Categoria: academic life – living in academia

Occupy – Occupied … . Claiming the Future by Claiming Today’s Rights

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia, contemporary socio-economic situation, general

The following are some notes I made in preparation of a presentation to the Occupy Cork Camp, which I addressed on Wednesday afternoon. 

 

Perhaps it would have been better to choose another title, saying that claiming the future is not least about claiming yesterday’s rights – and of course I can only make a few points, incomplete, in danger of being misunderstood and hopefully sufficient to spark some new aspects into the debate.

First a question, marking the point of departure and also important in more general terms as point of reference: Talking about occupation has usually something negative – and surely in reality it comes along as something negative. This negativity is about the loss of independence, the loss of self-determination. Such self-determination maybe something we claim as individuals or something we claim as social group or class.

“We”, if I may say so: from the people in the US, angry about the state and development behind the walls of the street, over a more or less organised movement in many EUropean countries and not least with the alter-mondialists of attac to again people like here in Cork are occupying public spaces, in actual fact occupying also the minds of many more people who are present. People in the streets, along some walls and not least behind walls and closed doors.

NB: university walls part of this system of catacombs, places to hide and claiming to be pushing towards paradise, people – at least some of them – playing an unfortunate role in this overall game of gaining power and security for a few.

Still, we easily forget one thing: actually, the occupants are the others, those are sitting in their secure places behind the walls which they can only occupy because and as long as we allow them doing so. And they are not just occupying their pools of money, greedy and egoistically diving every morning into it like Scrooge McDuck. – By the way, is it by accident that Scrooge is Scottish-American: Scottish in going back to the country where liberal economics finds its birthplace, American by showing that economy to live up to its excesses.

They are occupying power positions which they use to develop something that goes much further than what we usually understand as neoliberal strategy. In actual fact they develop an entire new capitalist system of accumulation, if you want: a new capitalism. This is not about conspiracy. Rather it is about the simple fact that they occupy with unimaginable amounts of capital not only industrial centres, not only bank and service centres but also and increasingly public positions of sovereignty. Police as private security services; the educational system as recruitment agencies; voluntary organisations as providers of public housing … – and not least the various governance instances, from public boards to voluntary organisations as assistants of the political system: the golden bars, sweetening the confinement.

Mind the following statement on labour relations, taken from the Introduction by Richard Bruton, Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation to the Consultation on the Reform of the State’s Employment Rights and Industrial Relations Structures and Procedures. He is wants to

  • improve customer service, in light of the acknowledged complexity, backlogs and delays in the resolution of grievances and disputes;
  • provide greater value for taxpayers’ money, in light of current fiscal constraints;
  • rationalise institutions in light of the Government’s public service reform agenda

(1)

Brecht, looking at some stage back on fascism and the post-war developments once wrote that the womb from which fascism emerged had still been fertile, a dangerous ground for the further development of post-war Germany. Looking at the cutbacks, the austerity policy in the country (and in other countries too) we can say: this, the spirit of private responsibility and the way in which it goes hand in hand with occupation of public spaces by the ruling class is the fertile ground, the womb which bearing the new capitalism.

Much can and has to be said – and in my view one set of two points is of special importance, often neglected in these day’s debates: Neoliberalism, as said, I think it is a rather dangerous catchword, easily distracting from the fact that we are confronted with a rather differentiated system of intervention and reregulation. And also easily overlooking the fact that we are facing not simply the redistribution between the rich and the poor – instead it is about the distribution also within the two major classes. And with this the emergence of a specific new form of capitalism.

I think this – the new capitalism and the role Ireland plays in it and is ready to play in it – is more important than the ‘fact’ of IMF-intervention, the EU-memoranda and Stefan Gerlach, a Swedish-German, being since September Deputy Governor of the Irish Central Bank

Talking about globalisation all the time we have to accept that this is not about subordination in a simple way – rather it is about the differentiated world-system in which the different countries play different roles, and accept to play them in this way. Seen in this light, austerity policies are very much not least nationally based.

Second, in this sense the actual occupants are those behind the walls of the street(s) and also behind the walls of many academic institutions. Much of it may be willy-nilly, a matter, a matter of ‘structural forces’, and here we find surely also oral irresponsibility, the acceptance of the easy way. The point I want to emphasise is a different one however. What happens right in front of our eyes is a kind of refeudalisation. To be sure, although I used the term n academic publications, we have to be careful. History may be stupid. But it is not so stupid to repeat itself. Important is however that this is a suitable metaphor, capturing well two major developments:

* the occupation of the public sphere, the capturing of the sovereign private interests;

* the increasing de-economisation and de-marketisation.

