Dear Felix,

>But to break out of the mold of neoliberal hyper-individuality and the
cult of "weak ties", to formulate something like a left perspective,
there needs to be a realization of a common fate, of a problem that
cannot be solved individually, but demands a collective response. From
this, a practice of solidarity can be built. <

I have learned a lot from living in Paris for over two decades, especially
from the recent renaissance of economic sociology and institutional
economics here. I have hung out with European and Latin American activists
who drew me into the alter-globalization movement launched in Porto Alegre
in 2001. I met you and likewise gained greatly from our civilized
interaction and friendship, as I have from Brian, Alex and others on
nettime and in person. But -- there has to be a but -- I believe that there
is one crippling intellectual impediment above all others that undermines
political initiatives generated in this network. It is the belief that more
solidarity can fix excessive individualism.

When I grew up in Manchester after the war, solidarity was a powerful
weapon against privacy, the cult of being exclusive. We could  not close
our house doors since neighbors should be free to come and go as they
please. When the men took their morning crap in the outside loos, they left
the door open to converse across the low backyard walls. After sanitation
was modernized, you could still  accidentally run into a old lady in the
bathroom who couldn't bring herself to close the door. All bedroom doors
were left open. The corner pub was our living room. When the gas company
started work with their machines outside too early, half a dozen women
would assail them on behalf of   "our street". They shut down the machines.
When United scored a goal, the combined shouts of 50,000 men cowed the
women and children left behind like a hundred bull roarers in a New Guinea
village.

By the 90s, having lived mainly in Britain, North America, West Africa and
the Caribbean, I was convinced that solidarity in that form of concrete
class solidarity was now gone forever. To my joy, living in Paris proved
that I was wrong. The republican tradition of manifestation, of street
protests, was alive and well. It was not for nothing that France gave us
society and solidarity, England economic individualism, Germany philosophy
and history, and America democratic revolution. But scratch the surface and
it gets more complicated -- the English are profoundly conformist, the
Americans even more so and I have never come across a people as
individualistic as the French. Look at their intersections jammed at rush
hour, the way they bust into queues, their behavior at supermarket
checkouts.

All this is preamble, a phantasmagoria in Benjamin's terms. To get serious,
I have to go back to Durkheim and Mauss. French social thinkers around 1900
blamed it all on Herbert Spencer. Market economy was an English invention
(with some help from Adam Smith) and incurably individualistic, a premise
taken to evolutionist extremes by Spencer's social Darwinism. When Talcott
Parsons wrote The structure of social action (1937), he began by asking who
killed Herbert Spencer and how? His answer was Durkheim, Weber, Pareto and
Alfred Marshall (yes, the synthesizer of marginalist economics and
Keynes'teacher).

Emile Durkheim, in The Division of Labor in Society (1893) and his nephew
Marcel Mauss in The Gift (1925) and extensive political writings insisted
that markets were social (the non-contractual element in the individual
contract) and that humanity is homo duplex --both individual and social (or
democracy must reconcile freedom and equality according to Tocqueville).
Bourgeois ideology everywhere contrasts individualism and society, as
Spencer did. In this the left as usual reproduces the dogma of its
capitalist opponents. Mauss was a cooperative socialist, active in the
French Section of the International Workers party (SFIO) and a close friend
of Sidney and Beatrice Webb who, with Marshall and others, led the Fabian
wing of the Labour Party. They aimed for consumer democracy building on the
solidarity and individualism of existing capitalist societies, through
coops, unions and mutual insurance.

Fair trade isn't just helping poor foreign farmers. It offers feel good
shopping for bobos. If neoliberalism promotes "hyper-individuality" and
"weak ties", it does so by doping the masses with the academic social
sciences as a smokescreen for its own strategy for carving up the world as
a plutocracy. Ensuring that capital flows freely everywhere is a
coordinated social strategy. Why else would the US have 25 % of the world's
prisoners, most of the world's weapons and the internet corporations who
sabotage our ability to make society? When the corporations claim to be
people like you and me in order to benefit from human rights laws, while
unlike us retaining limited liability for debt, they combine individualism
and global power in ways that are hidden from most and hardly revealed by
setting up little clubby institutions that deny the legitimacy of their
members' individuality and desire for freedom as for belonging to others as
equals.

Europe is politically a mess and Latin America no better. This strategy of
fixing individualistic markets with social clubs is bad politics because
it's bad anthropology. Trump and Brexit may be bringing the Anglos to their
knees -- or not. But it is time for the Latin tendency to recognize that
the British and American empires are no longer what they were and that
opposing individuals to society was always self-defeating. The Cold War
pitted free enterprise against communism and both were a trfavesty of the
forces driving the American and Soviet empires. We need to bring social and
liberal democracy together somehow. We need realism, courage and some heavy
hitters along the way.

Keith

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 10:54 PM Felix Stalder <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On 27.12.18 20:11, Brian Holmes wrote:
> > So what's to be done is to generate new aspirations, new ideas of the
> > good life, and initial models for putting them into practice at local or
> > regional scale.
>
> #  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:
#  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