Mason really captures the intensity of the breakdown, not only of
neoliberalism, but of the post-WWII interstate system. He also manages to
keep Asia in the picture, which is essential, because it is the emergence
of the China-centric economy that destabilized the former Trilateral
hierarchy of the US, Western Europe and Japan. However I have always found
Mason's prescriptions incoherent, and in this case he goes off into some
fantasy about Keynes that is totally invisible on the actual political
landscape. Except maybe in the UK itself? If that's true, as David
suggests, it would explain what I don't get about the article. It would be
really great to hear more detail about the Corbynites' analysis of the
international situation and how they translate that into a domestic policy
program (Barbrook, where are you?).

In the US there is no broad discussion about the need for what Alex calls a
"new pact," and the reason for this is that, quite unlike the situation in
the 1930s, the economy is currently booming and there is (as yet) no
credible threat of authoritarian control over the prosperous sectors. The
professional-managerial types of the digital economy, yesterday's "new
class," have firmly hitched their fortunes to the rising oligarchs, and
there's far more interest in the sales of Elon Musk's flamethrower than in
any transformation of the social order. We cannot currently produce
anything on the order of Keynes, much less Marx, because the macro-level
breakdown of the postwar system has really been caused at the micro level
by the ethical-political decay of the science-based professions that Felix
has analyzed. The emergence of the professionals as a force in their own
right, based on education and therefore distinct from the
capital-accumulating bourgeoisie, lent the consistency of a quest for
objective truth to all the properly political discussions about how to
organize a complex society. Neoliberalism dissolved that ethical component
of technocratic society by encouraging professionals to abandon the state
and any notion of public service, in favor of entrepreneurship with its
self-interested disruption of legitimate rules and norms (something that
Paolo Virno analyzed perfectly over 20 years ago in his text on
Opportunism, Cynicism and Fear, which in English is tepidly called The
Ambivalence of Disenchantment).

Alex writes:

 to stave off nationalism, racism, authoritarianism we need a new social
pact (similar to fordism in its macro elements) that distributes the
productivity of machine learning to all - a pact between the forces
representing the female and multiethnic precariat and those of digital
oligopoly

Alex, I totally agree about the new pact but I think the reason it's not
happening lies precisely in the description of its potential partners. The
precariat as theorized in the 1990s and 2000s totally ignored the
impoverished industrial workers outside major metropolitan areas and the
agricultural sector, paying only lip service to migrant farm workers. It
had nothing to say to the former artisanal and commercial middle classes
whose "included" status was shattered by the opportunistic disruption of
business models and the retreat of the state from anything to do with
social reproduction. Unlike Fordism, it offered no productive pathway
toward membership in any kind of social pact, but only dangled the promise
of a redistribution of financial wealth whose spigot has now dried up. It
is true that machine learning will unleash a new flood of industrial
productivity comparable to that released by the cynical relocation of
Fordist industry to Asia during the neoliberal period. But without any
corresponding form of productive inclusion, that flood when it comes will
only drown people in more meaningless and abusive products, exactly as the
flood of cheap Asian "goods" - which should be called "bads" - has
destroyed the social fabric in the US and led to things like the opioid
crisis and the election of Trump. Let me be clear that this was no fault of
the Asians, but instead, it was down to the owners of capital who sought a
fast buck, and to the politicians who enabled them. The evil twin of
precariat theory in the US was nothing other than Clintonian
entrepreneurialism, which appealed to the vote of women and minority
sectors in order to increase the agency of bankers and the emerging digital
oligarchs.

Anywhere you go in the world, the contrast between the glittering
metropolis and the toxic countryside is now obvious. It is underwritten
everywhere by equally stark divides within the metropolitan order, which
remain invisible to people who move only between their jobs, their
entertainment palaces and whatever they call home (from cheap flat to
luxury penthouse). The thing that has now started and happening and is
about to intensify radically is not just labor instability and household
debt. Instead the cheap flats, decayed middle class houses and rural shacks
are going to start getting massively destroyed by climate-change phenomena,
as they already have been in places like Puerto Rico or during the flooding
in India. The real opportunity for collective investment and a new form of
productive citizenship lies in eco-technics, by which I do not mean AI or
centralized geo-engineering but instead, dispersed transformation of the
energy and agricultural systems accompanied but pervasive reworking of the
patterns of inhabitation and entirely new forms of ecological stewardship,
based on the logic of ecosystem services (which needs to be amplified by a
new concept of human services to ecosystems). Keynes has no blueprint for
this situation. Neither do any of the anarcho-libertarian theorists of more
recent years, including the Accelerationists with their absurd rallying cry
of luxury communism.

I actually think there's a theoretical/practical emergency unfolding before
our eyes, except it's still dinner hour below decks on the Titanic, and
most people are just anxiously wondering how low they can go on the tip to
the waiter. At least Paul Mason went up for a look-see at the ocean.

Although we all surely disagree from the get-go, let's produce some
converging ideas on the scale of the current planetary weather.

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://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Reply via email to