The latter point is surely provocative – but not less sure is that we easily fall into traps when we use certain terms without further qualification. So it may be seen as provocation and as warning alike: a warning against the thesis of neoliberalism as straightforward concept. Neoliberalism is a catchword, easily used to explain everything and then at the end not explaining anything. The point is that we are facing increasingly a shift towards executing power that is based on the concentration and centralisation of material resources but not on economic processes in the strict sense. Slightly overstretching the argument, one may say tat capitalism has overcome itself – not primarily by the state bailing out the banks (though this is surely also a moment) but more by privately accumulated and centralised wealth, now violently occupying the roles genuinely attributed to the sovereign. It is not by chance that the term sovereign also had been attributed to the old English coin. However, then it had been a public currency, a means of socialising production and also power. Nowadays it is the establishment of the new sovereign: the completion of the capitalist individual will.

Third, coming to the other side then it is becoming a little bit tricky – it is easy to romanticise the good old times. Also, it is too easy to go with mechanisms that had been historically important and successful but that are now out-of-date. – I will return to this issue later. In any case, leaving all limitations aside, one of the relative progressive moments that capitalism claim to have established is rights-based approaches. As such this is by far not anything like perfect. On the contrary, all the rights-talk had been simply a reply on the total disrespect of even the most basic rights to live. This is true n the national levels and also in the intentional perspective. And as well, the then capitalist system itself instrumentally needed a rule of law: an accountable, predictable system of regulation, needed not least to ensure ‘smooth utilisation of capital’. Very much the discussion we find today again.

It is not least in this context that we have to be careful when it comes to pushes from governments like Germany and France, the move of the EU towards finance transfer taxation and we should not get too excited about some big bankers etc. who ask themselves now if Marx possibly had been right.

Fourth, going beyond the trinity the final point I want to make is about …, occupy. After we, ordinary people, had been occupied by capitalism and now pushed with the back against the wall, the occupants try to move even further, and turn to violence: squeezing in the name of an apparently sportive success – reached in Croke Park – additional hours of public servants, not to talk about all the rest of it. And this is why I referred to rights. As contestable as the much of the traditional social rights, as they are known in Europe, are have to be put n the agenda now, more than ever.

This is what we have to occupy – everyone in her or his position. In the position where we are occupied: as educators, as health service providers, as workers … For instance, forms of social economy should not be something at the margins but should be further developed as central moments of a democratically and sustainably developed economy. And we also have to occupy these spaces where we are not occupied. Sure, we have curricula at universities and at schools. And those who are employed there have to stick to them – at least in principle. But it is not less sure that the value of much of those principles is less than the paper on which they are written. The values of teaching are not defined by the formulas and number of rules. The real values are determined by how well they deal with reality – and realities are made by those who occupy positions.

I may return to Scrooge – and quote something that is surely not my favourite source – Wikipedia. There we read:

Scrooge has also opined that only in fairy tales do bad people turn good, and that he is old enough to not believe in fairy tales.

I just leave it there – only asking if we trust we are living in a fairy tale or in 2011-Ireland?

New Perspectives ….

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia, joys - what we usually take for it, works, projects, publications

One advantage, or should I say privilege of moving around, working in different places, is that it allows to easily take up new challenges, finding new opportunities to make life difficult. Well, at least I challenged myself, and now I am allowed doing so in an official framework. For my stay in Budapest in my role as visiting professor at Faculty of Economics, Department of World Economy and also as fellow of the Balassi Institute, Budapest (late spring/summer 2012) I had been invited to give an additional course for PhD-students.

Then, accepting challenging students means to stretch things a little bit. And also thinking about globalisation and looking at the repeatedly point made in this context: gobalisation is a complex and multifaceted matter motivates to think about a different approach, providing an insight of how globalisation is actually lived. And isn’t one way of defining culture as exactly this: the way in which we live our daily life, now the life in a globalised and globalising world?

My personal interest in what is called the fine arts, developed some years ago with beginning some arts studies during a lengthy stay in Rome, and furthered by several smaller exercises over the following periods put a stumbling block into the way – to be used as stepping stone. So, having been asked for this additional course I proposed

New economic philosophies. Its reflection in 6 paintings since the Renaissance

I now got the clear way for this – and so I am thinking about six paintings … And I am sure, Flemish painters like Hals, van Rijn will be amongst them. And I am equally sure that a look into the workshops of some of the artists will tell quite a lot of what the life had been like – that life about which we learn little about textbooks like on Macroeconomics as for instance that by Abel/Bernanke/Croushore (just randomly taken, one of the books frequently used).

