The other day I made a post about tonight's launch of FUSE magazine, with the theme of precarity. I'm just finding out about this whole "precarity" thing myself. The term is useful because it allows for very different and disenfranchised groups of people to connect politically. The current issue of FUSE has an article by Alessandra Renzi and Stephen Turpin outlining the precarity movement.
Precarity describes the situation of temp or flex workers, ranging from workers in supermarkets and other big commercial chains to artists and employees of the service industry.
[...]
By embracing a wide range of communication tools and practices, the precarity movement enables workers less familiar with their political conditions, yet all too familiar with the exploitation they engender, to contextualize their exploitation within the broader logic of capitalism, and connect to a wide range of struggles within a meaningful system of reference.
Izida Zorde, editor of FUSE, says in her introduction:
Citing the myth of the American Dream and its attendant fantasies of limitless opportunity and personal enrichment, [Renzi and Turpin] unpack how in foreclosing on the connections between economic oppression and organized political resistance, dominant North American culture reroutes political questions back onto the isolated individual.
Two articles I read recently seem possibly related under this precarity rubric. The first is a recent piece on the art market (thanks bill) by Jerry Saltz in Village Voice.
Painter Charline Von Heyl recently described Americans' disconnect between the personal and political this way: "While almost everything in the outer world feels messed-up, our inner lives aren't altogether messed-up." The current art world, awash in money and success, is shot through with a similar disconnect.
[...]
The current market feeds the bullshit machine, provides cover for a lot of vacuous behavior, revs us up while wearing us down, breeds complacency, and is so invasive that it forces artists to regularly consider issues of celebrity, status, and money in their studios. Yet, it also allows more artists to make more money without having to work full-time soul-crushing jobs and provides most of us with what Mel Brooks called "our phony-baloney jobs." Last December, more than 400 New York art dealers representing more than 5,000 artists paid for booths in one art fair or another in Miami to participate in this market. Everyone is trying the best they can. For critics to demonize the entire art world, then, as somehow unethical and crass seems self-righteous, cynical, and hypocritical.
The second article is a statement by Chris Gilbert, the curator from Berkley who resigned last year when he programmed a political show of art from Venezuela and the gallery wanted to change some of the accompanying text to mitigate expressions of "solidarity" and replace them with expressions of "concern."
The class interests represented by the museum, which
are above all the interests of the bourgeoisie that funds it, have two
(related) things to fear from a project like mine: (1) of course,
revolutionary Venezuela is a symbolic threat to the US government and
the capitalist class that benefits from that government's policies, just
as Cuba is a symbolic threat, just as Nicaragua was, and just as is any
country that tries to set its house in order in a way that is different
from the ideas of Washington and London -- which is primarily to say
Washington and London's insistence that there is no alternative to
capitalism.
I must emphasize that the threat is only symbolic; in the eyes of the US
government and the US bourgeoisie, it sets a "bad" and dangerous example
of disobedience for other countries to follow, but of course the idea
that such examples represent a military threat to the US (would that it
were the case) is simply laughable; (2) the second threat, which is
probably the more operational one in the museum context, is that much of
the community is in favor of the "Now-Time" projects -- the response to
the first exhibition is enormous and the interest in the second is also
very high. That response and interest exposes the fact that the museum,
the bourgeois values it promotes via the institution of contemporary art
(contemporary art of the past 30 years is really in most respects simply
the cultural arm of upper-class power) are not really those of any class
but its own.
Mute was following the Gilbert thing closely, and reposted an Artforum piece by Liam Gillick.
As the controversy unfolds, it highlights the void between rhetoric and practice within a developed and striated art discourse. During a period of social and political strife, within the context of a superheated art market, there is an increasing gulf between those artists and curators who have carved out a path of resistance via ongoing critique of social systems and those who function in a more complicit relationship to the contradictory impulses that affect art production and mediation. For some it is increasingly difficult to follow Deleuzian aims toward complex understandings, the subtle likes of which may be said to have oriented artistic and critical discourse for decades. To quote the philosopher in his Two Regimes of Madness (1977), "We've been trying to create concepts with fine articulations, extremely differentiated concepts, to escape gross dualisms." For Gilbert, it seems that such critical self-consciousness in relation to art production can no longer be productive within a society that, as he sees it, is inured to the delicate probings of the super-self-conscious artist, curator, or critic. It is a time of gross dualisms once more, and it is necessary to take a stand and make a careful choice about who will be there alongside you.
