La Gira

Europe Ancient and Present

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in contemporary socio-economic situation, general, thoughts on life and its philosophy

– Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus had to climb up a hill …

…. and from the elevation he looked down on The Burning of Rome, devastating one of the cities we consider as major source of what we call today EUrope, devastating the living space for uncountable lives, and also being a factor in the crumbling away of the overcome powers. It is said that he had been satisfied, laughing by the outlook.

Today we do not have to climb up a hill to see what happens – too clear are the signs of the developments taking place on the upper echelons of society, today even literally above our heads: on the upper floors of the finance centres, in airport-lounges of the international jet-set and in the modern ‘clouds’ if we take them as metaphor of a technologically developed global society that employs these means as instruments for advancing financialisation and speculation.

Another criminal offense that provides the foundation of modern Europe can be taken from another ancient source – the country of reference now Greece.

According to the Greek myth, Zeus, the Thunder-God residing on the Olympus, in the shape of a bull abducted Europa, the daughter of the Phoenician king Agenor and carried her over the sea to Crete. Agenor sent his sons out to search for their sister. One of them, Kadmos, landed in Greece and was told by the oracle of Delphi that he should wander around, armed with his spear till he reached the cowherd Pelagon in the land of Phokis. He should kill Pelagon – the man of earth, “born to die” – and choose the cow with the sign of the moon on both her flanks and follow her, till she would lie down, with her horns on the ground. On this hill he should kill and sacrifice her to the earth Goddess and then found a big city on this spot, Thebes.

Kadmos followed the oracle and became the founder of Thebes. He married Harmonia, the daughter of Ares, the War God, and Aphrodite (…). It is not clear from the myths whether he killed the moon-cow, obviously his sister Europa, or not. In any case, one does not hear of her again. She, the raped and abducted woman was only the means to lead the warrior and new culture hero into the foreign land and to his greatness.

(Maria Mies: Europe in the Global Economy or the Need to De-Colonize Europe; in: Peter Herrmann (Ed.): Challenges for a Global Welfare System: Commack, New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.; 1999: 153-171; here: 160 f.)

Today this may be translated into a political dilemma – that between national supremacy and sovereignty and true international and global solidarity and integration. The weekend’s Financial Times (10/12/2011) states

Mr Cameron will receive plaudits from Conservative MPs when he returns to the Commons on Monday. But back in London he may reflect on former prime minister Tony Blair’s bitter observation in 2006: ‘Co-operate in Europe and you betray Britain, be unreasonable in Europe, be praised back home and be utterly without influence in Europe.

But it is not only about the farewell by and from Britain.

It is also about the behaviour shown by the German Bundesbank. Accordingly – and again with reference to the FT:

It was exactly the rhetoric used by Germany’s famously conservative Bundesbank, to which Mr. Draghi paid tribute.

As such, it not only put pressure on governments but build is credibility among Germans, many of whom remain wary of handling control of their currency to an Italian.

As much as the two latter references resonate some form of abduction – at least the abduction of responsibly choosing points of reference of politics and policies we find the reference to the Nero, his will to establish power on the debris of the past and present, reflected in another statement from the same edition of the FT (though in a different article):

Britain was ‘as isolated as somebody who refused to join the Titanic just before it sailed’, said Terry Smith, chief executive of Tullet Prebon, the interdealer broker.

Taken from here it seems to be clear: the ship is sinking. The new steps are not more than an empty promise.

At least looking at Germany, the strong and supposedly reasoning power, shows that there is indeed little reason for optimism and trusting that cointry’s ability to balanced and strategic action. ‘Cracks spreading through Europe’s banks’ we read as if attentive observers didn’t knew this already – and as if it would be new that also the ‘strong political and economic powers’ are facing a serious threat: ‘Bail-out could be on the cards for Commerzbank’ and in France ‘Moody’s downgrades lender’s credit ratings’.