It would surely be exciting to develop this further: … in six paintings, six novels, six poems … – sure, this is in many cases about the fine arts, also as arts of the fine people. Still, it looks like an interesting challenge …

Before that I will try a little pre-exercise: when going with my social-policy students on a study trip during next month I will try myself in a guided tour through two arts galleries: the old and the modern Pinaktothek. On the program amongst others Duerer’s Apostles, Boucher’s Portrait of the Marquise de Pompadour and Marc’s Mandrill– just an indulgence of grand narrative of history.

Max Weber wrote on the state

Every state is founded on force,’ said Trotsky at Brest-Litovsk. That is indeed right. If no social institutions existed which knew the use of violence, then the concept of ‘state’ would be eliminated, and a condition would emerge that could be designated as ‘anarchy,’ in the specific sense of this word. Of course, force is certainly not the normal or the only means of the state–nobody says that–but force is a means specific to the state. Today the relation between the state and violence is an especially intimate one. In the past, the most varied institutions–beginning with the sib–have known the use of physical force as quite normal. Today, however, we have to say that a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory. Note that ‘territory’ is one of the characteristics of the state. Specifically, at the present time, the right to use physical force is ascribed to other institutions or to individuals only to the extent to which the state permits it. The state is considered the sole source of the ‘right’ to use violence. Hence, ‘politics’ for us means striving to share power or striving to influence the distribution of power, either among states or among groups within a state.

Max Weber, 1919: Politics as a Vocation

And it is exactly here where Antonio Gramsci stepped in, developing this legitimacy further, elaborating from a Marxist perspective the meaning and working of hegemonic power systems. – Fine-arts – in many cases also an idol for mass-culture but also a source of fracture – have surely a role to play here. And exploring these expressive means may also mean that we can understand in a much clearer way in which way political economy is very much also a matter of the Zeitgeist: the spirit of the times.

Not an easy task, not a simple work to be accomplished – but surely more exciting as following the beaten track of downplaying lived arts as artefact.

PS: Actually, a first attempt into this direction: of bringing in fine arts as point of reflection had been undertaken in the working paper on

Rethinking Precarity in a Global–Historical Perspective

Looking Back – Looking for an Agenda

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia, works, projects, publications

April 5th 2011, 7:15 a.m. – a journey beginning: ORK-LHR-WRS

October 1st 2011, 5:15 p.m. – EI 837 arrives at Cork airport, over 4300 hours, about 18,702.72 km, more or less four topics that followed me the way:

(i) the fundamental changes in the economic system which we cannot grasp by simply looking at the current crisis but where we have to think about the fundamental changes of the productive forces (see in this connection also the introductory contribution in: ‘Precarity – More than a Challenge of Social Security. Or: Cynicism of EU’s Concept of Economic Freedom’ (published with Europaeische Hochschulschriften in the series Studies in Comparative Social Pedagogies and International Social Work and Social Policy)

(ii) the connected changes of the socio-political system – in earlier thinking, published in the book New Princedoms (published with Rozenberg I talked tentatively about re-feudalisation (see as well the contribution in the recently published book All the Same – All Being New. Basic Rules of Capitalism in a World of Change (published with Europaeische Hochschulschriften in the series Studies in Comparative Social Pedagogies and International Social Work and Social Policy)

(iii) the linked question of changes of the actual meaning of Human Rights which apparently deserve more thorough consideration in the perspective of the changes of the economic formation, and

(iv) the topic of the role and function of research and education in this context – but the latter more in the search of a responsible undertaking, i.e. the responsibility of researchers as potential contributors to a counter-hegemony. At least few short reflections, looking back at the 4300 hours, may be useful.

First the search for courage. Aren’t we too much complaining, not taking up the opportunities? But it is a much deeper question of course: Aren’t we in our work as academic and also in the work as politicians to much caught in an agenda of different approaches which are glued to the existing societal patterns of fundamentally individualist and capitalist (re)production? There cannot be any doubt that we always have to secure ‘anschlussfaehigkeit’: the ability to connect to existing realities. However, we should not forget with this the need to transcend these conditions, to seriously apply the dialectical principle of preserving what is needed in order to overcome it, developing something fundamentally new. This new has to start from the real understanding of the existing – going beyond the analysis of appearances. And this means not least: going beyond a moral rebuke of individual behaviour.

Second, it is the challenge to think about the reach of the existing patterns. Human Rights and the Social/Welfare State are surely valuable concepts in the development of human kind and the political development. But by simply aiming on their maintenance we easily overlook that they emerged on the basis of restrictive systems. As a kind of last resort of systems that are in their own terms totally self-destructive. This is also true for the capitalist growth model, of which we should know at this stage that the attempts of moving to pre-2007 states are not anything else than determined ways to failure. Even the recent EU-, World Bank, OECD and IMF-outlooks make clear that we arrived at a point of no return. But what they do not show and what unfortunately only few who are seriously looking for alternatives ask is: what are the actual changes of the formation that are taking place. For instance what is the overall meaning of more and more sovereign functions are actually taken over by ‘private capital’ which, however, is not the same as the capital which political economy still considers as ‘entrepreneurial’.

