlioteca
> > La nouvelle vulgate planétaire (dans le Monde diplomatique)
> >
> > As the dominant discourse would have it, the economic world is a pure
> > and perfect order, implacably unrolling the logic of its predictable
> > consequences, and prompt to repress all violations by the sanctions that
> > it inflicts, either automatically or - more unusually - through the
> > intermediary of its armed extensions, the International Monetary Fund
> > (IMF) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
> > (OECD) and the policies they impose: reducing labour costs, reducing
> > public expenditures and making work more flexible. Is the dominant
> > discourse right? What if, in reality, this economic order were no more
> > than the implementation of a utopia - the utopia of neoliberalism - thus
> > converted into a political problem? One that, with the aid of the
> > economic theory that it proclaims, succeeds in conceiving of itself as
> > the scientific description of reality?
> >
> > This tutelary theory is a pure mathematical fiction. From the start it
> > has been founded on a formidable abstraction. For, in the name of a
> > narrow and strict conception of rationality as individual rationality,
> > it brackets the economic and social conditions of rational orientations
> > and the economic and social structures that are the condition of their
> > application.
> >
> > To give the measure of this omission, it is enough to think just of the
> > educational system. Education is never taken account of as such at a
> > time when it plays a determining role in the production of goods and
> > services as in the production of the producers themselves. From this
> > sort of original sin, inscribed in the
> > Walrasian myth (1) of "pure theory", flow all of the deficiencies and
> > faults of the discipline of economics and the fatal obstinacy with which
> > it attaches itself to the arbitrary opposition which it induces, through
> > its mere existence, between a properly economic logic, based on
> > competition and efficiency, and social logic, which is subject to the
> > rule of fairness.
> >
> > That said, this "theory" that is desocialised and dehistoricised at its
> > roots has, today more than ever, the means of making itself true and
> > empirically verifiable. In effect, neoliberal discourse is not just one
> > discourse among many. Rather, it is a "strong discourse" - the way
> > psychiatric discourse is in an asylum, in Erving Goffman's analysis (2).
> > It is so strong and so hard to combat only because it has on its side
> > all of the forces of a world of relations of forces, a world that it
> > contributes to making what it is. It does this most notably by orienting
> > the economic choices of those who dominate economic relationships. It
> > thus adds its own symbolic force to these relations of forces. In the
> > name of this scientific programme, converted into a plan of political
> > action, an immense political project is underway, although its status as
> > such  is denied because it appears to be purely negative. This project
> > aims to create the conditions under which the "theory" can be realised
> > and can function: a programme of the methodical destruction of
> > collectives.
> >
> > The movement toward the neoliberal utopia of a pure and perfect market
> > is made possible by the politics of financial deregulation.  And it is
> > achieved through the transformative and, it must be said, destructive
> > action of all of the political measures (of which the most recent is the
> > Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI),  designed to protect foreign
> > corporations and their investments from national states) that aim to
> > call into question any and all collective structures that could serve as
> > an obstacle to the logic of
> > the pure market: the nation, whose space to manoeuvre continually
> > decreases; work groups, for example through the individualisation of
> > salaries and of careers as a function of individual competences, with
> > the consequent atomisation of workers; collectives for the defence of
> > the rights of workers, unions, associations, cooperatives; even the
> > family, which loses part of its control over consumption through the
> > constitution of markets by age groups.
> >
> > The neoliberal programme draws its social power from the political and
> > economic power of those whose interests it expresses: stockholders,
> > financial operators, industrialists, conservative or social-democratic
> > politicians who have been converted to the reassuring layoffs of
> > laisser-faire, high-level financial officials eager to impose policies
> > advocating their own extinction because, unlike the managers of firms,
> > they run no risk of having eventually to pay the consequences.
> > Neoliberalism tends on the whole to favour severing the economy from
> > social realities and thereby constructing, in reality, an economic
> > system conforming to its description in pure theory, that is a sort of
> > logical machine that presents itself as a chain of constraints
> > regulating economic agents.
> >
> > The globalisation of financial markets, when joined with the progress of
> > information technology, ensures an unprecedented mobility of capital. It
> > gives investors concerned with the short-term profitability of their
> > investments the possibility of permanently comparing the profitability
> > of the largest corporations and, in consequence, penalising these firms'
> > relative setbacks.  Subjected to this permanent threat, the corporations
> > themselves have to adjust more and more rapidly to the exigencies of the
> > markets, under penalty of "losing the market's confidence", as they say,
> > as well as the support of their stockholders. The latter, anxious to
> > obtain short-term profits, are more and more able to impose their will
> > on managers, using financial directorates to establish the rules under
> > which managers operate and to shape their policies regarding hiring,
> > employment, and wages.