__________________

In this situation surely only few are really leaning back like Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus. On the contrary, new programs show up, new efforts are made public and …

… and apparently forlorn admonishers are another time turning up, vehemently claiming the right of reason – or are they claiming the reason of right?

One of these apparently forlorn admonishers is Juergen Habermas, recently called in an article in the Spiegel as ‘the last European’, and looked at in terms of ‘a Philosopher’s Mission to Save the EU’.

As such, indeed

he accused EU politicians of cynicism and turning their backs on the European ideals.

So, according to Georg Diez, author of the said article

Europe is his project. It is the project of his generation.

And surely one may approach it this way. However, there is a catch with such an assessment. At the time of Europe’s early institutionalisation Habermas and ‘his generation’, namely people like Max Horheimer and Theodor W. Adorno had been actually highly critical about the approach towards integration based upon instrumental reason. In an earlier work, Habermas states the problematique of the incremental and piecemeal capitalist reformism as

in its own terms the struggle between classes constituted itself only on the basis of the capitalist mode of production and with this it constituted the objective situation on the basis of which the class structure of the politically constituted traditional society could be recognised. Capitalism regulated by the state as it emerged as answer on the manifest class antagonism which resulted in threats for the system, leads the class conflict to a standstill.

(Habermas, Juergen, 1968: Technik und Wissenschaft als ‘Ideologie’; in: Technik und Wissenschaft als ‘Ideologie’; Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp: 48-103; here: 84)

In this way, systems are not ‘rational’ in the sense of an abstract and generally acknowledge rationality. Rather, they

exist as long as the development of the sub-systems of instrumental action remains within the realm of the legitimising virtue of cultural traditions.

(ibid.: 67)

Looking at this position we have to say that it is against this Europe to the extent to which this Europe is not at all based on what Habermas would see in a later perspective as the general principles of rationality – and it is important to note that at this stage we are dealing with an entirely different historical situation. Any rationality – limited by the self-reference of the ruling, hegemonic class – had to be historically limited to maintaining the functionality of the given system. As such it had been not least a matter which I characterised myself later by pointing out

The different involved actors have in part the same, in part different, even contradicting interests. Subsequently we find the emergence of specific criteria of success, reflecting the substantial determination by the respective position within the process of reproduction.

(Herrmann, Peter, 1995: Movements and Organisations in the Cyclical Processes of Socialisation; in: Swiss Journal of Sociology; volume 21/1 :85-106; here 97)

In 1995, Habermas himself acknowledges, pointing in the same issue of the Swiss Journal of Sociology on the tension between fundamental rights and their regulation, emphasising that

the materialisation of law shows itself in side-effects

(Habermas, Juergen, 1995: On the Internal Relationship between the State of Law and Democracy; in: Swiss Journal of Sociology; volume 21/1: 11-20; here: 18)

In principle, we are still dealing with the same pattern of distinct rationalities behind which the fact of multiple hegemonies is hidden and by which it is blurred: the ongoing principle of class interests and its expression by the reference to the nation state on the one hand and the reference to the supranational level on the other hand. Habermas indirectly addresses this issue in a contribution on the Concept of Human Dignity, referring to relevant conceptualisations as

universal legal concepts [as] facilitate[d] negotiated compromises

(Habermas, Juergen, 2010: The Concept of Human Dignity and the Realistic Utopia of Human Rights; in: Metaphilosophy; Oxford/Malden: Blackwell: 474-480; here: 475; see also Habermas, Juergen, 2011: Wie demokratisch ist die EU? Die Krise der Europaeischen Union im Licht einer Konstitutionalisierung des Voelkerrechts; in: Blaetter fuer deutsche und internationale Politik 8/2011: 37-48; here: 37)

However, he remains caught in the irresolvable contradiction between the different claims of sovereignty. The problem can be seen in the fact that he insufficiently differentiates within the multilayered systems. Rather than clearly spelling out the various contradictions as such:

  • the contradiction between [i] the suggested people as sovereign on the one hand, [ii] the sovereignty of the actual hegemon (i.e. the ruling class) on the other hand and – as mediator – [iii] the sovereignty of the nation state as third realm
  • the contradiction between [i] the suggested people as sovereign, [ii] the actual national hegemon, [iii] the nation state as relatively independent power and [iv] the inter/supranational level
  • the contradiction between the now four suggested sovereigns ([i] national people, [ii] national ruling class, [iii] national institutional system [iv] inter/supranational level) and in addition [v] the different other relevant national systems, each of them again existing as such complex unity

Habermas escapes into a realm of abstract reason and hope. So we read in a contribution on Human Dignity and the Realistic Utopia of Human Rights:

On the one hand, human rights could acquire the quality of enforceable rights only within a particular political community—that is, within a nation-state. On the other hand, human rights are connected with a universalistic claim to validity, which points beyond all national boundaries.20 This contradiction would find a reasonable solution only in a constitutionalized world society (not necessarily with the characteristics of a world republic).

(Habermas, Juergen, 2010: The Concept of Human Dignity and the Realistic Utopia of Human Rights; in: Metaphilosophy; Oxford/Malden: Blackwell: 474-480; here: 475)

Again, this leaves us with a very general plea for reason – and as such Habermas shows another time what he showed over a long time already: the individualist and voluntarist shift. At the end, Habermas’ earlier orientation along the lines of class struggle and class justice moved first to a general principle of discoursivity and ends – for the time being – at the point of an absolute idea. As such it is caught in the danger of

  • being squeezed between individual responsibility, the duty if emerging as good-doer (see Michaela Haas: Es geht nicht um viel. Es geht um alles. Die Rechnung ist ganz einfach: Wenn jeder von uns nur ein bisschen was beiträgt, ist die Weltarmut so gut wie beseitigt. Also: Was hindert uns daran?; in: 09.12.2011 SZ-Magazin|Magazin: 34-38),
  • disappearing in an abstract and idealist cloud, impossible to be controlled as it can claim its value from ‘pure reason’
  • emerging as a new Herrenmensch, pleading to individual politicians and countries to behave responsible, using the power for the suposed general interest.

Finally Habermas addresses the – in a contribution in the Blaetter fuer deutsche und internationale Politik –

federal government that holds in conjunction with the German-French cooperation the key to European future and it has the responsibility for the date of Europe.

(Habermas, Juergen, 2011: Wie demokratisch ist die EU? Die Krise der Europaeischen Union im Licht einer Konstitutionalisierung des Voelkerrechts; in: Blaetter fuer deutsche und internationale Politik 8/2011: 37-48; here: 37)

It is only consequent, that we then find for instance the German Die Zeit drawing a parallel between Kant and Habermas as we learn from the article by Georg Diez. However, if something like it is suggested it is probably more reasonable to highlight the affinity between Habermas’ Euro-euphoria and Kant’s three works on reason rather than the latter’s work on ‘Perpetual Peace’.

Of course, we still find in Habermas’ writing the argument against instrumental reason, reading that

that power has slipped from the hands of the people and shifted to bodies of questionable democratic legitimacy, such as the European Council. Basically, he suggests, the technocrats have long since staged a quiet coup d’état.

(from the article by Diez)

But point of reference is now rationality as general pattern, independent of class struggles and differences in and contradictions between interests.

Consequently, there is some truth in the sentence that

the activists of the Occupy movement refuse to formulate even a single clear demand, [and] Habermas spells out precisely why he sees Europe as a project for civilization that must not be allowed to fail, and why the “global community” is not only feasible, but also necessary to reconcile democracy with capitalism.

However, the developments over the last years in general and in particular over the last days, culminating in Friday’s decision, clearly show that dreams do not offer a solution when it comes to a clash of interests.

__________________

So at least I have to admit for myself, being younger than Habermas and perhaps in some way still the same generation:

Europe is my project. It is the project of my generation.