Stevphen Shukaitis, writing in Fifth Estate, is critical of the idea of adopting "precarity" as an organising principle in the USA (thanks Gita!)
As the Madrid-based feminist collective
Precarias a la Deriva observed, while those involved in designing a
webpage and providing a hand-job for a client can both be understood
to engaged in a form of immaterial labor (forms of work more based
on cultural or symbolic rather than physical production), one which
is connected through overall transformations on structures of labor
and social power, these are two forms of work hugely inflected by
the social value and worth assigned to them. And thus any politics
that is based on the changing nature of work has to consider how
differences in access to social power and the ability to have a voice
about oneís conditions affect organizing from those conditions, and
the possibility, as well as difficulties, of creating alliances
between them. To continue using the same example, how do we form a
politics based upon those conditions without those involved in a
form of labor with greater social prestige (for instance web design
or computer-based work) speaking for those who do not have the same
access to forms of social power and ability to voice their concerns
(in this instance, prostitutes). There is a huge potential to recreate
a form of paternalistic liberal politics, only this time based upon an
understanding of a connected position in an overall form of economic
transformation.
I have to admit I didn't know what the word meant. Seems an odd choice to have on the cover of a magazine, if you're trying to lure new readers...
It has an interesting archaic meaning - something obtained by entreaty or prayer.
I really enjoyed the launch last night. I didn't do my duty as a somtime online-articulater-of-events and so I don't have notes about all the speakers. What was great, though, was how many different kinds of organisations, from prison abolitionists to improvising musicians (yes they have an organisation) identified with the notion of being precarious. It seemed to almost turn into a celebration of precarity, which is maybe a little backwards in terms of getting rid of it, but maybe pretty good in terms of mobilising and bringing people together.
I can't read the word precarity without thinking it means "state of not having had a tooth cavity yet". And I must say, someone could probably write a duller paragraph using the phrase "hand job", but it wouldn't be easy.
I guess I have a howrd now for my annoying habit of placing full coffee cups right at the very edge of the table. It's better if it actually hangs off a bit. I don't know why i do that.
I don't know how i typed the word "word" as "howrd". Somebody please shoot me.
I agree about the lugubrious wording. There's a whole huge field of academic political critique that can be as impenetrable as academic art critique. But I do believe both fields are necesary arenas for people to hash out difficult concepts with one another.
Exactly why we should say "enough" to that sort of thing. Breaks my heart when an author has good ideas and feels it necessary to make it impossible for me to read their damn book.
I agree with Rob. Reading the phrase "hand job" should automatically make you laugh. The need to hash out different concepts with one another requires better writing (unless the whole point is not to read each other.)
Naw...we need all sorts of writing! Can't go banning stuff just cause it doesn't appeal to you. I don't go reading a lot peer-reviewed academic journals, but I'm very glad the institution exists.
Precarity is a weird-ish word because of translation. Here's what our ol' pal Wikipedia has to say:
Precarity has been adopted in leftist circles as the English-language equivalent of Precariedad, Précarité, Precarietà, terms of everyday usage in Latin countries that refer to the widespread condition of temporary, flexible, contingent, casual, intermittent work in postindustrial societies, brought about by the neoliberal labor market reforms that have strengthened the right to manage and the bargaining power of big and small employers since the 1980s.
Maybe this will cheer you guys up...
Or this...
That's the ticket!
Sally, how would you say the Postmodern affinity between the arts and the Precariat different from Proletarian alliances of the olden days?
Oh Gawd. Question should read - how would you say the Postmodern affinity between the Arts and the Precariat differs from Proletarian alliances of the olden days?
Doh.
Ohmygolly I have no idea. I don't really even know what you mean by "Postmodern affinity between the Arts and the Precariat." What's postmodern about it, for instance? Do you just mean "current" or is there more to it than that?