> >
> > Thus the absolute reign of flexibility is established, with employees
> > being hiring on fixed-term contracts or on a temporary basis and
> > repeated corporate restructurings and, within the firm itself,
> > competition among autonomous divisions as well as among teams forced to
> > perform multiple functions. Finally, this competition is extended to
> > individuals themselves, through the individualisation of the wage
> > relationship: establishment of individual performance objectives,
> > individual performance evaluations, permanent evaluation, individual
> > salary increases or granting of bonuses as a function of competence and
> > of individual merit; individualised career paths; strategies of
> > "delegating responsibility" tending to ensure the self-exploitation of
> > staff who, simple wage labourers in relations of strong hierarchical
> > dependence, are at the same time held responsible for their sales, their
> > products, their branch, their store, etc. as though they were
> > independent contractors. This pressure toward "self-control" extends
> > workers' "involvement" according to the techniques of  "participative
> > management" considerably beyond management level. All of these are
> > techniques of rational domination that impose over-involvement in work
> > (and not only among
> > management) and work under emergency or high-stress conditions. And they
> > converge to weaken or abolish collective standards or solidarities (3).
> >
> > In this way, a Darwinian world emerges - it is the struggle of all
> > against all at all levels of the hierarchy, which finds support  through
> > everyone clinging to their job and organisation under conditions of
> > insecurity, suffering, and stress. Without a doubt, the practical
> > establishment of this world of struggle would not succeed so completely
> > without the complicity of all of the precarious arrangements that
> > produce insecurity and of the existence of a reserve army of employees
> > rendered docile by these social processes that make their situations
> > precarious, as well as by the permanent threat of unemployment. This
> > reserve army exists at all levels of the hierarchy, even at the higher
> > levels, especially among managers. The ultimate foundation of this
> > entire economic order placed under the sign of freedom is in effect the
> > structural violence of unemployment, of the insecurity of job tenure and
> > the menace of layoff that it implies. The condition of the "harmonious"
> > functioning of the individualist micro-economic model is a mass
> > phenomenon, the existence of a reserve army of the unemployed.
> >
> > This structural violence also weighs on what is called the labour
> > contract (wisely rationalised and rendered unreal by the "theory of
> > contracts"). organisational discourse has never talked as much of trust,
> > co-operation, loyalty, and organisational culture as in an era when
> > adherence to the organisation is obtained at each moment by eliminating
> > all temporal guarantees of employment (three-quarters of hires are for
> > fixed duration, the proportion of temporary employees keeps rising,
> > employment "at will" and the
> > right to fire an individual tend to be freed from any restriction).
> >
> > Thus we see how the neoliberal utopia tends to embody itself in the
> > reality of a kind of infernal machine, whose necessity imposes itself
> > even upon the rulers. Like the Marxism of an earlier time, with which,
> > in this regard, it has much in common, this utopia evokes powerful
> > belief - the free trade faith - not only among those who live off it,
> > such as financiers, the owners and managers of large corporations, etc.,
> > but also among those, such as high-level government officials and
> > politicians, who derive their justification for existing from it. For
> > they sanctify the power of markets in the name of economic efficiency,
> > which requires the elimination of administrative or political barriers
> > capable of inconveniencing the owners of capital in their individual
> > quest for the maximisation of individual profit, which has been turned
> > into a model of rationality. They want independent central banks. And
> > they preach the subordination of nation-states to the requirements of
> > economic freedom for the masters of the economy, with the suppression of
> > any regulation of any market, beginning with the labour market, the
> > prohibition of deficits and inflation, the general privatisation of
> > public services, and the reduction of public and social expenses.
> >
> > Economists may not necessarily share the economic and social interests
> > of the true believers and may have a variety of individual psychic
> > states regarding the economic and social effects of the utopia which
> > they cloak with mathematical reason. Nevertheless, they have enough
> > specific interests in the field of economic science to contribute
> > decisively to the production and reproduction of belief in the
> > neoliberal utopia. Separated from the realities of the economic and
> > social world by their existence and above all by their intellectual
> > formation, which is most frequently purely abstract, bookish, and
> > theoretical, they are particularly inclined to confuse the things of
> > logic with the logic of things.
> >
> > These economists trust models that they almost never have occasion to
> > submit to the test of experimental verification and are led to look down
> > upon the results of the other historical sciences, in which they do not
> > recognise the purity and crystalline transparency of their mathematical
> > games, whose true necessity
> > and profound complexity they are often incapable of understanding. They
> > participate and collaborate in a formidable economic and social change.
> > Even if some of its consequences horrify them (they can join the
> > socialist party and give learned counsel to its representatives in the
> > power structure), it cannot displease them because, at the risk of a few
> > failures, imputable to what they sometimes call "speculative bubbles",
> > it tends to give reality to the ultra-logical utopia (ultra-logical like
> > certain forms of insanity) to which they consecrate their lives.