Third, implied is the need to critically reflect on the use of terms as neoliberalism and globalisation, catchy and increasingly empty formula. It is easier, of course, hiding behind them than it is to openly and thoroughly discuss the relevant issues.

This brings me to the fourth point – and the last major stop of my journey: the celebration of the retirement of my colleague and friend Josef Scheipl, now professor emeritus. Although we did not really have much contact over the years it had been sufficient to develop a high appreciation for his approach. Social pedagogue in the best sense, politically engaged and historian. And never isolating the different areas from each other, seeing them as essentially bound together, relational. And most fundamentally, permanently asking questions which he saw as the main task of thorough research. Yes, ASKING QUESTIONS. We should be honest to ourselves: we are in so most of the cases too much engaged in giving answers: in the form of research reports, in form of certificates … – and easily forgetting what research is really about: ASKING QUESTIONS. I am glad that I had been invited to contribute to the Festschrift which had been handed over to him during the ceremony in Graz: Anastasiadis, Maria/Heimgartner, Arno/Kittl-Satran, Helga/Wrentschur, Michael (Eds.): Sozialpädagogisches Wirken; Wien/Berlin: LITVerlag, 2011.

Sure, I didn’t mention many things tag I could enjoy during these over 4300 hours, on the way of about 18,702.72 km. Meeting friends, making new friendships, meeting people who ask, teaching students here and there, contributing to a few conferences, writing and marking the exam papers of students which ‘followed me’: scanned and demanding their right … – and I didn’t mention the joys of answers that had been given at earlier times: Don Giovanni, (a little bit of) studies of arts – continuing something I took up yesteryear in Rome) and nostalgia as the encounter with Maria Farantouri, the meetings in beer gardens, coffee shops, and surely the Simit and Türk kahvesi.

Asia Studies – A New Book Series

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia, works, projects, publications

This weekend, during the 3rd Annual Conference of Asian Studies Ireland Association a new book series will be launched. It is published by Rozenberg publishers and will thus provide high-quality books on issues that are interesting for developing an in depth debate on current issues. and the books will be available for a reasonable price. The title of the series is

Asia Studies – Within and Without

Edited by the School of Asian Studies at the University College Cork General Editors: Fan Hong, Auke van der Berg, Peter Herrmann

This book series aims on opening different perspectives on Asian studies by publication of relevant documents in the present framework. Publications are focusing on the subject area of Asia – the understanding of which is not taken in a restrictive way, but a wide understanding. Focussing on Asia includes looking at relationships and connections between countries within this region..

Publications in this series are looking at issues from an insider perspective – studying Asian issues sui generis, as issues of academic interest without interest in (immediately) applied knowledge. They are also looking at Asian issues as they arise in the context of relation- ships and increasingly globalisation.

Although the series is edited by the School of Asian Studies at the University College Cork it will gather contributions from a global pool of experts.

The first volume, written by Nicholas O’Brien, is titled

Irish Investment in China Setting New Patterns

At least my personal interest when joining the editorial team had been about launching a series of publications that provides more in-depth material that allows serious debates on important issues of global political-economic issues.

Anything Else to Think About? or: Re-finding Truth in Research

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia, thoughts on life and its philosophy

Vladimir Fedosejev and the Tschaikowskij-Symphonieorchester Moskau, performing Tschaikowskij and Shostakovich in the Large Hall of the Musikverein.

A more or less busy day coming to an end, beginning with talks about projecting a new book series (around global democracy), discussion about a film project, catching up with a good friend, answering and writing mails in the meantime and finalising the short contribution for the next Euromemo (had been easier to write the 80 pages for the recent workshop) …. and sometimes asking myself the difference between the real world and the facebook world. At least there is one commonality: it is not always easy to be clear about the difference friendships, acquaintance and colleagues. Perhaps better, it is not always clear to separate roles.