Precariat does seem to be touted as the new Proletariat, and off the top of my head I'd have to say that I doubt if the complex of class issues between artists and other workers has changed much in last century. Although the term "artist" may be slightly less exclusive (is that what you mean by Postmodern?) than it used to be.
I'm really hoping that some of the organisers/participants in last night's event will join us in this thread. I'm in over my head with this stuff.
What's postmodern about it, for instance?
Basically that it belongs to the Postmodern era -
"Precariat" is a fine neologism for temp workers (precarious proletariat)--it's funny whereas precarity sounds pompous with or without the Latin street cred.
I agree with you.
I want a racehorse named Seprecariat! And as for the euro mayday poster, heck ya! More like that.
Well... I guess, but while the term is new to us, it has been in use for awhile and though the texts I quoted may seem heavy to some people, the actions in Eurpoe seem pretty down to earth, as did all the people who came out to speak last night. Despite the fact that the term was new to many of us, people seemed to recognise potential in it for finding common ground, and so in that sense I guess I'd say its working okay.
It doesn't sound heavy - I just wonder if the precarity movement is as interchangeable with proletarianism as the wikiP suggested.
Well it sure as heck ain't unproblematic. That's why I started this thread with the much-maligned quote from Shukaitis.
hey there! thanks sally for pointing this to me. I couldn't resist.
just a few clarifications: precarity yes, it's stolen from europe, but it is just a name. I find it really different from the past proletarian alliances for a few reasons.
1) it is not exclusive to labor issues. if you are an illegal immigrant you are in a very "precarious" state indeed. same if you are homeless or in prison. and what about if you have to pay a humongous tuition or, worse a loan with many 0s attached? these things are going well-beyond what we call "proletarian."
2) it includes different people with different status, privileges, ages. what's in common between a walmart employee and a contract faculty teacher? they might be very different, and, yet, they might be unemployed, without assistance etc... tomorrow.
3) they have different requests. the illegal immigrant wishes to be invisible no more and the student wants her loan to disappear.
there are many problems with placing so many diverse instances together, but what if we find something in common? first thing first: coming out with the same name? I know, it reminds me of my dentist as well (ouch!) but I didn't invent it, it's been used in europe for at least a decade. we could have invented another name, but then, how would we communicate with them?
Thanks for posting Roberta. It's nice to hear from someone with a little background in this (unlike me).
Sally, were there organizations representing sex trade workers at the launch? It would be interesting to know if they saw themselves as allied, or connected to web page designers. I suspect not here, but what about in Europe and Latin America?
There weren't any sex trade workers at the launch. I can't answer your question, as I would never attempt to speak on behalf of sex trade workers here or anywhere else.
i'm a bit surprised by so many comments focusing on the term rather than the concept. i'm sure the term "proletariat" was pretty new, odd and unweildy in parlang at some point as the terms "precarity" and "precariate" are at the moment... as roberta pointed out, the concept of precarity, however, allows for a lot more flexibility in terms of exploring the interconnections among different forms of socio-economic exploitation, disenfranchisement and exclusion... as an umbrella concept, like any other (e.g. proletariat, middle-class, working class, etc), there is the danger that it over-generalizes and masks social and historical differences, and i think this is something to be keenly vigilant about... on the other hand, in terms of resistant and oppositional (to neoliberalism) tactics and strategies, the concept of precarity seems to have the potential to allow for creating broader networks and alliances and a shared conceptual space to envision and deploy specific broad-base campaigns... this is of course the challenge facing the activists who've taken up the concept... be well y'all.
