Aquest seminari proposa investigar les noves lluites i les estratègies activistes que intenten intervenir en les formes de producció de valor del capitalisme neoliberal. El capitalisme industrial, explica Marx, s’ha constituït entorn de la ficció del «treballador lliure», propietari d’una mercaderia anomenada força de treball. Pensar l’empresari i l’assalariat com dos negociants autònoms que desitgen intercanviar béns en un mercat lliure és simplement la ficció en la qual es fonamenta l’explotació del treballador. Tanmateix, les lluites del moviment obrer no tenien com a objectiu tornar a l’artesanat o a formes prèvies de producció. Al contrari: els sindicats es van formar precisament com a moviments de treballadors lliures capaços d’entrar en el mercat i modificar les seves condicions de venda. És precisament l’èxit d’aquesta estratègia el que ha portat els detentors de capital a desplaçar la recerca de beneficis des de la producció industrial cap a l’especulació financera. Aprenent del moviment obrer, potser avui cal lluitar per inventar noves formes d’acreditació i de producció de valor que puguin funcionar dins dels mercats financers.

[Aquest text estarà disponible només en anglès]

Michel Feher will focus the seminar in the following subjects:
1. My life is my business: the neoliberal agenda and the entrepreneurial self
In the immediate post-war period, the founding fathers of the neoliberal movement worried about the impending conflict between democracy and capitalism. Majority rule, they feared, would enable demagogues to fuel the resentment of affluent minority groups such as capital owners – thereby paving the way for the advent of socialism. At the same time, since Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman and their followers saw themselves as the true keepers of the liberal heritage, they could hardly advocate the suspension of the electoral process – except in “peripheral” countries like Chile.

Thus, in order to combine the safeguard of economic freedom with the exercise of political liberties, neoliberal reformers started working on a multilayered program purported to wrest market prices and competition from the realm of democratic debates. While largely comprised of measures designed to keep corporations eager to compete and governments focused on enabling competition, their agenda was ultimately about modifying the psychological outlook of the salaried classes: as they saw it, if people who did not belong to the business world were made to think and behave like entrepreneurs, they would be likely to vote accordingly – thereby making democracy safe for capitalism.

2. Appreciable projects: financial capitalism and the invested self
After being sidelined for about thirty years, the proponents of neoliberal reforms eventually prevailed: on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean, their recommendations formed the intellectual framework of the 1980s “conservative revolution”. Regarding the role of the State, neoliberal policies delivered what they had promised: whereas under the previous regime of welfare capitalism, governing agencies had been required to shelter the vulnerable segments of the population from the roughness of market relations, they were now asked to protect the fragile mechanisms of the market against the unreasonable demands of the population. However, with respect to the social engineering dimension of their project, the implementation of the neoliberal program did not produce the anticipated results.

To soften the impact of monetarist shock therapy and supply-side economics on their constituents, governments inspired by Hayek’s and Friedman’s guidelines endeavored to lift all restrictions to the circulation of capital – across national borders and financial institutions – as well as to the creation of assets – hence the development of the derivatives market. Yet, far from enticing people to envision their lives as a profit-seeking business, the ensuing hegemony of financial markets led them to treat the various aspects of their existence as so many credit-seeking projects. In other words, rather than an entrepreneurial self whose choices proceed from calculations of costs and benefits, what neoliberal governments have actually fashioned is an invested self whose behavior is modeled on the speculative bets of an asset manager.

3. Investee activism: another speculation is possible
Though hardly planned or even foreseen by neoliberal scholars, the invested self is the character that the triumph of their perspective actually produced. For that reason, his or her advent also points to a gradual yet decisive change of emphasis in the critiques leveled at capitalism. Indeed, once centered on corporate profits, criticism is now primarily aimed at the conditions under which financial institutions allocate credit. What has shifted is thus the focus of the discontent generated by capitalism: previously located in the market where labor is made into a commodity and priced accordingly, it has moved to the market where capital is turned into assets and evaluated as such.
In the socialist tradition, exploitation designates the conditions of employment under capitalism. The so-called “free” workers are exploited insofar as their wages are inferior to the exchange value of the wealth they produce. According to this description, capitalism’s core relationship involves employers who exploit and workers who are exploited. Investors, however, do not easily fit into this description of capitalist exploitation. What is specific to them is their ability to select the endeavors that deserve resources: their distinctive prerogative resides in the allocation of capital, rather than the extortion of income. In light of this functional difference, to claim that financial markets are hegemonic should have major implications for the critics of capitalism. Having to stress a type of harm other than exploitation, they necessarily need to identify a harmed party other than the exploited worker, and are consequently led to delineate another form of resistance than the time-honored modes of struggle against exploitative bosses.

Michel Feher

Patrocinador principal d'activitats:
Estrella Damm
Auditori MACBA


3, 4 I 5 DE DESEMBRE DE 2014, DE 19 A 21.30 h
Lloc: auditori Preu: 15 €. Amb inscripció prèvia. Places limitades.
Per obtenir el certificat d'assistència cal assistir al 100% de les sessions.

Michel Feher és filòsof i editor, fundador de Zone Books (Nova York) i president de Cette France-là (París), una organització francesa que va dur a terme un seguiment de la política d’immigració francesa sota la presidència de Sarkozy. És autor de Powerless by Design: The Age of the International Community (2000) i coeditor de Nongovernmental Politics (2007), amb Gaëlle Krikorian i Yates McKee. Més recentment ha estat coautor i editor de Cette France-là 1, 2007/2008 i Cette France-là 2, 2008/2009.

Programes públics MACBA
macba [at] macba [dot] cat
Tel: 93 481 33 68

Continguts relacionats


Sobre el crèdit, l'autoestima i sharing*: Introducció a la condició neoliberal. 15/12/2012 (només disponible en francès)
Seminari "Inversors i invertits: els nous contorns de la lluita de classes" a càrrec de Michel Feher (3a sessió)
Seminari "Inversors i invertits: els nous contorns de la lluita de classes" a càrrec de Michel Feher (2a sessió)
Seminari "Inversors i invertits: els nous contorns de la lluita de classes" a càrrec de Michel Feher (1a sessió)
Son[i]a #150 Michel Feher
L’essència del fragment i del mòdul té un ressò profund en el meu treball.
Pep Agut