And really coming to an end then (leaving the Tchaikovsky’s concert for violin and orchestra [d-minor; the violin beautifully performed be the still young Arabella Steinbacher] and the encores aside) it is Shostakovich’s 5th symphony (also d-minor) – what a masterpiece, and indeed is there anything else that can come to mind than Schiller’s ‘Letters upon the Aesthetic Education of Man‘, Jehring’s ‘The Struggle for Law’ and the presentation I will give on Thursday in Graz, titled ‘Science/Scientists between Reflexive Responsibility and Penance’.
Schiller’s main concern is that what really is at stake is the balancing act between different poles, in particular the unbridled sensuous nature of human beings and the refined nature, finding its true and unique expression in arts, and being as such a matter of highest rationality: independent of unrestrained natural forces and allowing as such determination of a higher order.
In Schiller’s words
Two principal and different states of passive and active capacity of being determined (Bestimmbarkeit) can be distinguished in man; in like manner two states of passive and active determination (Bestimmung).
(Schiller, J.C. Friedrich von, 1793: Letters upon the Aesthetic Education of Man; Literary and Philosophical Essays, New York: Collier, 1910 [The Harvard Classics, 32]: 36 (I hope there is a better translation somewhere)
It is in his eyes not least a matter of striving for and – though only in tendency – achieving wholeness, in his idealist vision of course very much perceived and defined as holiness as the incontestable absoluteness. One does not have to follow this idealist aberration in order to agree in Schiller’s view on the two dimensions of determination: the passive and the part, the Bestimmtsein and the Bestimmung. Much later we find this of course reflected in Max Weber’s discussion on ‘vocation’.
Before I come back to the latter remark, a short note on a linked subject – a closer look at the link will be looked at later. One can easily see from here that this strive for wholeness is not an everlasting matter of development of humankind but also a matter of developing personality. And indeed, it is also a matter of the two forces permanently at work, one claiming dominance over the other. Even within certain institutions as Rudolph von Jhering  pointed righty at the beginning of his book I really have to than Lorena for making me aware of this piece) out that
[a]ll the law in the world has been obtained by strife. Every principle of law which obtains had first to be wrung by force from those – legal rights of a whole nation as well as those who denied it; and every legal right the of individuals – continual readiness to assert it and defend it. The law is not mere theory, but living force. And hence it is that Justice which, in one hand, holds the scales, in which she weighs the right, carries in the other the sword with which she executes it.
(Jhering, Rudolph (1872): The Struggle for Law; Chicago: Callaghan and Co, 1915: 1 f.)
What is now the connection between this and my presentation on ‘Science/Scientists between Reflexive Responsibility and Penance’?
It may get clear when we look at what Schiller said in the same piece:
Art, like science, is emancipated from all that is positive, and all that is humanly conventional; both are completely independent of the arbitrary will of men. The political legislator may place their empire under an interdict, but he cannot reign there.
(op.cit.: 19)
And indeed it is not so much a strictly idealist position as we see when we read on page 8
Therefore, totality of character must be found in the people which is capable and worthy to exchange the state of necessity for that of freedom.
Aren’t there obvious repercussions – reading Kant, Schiller and later Marx? And if we read further we see that this tension between dependence/independence, between necessity and freedom, between being-determined and determination, between passive and passive is very much an issue of …, indeed: The Struggle for Law, the struggle for – and here I come explicitly back to Weber – Science as Vocation.
Of course, in this perspective we may pose the question from the beginning in a different way: Re-finding Truth in Research can also be formulated as (Re-)Defining Truth in Research. In such a perspective we should not look for freedom from demand but for our own right, very much in the understanding of Schiller:
Culture, far from giving us freedom, only develops, as it advances, new necessities; the fetters of the physical close more tightly around us, so that the fear of loss quenches even the ardent impulse toward improvement, and the maxims of passive obedience are held to be the highest wisdom of life. Thus the spirit of the time is seen to waver between perversions and savagism, between what is unnatural and mere nature, between superstition and moral unbelief, and it is often nothing but the equilibrium of evils that sets bounds to it.
(op.cit.: 10)
**************
A more or less busy day coming to an end … – and it is a more or less long fight ahead for science, for research that also acknowledges again that it is not least based on two major pillars: the one being about asking questions rather than waiting for questions to be asked. And the other being ready to accept also the role of an educator, not in an elitist understanding; but very much int he understanding of entering a dialogue and taking firm positions within it. Surely as well with both the readiness to make mistakes. And finally it means to be ready to makes these mistakes together, rather than simply claiming to be the greatest and to know only what is considered to be the ‘most important people’.
Otherwise such masterpieces as that of Shostakovich will never exist – not in arts, not in politics and not in science.

The Irish Recovery and Naughty Children

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia, thoughts on life and its philosophy, works, projects, publications

What will happen: writing a critical assessment of the Irish economy, approaching it in a radical way, assessing also the current Irish situation Irish in a long term perspective, I am wondering if there will be dear Irish readers who ….