I write this, trying to defend myself and also with some bitterness but not least with some energy aiming on maintaining it as my project – Europe, another Europe.

Coming back to the debate on sovereignty – and on Habermas – the difference and struggle between the perspectives on sovereignty and hegemony is currently focused around a potentially fatal trinity

  • finacialised utilitarianism and in tendency decoupling of the entire economy from actual use value
  • particularising individualism and isolationalism
  • strive for hegemony of this particularising force – taking the form of re-nationalisation and re-regionalisation, commonalisation, discoursation but also appearing in the form of governancisation, communitarianism, professionalism, functionalisation and formalisation.

This seems to be a vicious circle – the Faustian ‘vitalising circle’. We are, indeed, living in this society and we simply have to start from here – suggesting ‘but I would not start from here’ may said to be the saying in which the Habermasian plea for reason can be summarised. Working in academia and having worked on EU-issues for  some time, I lived sufficiently long moving within this trinity, trying to push for an alternative. It is about looking at a time of unsettling processes and debates; it is about moving on stages of dazzlement: areas of ‘good governance’ that emerge latest in hindsight as arrays of greasy ground, giving some security by golden chains [actually in hindsight it looks better than actually being on the battlefield]; it is about distraction from and artificialisation of needs and interests and it is about the isolation in alleged power positions. I still believe there is nothing wrong with the engagement in those democratic institutions to which I refer. On the contrary: today, these institutions are more important than ever. Entering into distractions by allowing laws of liquid modernity (Bauman) taking power over seems to be more dangerous than withdrawing from any engagement.

However, while moving on these stages one has to resist the temptation of looking for a new point of departure rather than starting from the existing point. And the given point of departure is a world that is not trinitarian, nor binary. However, we have to look for the real world and its contradictions. As much as words and ideas may shape the world, as much as issues that are located on the level of the superstructure play a role in shaping decisively the organic whole of social existence, we nevertheless cannot take this as an excuse for starting the analysis from there. It is still the real economy and the real political power-process that has to be point of reference. Such perspective does not allow us to stop at rejecting greed nor does it allow us to simply look for ‘better regulation’ alone. As important as such issues are we should take the current situation as challenge to thoroughly ask ‘What is the actual change of the productive forces and the mode of production?’

This means also that it is surely correct when the taz criticizes Angela Merkel in the weekend-edition (10/11.12.2011), stating

Evidently Merkle doesn’t think in a systemic way … . For her the problem the problem is located where it becomes manifest, visible.

Indeed, the problem is not about public deficits. However, the analysis provided by the taz (and by so many others) is not really looking at the fundamentals either. It is questionable

that it is a matter of the crisis of the banks/banking system. Dubious loans had been granted without restraint – be it to poor house builders in the USA, a venturer in Spain or careless credit institutions in Ireland. Public debt exploded only subsequent to this snowball effect.

This still sounds as if responsible and circumspect approaches on the finance markets and by the finance institutions (and the governments who failed regulating them) would have fundamentally changed the situation. To some extent only one should follow this. To a larger extent it is about the fundamental change of the system and a new circle of primitive accumulation or as for instance Harvey names it: of accumulation by dispossession. At least it is a point that allows to begin asking serious questions – and also looking for serious answers as it is now about about the process of relational appropriation, i.e. what (kind of) property is appropriate for what and who is and should be the owner.

It is my Europe – even this crisis-shaken Europe, apparently in danger of braking up – to the extent to which I have to admit: I failed thoroughly engaging in such debates that had been aiming on moving further, going beyond the given framework for reason as within this framework reason will barely move beyond technicist solutions, instrumental reason. – And the same is true for allowing academic debates drifting increasingly towards short-term orientations, engaging in bean-counting and finding administrative solutions for substantial questions.