> >
> > And yet the world is there, with the immediately visible effects of the
> > implementation of the great neoliberal utopia: not only the poverty of
> > an increasingly large segment of the most economically advanced
> > societies, the extraordinary growth in income differences, the
> > progressive disappearance of autonomous universes of cultural
> > production, such as film, publishing, etc., through the intrusive
> > imposition of commercial values, but also and above all two major
> > trends. First is the destruction of all the
> > collective institutions capable of counteracting the effects of the
> > infernal machine, primarily those of the state, repository of all of the
> > universal values associated with the idea of the public realm.  Second
> > is the imposition everywhere, in the upper spheres of the economy and
> > the state as at the heart of corporations, of that sort of moral
> > Darwinism that, with the cult of the winner, schooled in higher
> > mathematics and bungee jumping, institutes the struggle of all against
> > all and cynicism as the norm of all action and
> > behaviour.
> >
> > Can it be expected that the extraordinary mass of suffering produced by
> > this sort of political-economic regime will one day serve as the
> > starting point of a movement capable of stopping the race to the abyss?
> > Indeed, we are faced here with an extraordinary paradox. The obstacles
> > encountered on the way to
> > realising the new order of the lone, but free individual are held today
> > to be imputable to rigidities and vestiges. All direct and conscious
> > intervention of whatever kind, at least when it comes from the state, is
> > discredited in advance and thus condemned to efface itself for the
> > benefit of a pure and anonymous mechanism, the market, whose nature as a
> > site where interests are exercised is forgotten. But in reality, what
> > keeps the social order from dissolving into chaos, despite the growing
> > volume of the endangered population, is the continuity or survival of
> > those very institutions and representatives of the old order that is in
> > the process of being dismantled, and all the work of all of the
> > categories of social workers, as well as all the forms of social
> > solidarity, familial or otherwise.
> >
> > The transition to "liberalism" takes place in an imperceptible manner,
> > like continental drift, thus hiding its effects from view. Its most
> > terrible consequences are those of the long term. These effects
> > themselves are concealed, paradoxically, by the resistance to which this
> > transition is currently giving rise among those who defend the old order
> > by drawing on the resources it contained, on old solidarities, on
> > reserves of social capital that protect an entire portion of the present
> > social order from falling into anomie. This
> > social capital is fated to wither away - although not in the short run -
> > if it is not renewed and reproduced.
> >
> > But these same forces of "conservation", which it is too easy to treat
> > as conservative, are also, from another point of view, forces of
> > resistance to the establishment of the new order and can become
> > subversive forces. If there is still cause for some hope, it is that
> > forces still exist, both in state institutions and in the orientations
> > of social actors (notably individuals and groups most attached to these
> > institutions, those with a tradition of civil and public service) that,
> > under the appearance of simply defending an
> > order that has disappeared and its corresponding "privileges" (which is
> > what they will immediately be accused of), will be able to resist the
> > challenge only by working to invent and construct a new social order.
> > One that will not have as its only law the pursuit of egoistic interests
> > and the individual passion for profit and that will make room for
> > collectives oriented toward the rational pursuit of ends collectively
> > arrived at and collectively ratified.
> >
> > How could we not make a special place among these collectives,
> > associations, unions, and parties for the state: the nation-state, or
> > better yet the supranational state - a European state on the way toward
> > a world state - capable of effectively controlling and taxing the
> > profits earned in the financial markets and, above of all, of
> > counteracting the destructive impact that the latter have on the labour
> > market. This could be done with the aid of labour unions by organising
> > the elaboration and defence of the public interest.
> > Like it or not, the public interest will never emerge, even at the cost
> > of a few mathematical errors, from the vision of accountants (in an
> > earlier period one would have said of "shopkeepers") that the new belief
> > system presents as the supreme form of human accomplishment.
> >
> >
> >
> > (1) Auguste Walras (1800-66), French economist, author of De la nature
> > de la richesse et de l'origine de la valeur ("On the Nature of Wealth
> > and on the Origin of Value") (1848). He was one of the first to attempt
> > to apply mathematics to economic inquiry.
> >
> > (2) Erving Goffman. 1961. Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of
> > Mental Patients and Other Inmates. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
> >
> > (3) See the two journal issues devoted to "Nouvelles formes de
> > domination dans le travail" ("New forms of domination in work"),  Actes
> > de la recherche en sciences sociales, nos. 114, September 1996, and 115,
> > December 1996, especially the introduction by Gabrielle Balazs and
> > Michel Pialoux, "Crise du travail et crise du politique" [Work crisis
> > and political crisis], no. 114: p.3-4.
> >
> > Translated by Jeremy J. Shapiro La globalización en La BitBlioteca La
> > nouvelle vulgate planétaire (dans le Monde diplomatique)
> >
> >