Well, I remember one day few years back now. A colleague, I think he originally came from Belgium to Ireland, had been tabling publicly some fundamental critical points concerned with the Irish Universities, the prevailing clientelism and the fact that there are forces within this system claiming to work for smart developments and factually milking the system for their own sake. As said, he did it publicly, using the all-user-exchange e-mail service: mails circulated to all staff. Now, one of those days I had been sitting with colleagues down for a coffee – and this topic, more precise: his mails came up. There had been not much said against his positions. But one remark mad me  …, well one remark had been perhaps even a little bit of a surprise, not being expected amongst members of the claimed intellectually enlightened elite. Somebody asked the question: ‘But if it is all so bad, why doesn’t he go back to from where he comes?’

I don’t mind in one way: I will write and say what I think I have to write and say – and perhaps somebody will ‘send me back’ as well one day [btw., I never saw the colleague from Belgium again. Though I do not want to say that he had been physically pushed out of the way, I have to say that bullying is …, well: not nice]. Why I am writing about it here has another reason – of course, some readers know by now: nothing simple, and just a short straight line.

* Yesterday I posted on facebook:

of course madness: sitting in Finland, writing on Ireland, to be presented in Austria, and talking to colleague in Turkey on project on HR-finding out that we may meet in Germany as by chance we will be there at the same time. May introduce him then to my Irish students – taking them to Munich for study trip.

seems we are safe – Benedetto won’t be around then. Seen from another angle it is a funny idea thinking about different global players and different global games: from the top and from the bottom.

500-limit, otherwise I would have added: getting interesting info from Yu-ze in Taiwan, on Neurosociology and some news on Gramsci, of course from the south of Europe. All a question of hegemony, right?

And got some photos from back in Ireland. Really nice spot, have to go there one day to make holidays rather than hear from the holidays others make there 😉

* Contrast that with what I stated before ….

* AND NOW:

Reading through the papers that I need for the analysis of the Irish development and situation (and further development from here), looking at documents like budgets, the recovery plan, the ECB-statements, the Taoiseach’s action plan …, I can only find one of the issues confirmed, linking the different positions of “academic-pub talk about opposing colleagues” and governmental analysis together. The confirmation is concerned with one of the governance issues, only linked to the economic policy by allowing the government to proceed in such disgraceful and un-virtuous way of robbing the people, celebrating communities as self-sufficient and self-reliant and serving those who brought us onto the cemetery of the Irish tiger. I am talking about the following:

Of course, much of this can be linked to the following dimensions of ‘insularity’

  • the obvious fact of insularity in geographical terms;
  • the long-lasting  and persisting dominance of agriculture;
  • the persisting parishialisation and communitarianisation

the political ‘segmentation’, welding together what does not belong together – for instance communities and localities, claiming against each other rather than bringing together people whose common interest is based on the social class to which they belong.

And

This socio-political outline is important in order to understand the lack of ‘expressed demand’ of systematic and structurally sound public welfare and also the lack of public protest on a societal level. Family and community orientation has to be understood as being very much a matter of forbearances and inwardness of protest.

So, what do you do with the small, naughty child? ….

Sure, but there they often face the same situation – and perhaps they actually left there because of it: the readiness to assess situations by looking at a broader spectrum of historical explanations than that offered by misbehaviour of virtue-less governance. Hegemony is about more, it is also about acceptance – the larger brother beating up the smaller, saving the parents from doing a proper job.

– Having said this, may be at least some of the parents are less closed, less narrow-minded than the parochial wolves, wearing a cosmopolitan fur.

My neighbour: farmer’s wife, well educated about and having left her job in favour of marriage and farmer’s-wife existence may be about fifty years ago: she won’t read this – but I cannot recall that she said anything like what I reported above. Sitting for a nice cuppa at the kitchen table there had been some undeniable wisdom coming from her.

(see Herrmann, Peter, forthcoming: Social Policy – Production rather than Distribution. A Rights-Based Approach – as volume XIX of the socialcomparison series)

There is always a solution

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia

Dear Herr Doctor,
You are already 10 months behind with the manuscript of Das Kapital, which you have agreed to write for us. If we do not receive the manuscript within 6 months, we shall be obliged to commission another to do this work.

From a letter Karl Marx received from his publisher in Leipzig.

If publishers would just do their job authors could do their job in much batter ways.

If reviewers would do just do there job: looking for integrity of arguments rather critising authors on things they never came across academic work and publications could be much more innovative.

And if politicans would be delayed in writing shallow programs – paraphrasing Marx’ famous sentence from the 18th Bonaparte – Men and women could make more of their own history, and could do it more as they please.

There is always a solution – and there is always something behind the various triple-A-standards– though not necessarily wisdom.

Yes, there are connections though many people may not (want to) see them ….