And it is my Europe – and ‘my academia’ alike – to the extent to which I still refuse to engage in certain debates and/or to which I am ready to follow the stony path of resisting the search for simple answers to difficult questions and searching for a new varnish where a new grounding is needed. – No reason to look up, following the clouds in their move nor a reason to climb on up. looking for a spot from where one can look at the devastating fire. If Diez writes on Habermas

it should be mentioned that Habermas is no malcontent, no pessimist, no prophet of doom – he’s a virtually unshakable optimist, and this is what makes him such a rare phenomenon in Germany.

I may claim that I feel myself very much like that, even on the stony path of harsh and twisted way of reality rather than on the idealist way of an absolute idea of rationality.

And stating it this way it also a self-critique not only on the personal level. Also the left should critically look at what actually happened to the own analytical approaches. Orienting on practice – the practice of others and own practice does not mean looking at reality. Practice is only emerging as matter of reality to the extent to which it is able to develop a historical perspective.

_____

What remains? It remains the evidence that rats show empathy – a series of experiments evidenced this.

Since Wolfgang Borchert’s short-story ‘Outside, in front of the door’ we may live with the reassurance that rats are asleep at night.

And the saddening fact, seemingly completely out of context that in a small town near Hamburg an association of owners of allotment gardens decide that only 12.6 of the owners may have a non-German background.

It may be that the latter is not really so much out of context – finally Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus had not just been ‘sitting and waiting’. He is also known as one of the most pronounced persecutors of Christians. So, we see in any case that there is surely no end of history; nor is there any reason to believe that the clash of civilisations, if it exists, really comes by accidental encounters of different faiths. It still is, as it always had been, about a clash of interests.

Before I stated the focus on a potentially fatal trinity

  • finacialised utilitarianism and in tendency decoupling of the entire economy from actual use value
  • particularising individualism and isolationalism
  • strive for hegemony of this particularising force – taking the form of re-nationalisation and re-regionalisation, commonalisation, discoursation but also appearing in the form of governancisation, communitarianism, professionalism, functionalisation and formalisation.

All these and other particularisations are in the better case a withdrawal from collective responsibility; in the worse case they are the justification of particularist interests which cannot mean anything else than the survival of the fittest …

At the end, we are not dealing with any of the trinities mentioned – at the end we have to define a clear alternative. Helmut Schmidt – in his writing on Ausser Dienst (‘Out of Office’) – contends in the last chapter that today individual rights are secured, however morals do not exist (anymore) and are actually questioned (from the last chapter of the audio-book-version). There is surely some truth in it. However, there is a fundamental catch. There will be hardly any relevant – appropriate – social moral as long as we do not achieve rights that are thoroughly understood as social rights. And this surely means not least a matter of looking to advance the process of relational appropriation. If this wants to evolve as real answer it has to go much beyond looking for questions in small spaces.

Protecting the Environment – Aerlingus and Lyons Tea join forces ;-(

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in general, Peter's Log

But of course, it is an example only – details are important, and still: they could look different, ending in the same societal detail.

Reasonably late flight from Cork: 7:00 am, still, not too late for a cup of tea (sure, the cup is not really a cup but that is one of these details …). The air hostess puts it on the little table in front of the seat next to me (have my ‘three-seater’ privilege. I hand over the 2.60 Euro (of course, 2.60 – did anybody say aerlingus is a low-fare airline?) and say friendly, pointing on the milk,

I don’t need that.

She takes it back, saying

But I will leave this for you. There is a bag for the rubbish in it.

And she points on a tiny plastic bag, containing sugar (which I do not need), a spoon/knife combination (which I do not need as I do not use the sugar and because I want to drink the tea and it is indeed not so strong that I have to cut it), and finally it contains a plastic bag, the words printed on it, clearly stating what it is:

WASTE BAG

And it says also:

KEEP AWAY FROM CHILDREN. MAY CAUSE SUFFOCATION

And finally it contains a little napkin. I actually have to use that, drying my face which is wet from the tears shed in the light of all this waste …

Sure, now one may ask: did I have to write this, contributing to the data waste, and even more immediately: contributing to destroying the environment by using precious electrical energy; running the computer, profiting from the WLAN (won’t tell you where I use it – it is free, meaning it does not cost me more than the price of a cup of coffee), by relying on one of the many servers ….