my memory of the definition of proletariat, is those who take resources and turn them into goods by their labour. Originally, there was also the lumpen proletariat, a term I was never happy with.It referred to those on the margins of society, not generally well regarded, I suspect some of these folk fit into the precariat, and I think it as a more affirming category. I have always thought of the unfranchised, those who feel powerless, who are not aware of the huge energy and power they have if they come together. Too many times I have seen wonderful middle class idealists working to bring power where it needs to be, and too often losing track of the consituencey they are dealing with, and as Shukaitis suggests, devolving into m/paternalism. As Sally points out, we should not
attempt to speak for other groups, but we should reach out to other groups and ask for their story, desires and goals. From there a discussion of commonality can begin
Re:
"i'm a bit surprised by so many comments focusing on the term rather than the concept. i'm sure the term "proletariat" was pretty new, odd and unweildy in parlang at some point as the terms "precarity" and "precariate" are at the moment... as roberta pointed out, the concept of precarity, however, allows for a lot more flexibility in terms of exploring the interconnections among different forms of socio-economic exploitation, disenfranchisement and exclusion... as an umbrella concept, like any other (e.g. proletariat, middle-class, working class, etc), there is the danger that it over-generalizes and masks social and historical differences, and i think this is something to be keenly vigilant about... "
Precarity doesn't seem "unweildy [sic] in parlang". But it does beg clarification, especially when its visual propaganda appropriates so directly from traditional communism. The question of the extent to which the "Precariat" is a neologism for the "Proletariat" is entirely valid and it speaks to the need to be specific that you express but don't really address.Traditional Marxism's Proletariat was conceptually flexible enough to include disenfranchised members of the petty bourgeoisie (Roberta's professor) but it sought to eventually eradicate the "so called" criminal element such as galenagalaxian's sex trade workers on the grounds this group was too reactionary. So yes people are questioning the term - as a means to understanding the concept.
Re:
"on the other hand, in terms of resistant and oppositional (to neoliberalism) tactics and strategies, the concept of precarity seems to have the potential to allow for creating broader networks and alliances and a shared conceptual space to envision and deploy specific broad-base campaigns... this is of course the challenge facing the activists who've taken up the concept... "
I find this a tad vague. What do you mean?
I think the concerns being raised here are good ones, but I'm not sure that an argumentative question-answer mode is making sense in this forum at this point in time. Precarity as an organising concept is just beginning to be explored in Canada, meaning that a lot of these very valid questions don't have answers, but are issues yet to be worked out as the movement takes shape. The questions should certainly be raised, because like any grassroots activism, the form of the work will emerge from the concerns of the people doing the work. There is info out there on the European actions, which I've grazed at, but haven't really digested yet, certainly not enough to adopt a defined position nor to defend the movement. The FUSE article by Alessandra Renzi and Stephen Turpin does provide an introduction. My intention here on the blog was to draw attention to the concept, and engage in some speculation, not to speak authoritatively on behalf of the precarity movement. Likewise the coming together of multiple groups at the launch was a very early stage of exploration. There is a website for Precarity Canada underway, and I know the organisers were eager to gather input from participants at the launch before defining their plans. Perhaps this discussion will also play into that agenda in some way. I'll definitely follow up with links and updates as that organisation develops. I'm glad people are curious about where this might or might not go...I'm curious too.
I should just mention that there were representatives from a prisoner's rights group at the gathering, a prison abolitionist group, as well as people from No One is Illegal and others with similar concerns (I'll get a full list from somebody). So judging from this fledging gathering, I say the chances of an agenda developing that discriminates against the "'so called' criminal element" are pretty slim.
Not to be argumentative - but I do also want to clarify - I am in no way an expert but at least on paper the criminal class would not so much be discriminated against as eradicated. Its numbers would diminish because everyone's socio economic needs would be met.
That was me.
Thanks for the clarification J!
Criminal class, is that what the old lumpen proletatiat becomes? Always seemed to me that these distinctions were those made by the children of privilege who espoused solidarity, and those who identified with the working class, rather than those who had any clue what it was to grow up as a member of a poor disenfranchised, hungry group. If you do not know where the next days food is coming from, you are not far from finding less palatable ways to find money
|
The other day I made a post about tonight's launch of FUSE magazine, with the theme of precarity. I'm just finding out about this whole "precarity" thing myself. The term is useful because it allows for very different and disenfranchised groups of people to connect politically. The current issue of FUSE has an article by Alessandra Renzi and Stephen Turpin outlining the precarity movement. Izida Zorde, editor of FUSE, says in her introduction:
Two articles I read recently seem possibly related under this precarity rubric. The first is a recent piece on the art market (thanks bill) by Jerry Saltz in Village Voice. The second article is a statement by Chris Gilbert, the curator from Berkley who resigned last year when he programmed a political show of art from Venezuela and the gallery wanted to change some of the accompanying text to mitigate expressions of "solidarity" and replace them with expressions of "concern." Mute was following the Gilbert thing closely, and reposted an Artforum piece by Liam Gillick.