Bu the way, I will look more in detail into issues of this kind end of September – during the OeFEB-Annual Meeting in Graz – the overall topic of the congress is “Research on Demand”.

Historical Errors

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia
How can one submit something like this for publication – and possibly expect positive review?
In the course of the actual attainment of selfish ends – an attainment conditioned in this way by universality – there is formed a system of complete interdependence, wherein the livelihood, happiness, and legal status of one man is interwoven with the livelihood, happiness, and rights of all. On this system, individual Happiness, &c., depend, and only in this connected system are they actualised and secured. This system may be prima facie regarded as the external state, the state based on need, the state as the Understanding envisages it.
The Idea in this its stage of division imparts to each of its moments a characteristic embodiment; to particularity it gives the right to develop and launch forth in all directions; and to universality the right to prove itself not only the ground and necessary form of particularity, but also the authority standing over it and its final end. It is the system of the ethical order, split into its extremes and lost, which constitutes the Idea’s abstract moment, its moment of reality. Here the Idea is present only as a relative totality and as the inner necessity behind this outward appearance.
Isn’t such sentence simply an attempt to link a vast number of abstract concepts and statements in a rather inconsistent way, then mixing it with simplistic and unexplained statements like ‘Happiness’?
A short note of explanation: the author of those sentnences did not submit it anywhere and it had not been reviewed. But published and at one stage well recognised as an important contribution to philosophical thinking. It is § 183 and 184 of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, talking about Civil Society.

Joerg Huffschmid Award – press release – German only

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia, contemporary socio-economic situation, works, projects, publications

Pressemitteilung
Attac Deutschland
Frankfurt am Main, 19. August 2011

* Preis in Gedenken an Jörg Huffschmid erstmals vergeben
* Arbeit über Steuergerechtigkeit in der Globalisierung ausgezeichnet

“Determinanten einer nachhaltigen Steuerpolitik im Kontext der
Globalisierung” ? so lautet der Titel der Dissertation, für die die
Politologin Nicola Liebert kürzlich den Jörg-Huffschmid-Preis erhalten
hat. Verliehen haben die Auszeichnung das globalisierungskritische
Netzwerk Attac und sein Wissenschaftlicher Beirat, die Arbeitsgruppe
Alternative Wirtschaftspolitik, die EuroMemo-Gruppe sowie die
Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung. Der Preis in Gedenken an Jörg Huffschmid wird
künftig alle zwei Jahre verliehen und ist mit 2000 Euro dotiert.

In ihrer Doktorarbeit geht Nicola Liebert der Frage nach, wie
Steuergerechtigkeit in einer globalisierten Wirtschaft geschaffen werden
kann. In seiner Laudatio betonte Elmar Altvater, Emeritus der Freien
Universität Berlin und im Wissenschaftlichen Beirat von Attac, die
Arbeit bilde auch deswegen einen wichtigen Beitrag, weil sie sich nicht
nur gründlich mit der Ausgaben-, sondern auch mit der Einnahmeseite des
Staates auseinandersetzt. Elmar Altvater: “Es ist ein Unding, dass
Parteien in der aktuellen Krise weiterhin Steuersenkungen fordern.
Verantwortliche Politik müsste zudem wieder verstärkt die
Vermögensbesitzer zur Finanzierung des Staates heranziehen.”

Ulrich Brand von der Universität Wien, Mitinitiator des Preises und
Mitglied der Jury, begründete die Einrichtung des Preises mit dem
wissenschaftlichen und gesellschaftspolitischen Engagement des im
Dezember 2009 gestorbenen Jörg Huffschmid. Dieser rief 1975 die
Arbeitsgruppe Alternative Wirtschaftspolitik mit ins Leben, die so
genannte Memorandum-Gruppe. 1995 gehörte er zu den Mitgründern der
Europäischen Memorandum-Gruppe und 2002 des Wissenschaftlichen Beirates
von Attac. “Jörg Huffschmid hat mit seinen Analysen der Finanzmärkte
ganz wesentlich zur analytischen Unterfütterung der
globalisierungskritischen Bewegung beigetragen”, sagte Ulrich Brand.

Für den Jörg-Huffschmid-Preis 2013 können erneut
Studienabschlussarbeiten (Magister-, Master und Diplomarbeiten) sowie
Dissertationen eingereicht werden, die thematisch im Bereich der
politischen Ökonomie der Finanzmärkte angesiedelt sind.

Die Dissertation von Nicola Liebert erscheint kommenden Monat im Verlag
Westfälisches Dampfboot unter dem Titel “Steuergerechtigkeit in der
Globalisierung: Wie die steuerpolitische Umverteilung von unten nach
oben gestoppt werden kann”.