… and another time getting aware of the fact: nothing is really easy on this world. And that is why so many people leave it: HELLO! ???

We all have to put our hands-on. Only a question to get the right match.

And finding the right people – the right I said but I meant the correct, rather than the right ….

Taming of the Screw*

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

Taming of the Screw*

Mapu ñuke – Mother Earth

Mapu ñuke, mapu ñuke
tami rewkvleci jawe
coyvmkey kom puh ka kom antv
fvxa kuifi kakerume fvh,
wefkey bewfv reke
ka dewkey pehoykvleci xayen,
alofkvleci wagvben keciley,
dewmalekenmu, coyvlekenmu
fij kuyfike kekerumeci folil.

Mapu ñuke, mapu ñuke
mi pu pvxa jeqkey pu mapuce,
amuleci hegvmvwvnmu
naqvn antv meu ka pu liwen

Lelfvn mew ka mawida mew,
xiwe, peweh ka foye
leliwvlnieygvn ta kaifvwenu,
wixapvray tami pu toki
mi kisu gvnewam ka mi rumekagenuam
ka tami poyeatew ka ayvatew
mapu ñuke

**

Mother earth,
in your undulating body
the eternal germs
pullulate at day and night.
like rivers they debouch
and outpour in cascades
of enigmatic stars
sprouting, burgeoning –
the roots of the ancestors.

Mother earth,
in permanent change
elevating from dusk and daybreak
your inmost bears Mapuces.

In the valleys, in the mountains
Rewes, Pewenes and Canelos are standing
the countenance directed to the sky,
raise the Tokis
to liberate you, to protect you
to love you fondly.
Mother Earth

(Rayen Kvyeh; translation P.H.)

*****

A study trip – officially it came to its end on Friday night, when UCC’s Higher Diploma Course in Social Policy went together for dinner, returning to Cork then on Saturday lunchtime. For my part, I could not join, some work still needs to be done.
And as part of this I date the end of the study trip on Sunday afternoon – Orhan Akman, deputy of Die Linke in the city council in Munich, whom the student group met on Friday morning in the town hall, is again my host. This time it is in the building of the Trade Union – and it is on an entirely different occasion. The title of the event is

Struggle for Freedom, self determination and human dignity by Kurds and Mapuche.

While I go there I read Frigga Haug’s Die Vier-in-Einem-Perspektive. Politik von Frauen für eine Neue Linke (Four-in-One-Perspective. Politics by Women for a New Left). The book is a plea for recognising the need to approach different facets: employment, reproduction, politics and culture as organic whole.

Orhan welcomes me – as I am arrived before the official beginning I have the opportunity to talk a little bit with him. And also with Rayen Kvyeh, the writer, poet and activist of the Mapuche.
It is such a difference: the meetings during the week, all in their own way highly political, the reading of Frigga’s book – surely radical but nevertheless very much so much dealing with the reality as we know it from our daily experience – and now the confrontation with an apparently entirely different array. After Orhan’s general opening remarks – the personal welcomes of some participants and the speakers, after giving an outline of the event: the presentations, the open discussion and the ‘cultural event’ at the end – he gives a brief introduction into the topic, namely ….