- sally mckay 2-01-2007 8:34 pm
Stevphen Shukaitis, writing in Fifth Estate, is critical of the idea of adopting "precarity" as an organising principle in the USA (thanks Gita!)
- sally mckay 2-01-2007 10:27 pm
I have to admit I didn't know what the word meant. Seems an odd choice to have on the cover of a magazine, if you're trying to lure new readers...
- anonymous (guest) 2-02-2007 5:54 pm
It has an interesting archaic meaning - something obtained by entreaty or prayer.
- J@simpleposie (guest) 2-02-2007 6:03 pm
I really enjoyed the launch last night. I didn't do my duty as a somtime online-articulater-of-events and so I don't have notes about all the speakers. What was great, though, was how many different kinds of organisations, from prison abolitionists to improvising musicians (yes they have an organisation) identified with the notion of being precarious. It seemed to almost turn into a celebration of precarity, which is maybe a little backwards in terms of getting rid of it, but maybe pretty good in terms of mobilising and bringing people together.
- sally mckay 2-02-2007 7:24 pm
I can't read the word precarity without thinking it means "state of not having had a tooth cavity yet". And I must say, someone could probably write a duller paragraph using the phrase "hand job", but it wouldn't be easy.
I guess I have a howrd now for my annoying habit of placing full coffee cups right at the very edge of the table. It's better if it actually hangs off a bit. I don't know why i do that.
- rob (guest) 2-02-2007 8:32 pm
I don't know how i typed the word "word" as "howrd". Somebody please shoot me.
- rob (guest) 2-02-2007 8:33 pm
I agree about the lugubrious wording. There's a whole huge field of academic political critique that can be as impenetrable as academic art critique. But I do believe both fields are necesary arenas for people to hash out difficult concepts with one another.
- sally mckay 2-02-2007 8:41 pm
Exactly why we should say "enough" to that sort of thing. Breaks my heart when an author has good ideas and feels it necessary to make it impossible for me to read their damn book.
- rob (guest) 2-02-2007 9:26 pm
I agree with Rob. Reading the phrase "hand job" should automatically make you laugh. The need to hash out different concepts with one another requires better writing (unless the whole point is not to read each other.)
- L.M. 2-02-2007 9:30 pm
Naw...we need all sorts of writing! Can't go banning stuff just cause it doesn't appeal to you. I don't go reading a lot peer-reviewed academic journals, but I'm very glad the institution exists.
Precarity is a weird-ish word because of translation. Here's what our ol' pal Wikipedia has to say:
- sally mckay 2-02-2007 9:33 pm
Maybe this will cheer you guys up...
- sally mckay 2-02-2007 9:40 pm
Or this...
- sally mckay 2-02-2007 9:45 pm
That's the ticket!
- L.M. 2-02-2007 10:00 pm
Sally, how would you say the Postmodern affinity between the arts and the Precariat different from Proletarian alliances of the olden days?
- J@simpleposie (guest) 2-02-2007 10:59 pm
Oh Gawd. Question should read - how would you say the Postmodern affinity between the Arts and the Precariat differs from Proletarian alliances of the olden days?
Doh.
- J@simpleposie (guest) 2-02-2007 11:14 pm
Ohmygolly I have no idea. I don't really even know what you mean by "Postmodern affinity between the Arts and the Precariat." What's postmodern about it, for instance? Do you just mean "current" or is there more to it than that?
Precariat does seem to be touted as the new Proletariat, and off the top of my head I'd have to say that I doubt if the complex of class issues between artists and other workers has changed much in last century. Although the term "artist" may be slightly less exclusive (is that what you mean by Postmodern?) than it used to be.
- sally mckay 2-03-2007 12:12 am
I'm really hoping that some of the organisers/participants in last night's event will join us in this thread. I'm in over my head with this stuff.
- sally mckay 2-03-2007 12:13 am
What's postmodern about it, for instance?