Pressefotos (freie Verwendung bei Angabe der Quelle):

* Nicola Liebert:
(Fotohinweis: Nicola Liebert)

* Jury und Preisträgerin (3.v.l.):
(Fotohinweis: Stefan Thimmel)

Für Rückfragen:

* Ulrich Brand, Wissenschaftlicher Beirat von Attac, Tel.
ulrich.brand@univie.ac.at

* Nicola Liebert, Trägerin Jörg-Huffschmid-Preis, Tel. 0163 – 163 6127

* Stefan Thimmel, Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung, thimmel@rosalux.de, 030 –
44310 434

Cats and Enlightenment

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia, general, thoughts on life and its philosophy, works, projects, publications

The other day I sent a mail to a colleague and friend: after he let me know about the “very latest” Apple’s laptop; and after I came across the very latest software (OS) …. and after I sent him a devastating negative critique on that software I saw by accident – he replied, saying that he could not share  the critique after installing the OS … Fair enough – maybe that I install it soon myself …, but …: there is a more complicate answer to it, one that is not really about computers …. – so here it is:

Take your point, Kenneth; and not knowing the Lion, the cat itself had not been really my point. Nor Mac/apple or any special brand … . However, I am already since some time and receptively concerned about all these “the latest” and “the best”, quickly moving on to “very latest and the very best” and moving on to … – take food, take washing powder, take computers …, well, and take education and financial markets (of course, subsequently the crisis from 2007, though predictable since 2??? – not sure when exactly in the early 2000s I published something predicting its emergence), getting obvious in 2008, being bemoaned in 2009 (after overcoming the first shock) and now a matter of usage or something like it [perhaps even habit]. Due to the complete crash of my database which until today is not sorted, I installed office I don’t know what (the latest version) – it is so complicated that I cannot handle it, things are so easy, so much “supported” with macros etc. that many things are awkward … – I am now back to the previous version, and for mail I am using mail … – this apparently doesn’t allow me to use BE, at least the spellcheck highlights everything as wrong that doesn’t follow “big brothers” AE-rule.

Talking about rule – brings me to my current position, working on law. Though most of my own work is around philosophy of law, a look at more current issues has to be part of it. As usual, I forgot the figures. Roughly then just one example: the German Social Code – BSHG – had been established in 1962, serving as foundation for the area until 2004. Be assured, there had been many serious problems around the law, and with the BSHG itself and also with the implementation. I remember my own engagement on relevant issues – criticising relevant issues …, long stories, I could tell many and long stories (though I cannot tell you out of hand the dates). At stake had been very fundamental, systemic questions, matters of implementation – and all in between. – Still, for the good or bad this law had been in place until 2004 – changes had been made but only relatively few and not changing fundamentals. In 2005 Hartz-IV changed fundamentally the entire situation. I would be the last who would say: Oh, good old times – why should we change anything? But there is something which really is of concern for me: The same minute when the institutions of the parliamentary democratic system approved Hartz-IV, the very same law had been already discussed in the special committees – and the important point is: they discussed the need for fundamental changes.

As said, I would be the last who would say: Oh, good old times – why should we change anything.

And I surely would be the last who would say: Oh good god. There is no divine power to trust:

No Saviour from on high delivers

No faith have we in prince or peer

….

[You’ll find it somewhere here ;-)]

But the reason had been – so far I am indeed not too far from the humanist thinking as it finds its roots in the citoyenitée, revolutionary at its time, though at the end conservative in its idealism – the force to be guiding: guiding by circumspection, at least striving for providence.

Further a brief note on the law: legal provisions in the US (laws, acts …) are enacted and remain in place for a very short term only – the European had been different and increasingly changes, developing an ever shorter time of turn over. in in some way o the same point: Yesterday I have had a lengthy talk with Lorena, a colleague from Brazil who works here at the institute (really enjoyed it, really brought me forward in my own thinking. We discussed a text which I wrote as part of the book mentioned the other day.

As said, I would be the last who would say: Oh, good old times – why should we change anything. But something is surely remarkable. At one stage she said: most of the literature you refer to, are the classics. There is not much you use from what had been published more recently [though I actually made reference to Hart, Luhmann and other youngsters ;-)]. She mentioned – as missing – for instance Habermas. Sure, I could have included part of his work – but what did and does he really say what had not been said much better already by Kant, Weber … ?

There is good reason for change – but it should be reasoned, not rushed ….

But I have to rush now …, going to the bookshop, getting something to read when I don’t have the privilege of the use of the library here anymore.

And have to read, red, read and write, write, write … – but all with the one point in mind: it is not anout another interpretation, it is about change – that is then the focus next week ….