Basically that it belongs to the Postmodern era -
- J@simpleposie (guest) 2-03-2007 12:17 am
"Precariat" is a fine neologism for temp workers (precarious proletariat)--it's funny whereas precarity sounds pompous with or without the Latin street cred.
- tom moody 2-03-2007 12:20 am
I agree with you.
- J@simpleposie (guest) 2-03-2007 12:41 am
I want a racehorse named Seprecariat! And as for the euro mayday poster, heck ya! More like that.
- rob (guest) 2-03-2007 1:01 am
Well... I guess, but while the term is new to us, it has been in use for awhile and though the texts I quoted may seem heavy to some people, the actions in Eurpoe seem pretty down to earth, as did all the people who came out to speak last night. Despite the fact that the term was new to many of us, people seemed to recognise potential in it for finding common ground, and so in that sense I guess I'd say its working okay.
- sally mckay 2-03-2007 1:03 am
It doesn't sound heavy - I just wonder if the precarity movement is as interchangeable with proletarianism as the wikiP suggested.
- J@simpleposie (guest) 2-03-2007 1:20 am
Well it sure as heck ain't unproblematic. That's why I started this thread with the much-maligned quote from Shukaitis.
- sally mckay 2-03-2007 1:34 am
hey there! thanks sally for pointing this to me. I couldn't resist.
just a few clarifications: precarity yes, it's stolen from europe, but it is just a name. I find it really different from the past proletarian alliances for a few reasons.
1) it is not exclusive to labor issues. if you are an illegal immigrant you are in a very "precarious" state indeed. same if you are homeless or in prison. and what about if you have to pay a humongous tuition or, worse a loan with many 0s attached? these things are going well-beyond what we call "proletarian."
2) it includes different people with different status, privileges, ages. what's in common between a walmart employee and a contract faculty teacher? they might be very different, and, yet, they might be unemployed, without assistance etc... tomorrow.
3) they have different requests. the illegal immigrant wishes to be invisible no more and the student wants her loan to disappear.
there are many problems with placing so many diverse instances together, but what if we find something in common? first thing first: coming out with the same name? I know, it reminds me of my dentist as well (ouch!) but I didn't invent it, it's been used in europe for at least a decade. we could have invented another name, but then, how would we communicate with them?
- roberta (guest) 2-03-2007 2:08 am
Thanks for posting Roberta. It's nice to hear from someone with a little background in this (unlike me).
- sally mckay 2-03-2007 2:12 am
Sally, were there organizations representing sex trade workers at the launch? It would be interesting to know if they saw themselves as allied, or connected to web page designers. I suspect not here, but what about in Europe and Latin America?
- galenagalaxian 2-03-2007 4:40 am
There weren't any sex trade workers at the launch. I can't answer your question, as I would never attempt to speak on behalf of sex trade workers here or anywhere else.
- sally mckay 2-03-2007 6:54 am
i'm a bit surprised by so many comments focusing on the term rather than the concept. i'm sure the term "proletariat" was pretty new, odd and unweildy in parlang at some point as the terms "precarity" and "precariate" are at the moment... as roberta pointed out, the concept of precarity, however, allows for a lot more flexibility in terms of exploring the interconnections among different forms of socio-economic exploitation, disenfranchisement and exclusion... as an umbrella concept, like any other (e.g. proletariat, middle-class, working class, etc), there is the danger that it over-generalizes and masks social and historical differences, and i think this is something to be keenly vigilant about... on the other hand, in terms of resistant and oppositional (to neoliberalism) tactics and strategies, the concept of precarity seems to have the potential to allow for creating broader networks and alliances and a shared conceptual space to envision and deploy specific broad-base campaigns... this is of course the challenge facing the activists who've taken up the concept... be well y'all.
- gita (guest) 2-03-2007 7:38 am
my memory of the definition of proletariat, is those who take resources and turn them into goods by their labour. Originally, there was also the lumpen proletariat, a term I was never happy with.It referred to those on the margins of society, not generally well regarded, I suspect some of these folk fit into the precariat, and I think it as a more affirming category. I have always thought of the unfranchised, those who feel powerless, who are not aware of the huge energy and power they have if they come together. Too many times I have seen wonderful middle class idealists working to bring power where it needs to be, and too often losing track of the consituencey they are dealing with, and as Shukaitis suggests, devolving into m/paternalism. As Sally points out, we should not
attempt to speak for other groups, but we should reach out to other groups and ask for their story, desires and goals. From there a discussion of commonality can begin
- galenagalaxian 2-03-2007 8:52 am
Re:
"i'm a bit surprised by so many comments focusing on the term rather than the concept. i'm sure the term "proletariat" was pretty new, odd and unweildy in parlang at some point as the terms "precarity" and "precariate" are at the moment... as roberta pointed out, the concept of precarity, however, allows for a lot more flexibility in terms of exploring the interconnections among different forms of socio-economic exploitation, disenfranchisement and exclusion... as an umbrella concept, like any other (e.g. proletariat, middle-class, working class, etc), there is the danger that it over-generalizes and masks social and historical differences, and i think this is something to be keenly vigilant about... "
Precarity doesn't seem "unweildy [sic] in parlang". But it does beg clarification, especially when its visual propaganda appropriates so directly from traditional communism. The question of the extent to which the "Precariat" is a neologism for the "Proletariat" is entirely valid and it speaks to the need to be specific that you express but don't really address.Traditional Marxism's Proletariat was conceptually flexible enough to include disenfranchised members of the petty bourgeoisie (Roberta's professor) but it sought to eventually eradicate the "so called" criminal element such as galenagalaxian's sex trade workers on the grounds this group was too reactionary. So yes people are questioning the term - as a means to understanding the concept.
Re:
"on the other hand, in terms of resistant and oppositional (to neoliberalism) tactics and strategies, the concept of precarity seems to have the potential to allow for creating broader networks and alliances and a shared conceptual space to envision and deploy specific broad-base campaigns... this is of course the challenge facing the activists who've taken up the concept... "
I find this a tad vague. What do you mean?
- J@simpleposie (guest) 2-03-2007 8:12 pm
I think the concerns being raised here are good ones, but I'm not sure that an argumentative question-answer mode is making sense in this forum at this point in time. Precarity as an organising concept is just beginning to be explored in Canada, meaning that a lot of these very valid questions don't have answers, but are issues yet to be worked out as the movement takes shape. The questions should certainly be raised, because like any grassroots activism, the form of the work will emerge from the concerns of the people doing the work. There is info out there on the European actions, which I've grazed at, but haven't really digested yet, certainly not enough to adopt a defined position nor to defend the movement. The FUSE article by Alessandra Renzi and Stephen Turpin does provide an introduction. My intention here on the blog was to draw attention to the concept, and engage in some speculation, not to speak authoritatively on behalf of the precarity movement. Likewise the coming together of multiple groups at the launch was a very early stage of exploration. There is a website for Precarity Canada underway, and I know the organisers were eager to gather input from participants at the launch before defining their plans. Perhaps this discussion will also play into that agenda in some way. I'll definitely follow up with links and updates as that organisation develops. I'm glad people are curious about where this might or might not go...I'm curious too.
- sally mckay 2-03-2007 11:58 pm
I should just mention that there were representatives from a prisoner's rights group at the gathering, a prison abolitionist group, as well as people from No One is Illegal and others with similar concerns (I'll get a full list from somebody). So judging from this fledging gathering, I say the chances of an agenda developing that discriminates against the "'so called' criminal element" are pretty slim.
- sally mckay 2-04-2007 12:09 am
Not to be argumentative - but I do also want to clarify - I am in no way an expert but at least on paper the criminal class would not so much be discriminated against as eradicated. Its numbers would diminish because everyone's socio economic needs would be met.
- anonymous (guest) 2-04-2007 1:35 am
That was me.
- J@simpleposie (guest) 2-04-2007 1:36 am
Thanks for the clarification J!
- sally mckay 2-04-2007 6:41 am
Criminal class, is that what the old lumpen proletatiat becomes? Always seemed to me that these distinctions were those made by the children of privilege who espoused solidarity, and those who identified with the working class, rather than those who had any clue what it was to grow up as a member of a poor disenfranchised, hungry group. If you do not know where the next days food is coming from, you are not far from finding less palatable ways to find money
- galenagalaxian 2-06-2007 7:48 am