Chile under Fire
…., the student movement, the massive protests against an educational system which is by its high costs extremely exclusive, not allowing ordinary people to access it … – and the fact that the students are expressing their solidarity with the Mapuche. But who did ever hear about the Mapuche, who knows that it is a minority living to a large extent in Chile, having been dispelled from their own land, resisting and asking to be recognised as ethnic group, claiming as such the recognition of their own rights. A people who resisted the conquest – first by Christobal Colón who arrived by a navigation error in 1492 in the Americas rather than in India, the subsequent ‘import of capitalism’. They resisted and continue to resist not least by maintaining collective property and sustainable economic development.
A people of the moon rather than the sun – the first being female, the second being male; a people not knowing pyramids – triangular, hierarchical constructions – but maintaining ‘levelled structures’ of collective governance. As such their resistance is not least geared against the establishment of reservations aiming on reocupación – re-occupation. – Rings a bell?

Something they have in common with the Kurds …, they have in common like the

Luna of Ashes
The eyes, blinded with a black bandage
the air compressed into a meter by a meter
captivated, tormented silence
between cables, bashes and blood

My comprehension goes astray
in endless labyrinths
made of the raw realities and its dark imaginations

Sweating cold, rage shivering
my skin
spans across the flayed skeleton
it begins leaving is life behind itself
in slow, pertinacious agony

My children are calling for me
under the chime they call
immersing my eyes, engrossing in drifty flood
my body purifying, laving in the warmth
my moribund thoughts

step by step, a small step
my blinded eyes stride
the narrow paths of my soil

Aside the loom
my grandmother gins the maize
a kiss from the auricaria, you are collecting
pignolias,
sweating in the oven
you shed tears
the streets conquered by the military forces

A forest of affection strikes roots
deep
in my body
and gives raise
to a rebellious fruit.

(Rayen Kvyeh; translation P.H.)

A song concludes the first presentation – the sounds of Victor Jara.

****

Songül Karabulut, member of the board of the Kurdish National Congress, presents: the history of the Kurds, making the point that a people living according to their origins cannot be easily erased. As people of freedom they first contributed – during the Ottoman wars and the dissolution of the Empire between 1908 and 1918 – to the liberation of Turkey. However, it meant laying the ground for their own oppression by the new Turkish regime, the fate they shared with the communists. Genocide, psycho-genocide, assimilation – the traditions of the divide et impera – against the Mesopotamian people who stood at the crèche of civilisation.

***

On the way back I remember Frigga’s book, her reference to Marx’ Grundrisse, where he states that it is finally the economy of time that is at the core of all economy. She argues against glorifying the past, rebukes the neglects of developing the productive forces.

However, the oppression of women, structurally linked to the dominance of increasing profit as Leitmotif has to be limited in favour of “goals of quality of life”. (116)

***

It had been a long day – the conclusion of the study trip in its own way. Surely the end of a week with diverse impressions:

  • A quick overview over four-hundred year’s of Western arts: the development of Western culture in a nutshell: From Duerer’s Four Apostles to the work by Chamberlain.
  • The confrontation with the most barbarian derailing which may be the most pronounced culmination of the ambiguity of a modernism which turned a people of thinkers and poets into a people of judges and hangmen (a Volk of Dichter und Denker wurde zum Volk der Richter und Henker)
  • The various impressions of The Taming of the Screw*: the well-ordered system, its success peaking in the fact that Lenin described by saying that there surely will not be a revolution starting n Germany as the German’s will first buy a ticket for the Platform before they conquer the railway lines
  • And the insights in silent revolutions – germs of resistance, confessions and the adaption of rational rules in order to change …

A circle coming to a close – on a personal level: Monday it will come to a close, providing a stage for new steps. Not as means of strangulation but as point allowing a new departure: The collaboration on Human Rights I started with Mehmet from ODTUe some time ago; this Monday’s meeting with Lorena from the MPI, hoping that we develop cooperation on this topic and linking it to her country: Bolivia. Drawing a bow between the three of us – and in some way brought together by the activists: Rayen and Orhan.
Many facets, laboriously and playfully coming together like the different individual bars and melodies in a symphony. A process of relational appropriation – it may be a machine of alienation and oppression but it also may evolve as an artful symphony which allows individuals to develop with their own timbre, merging to a gorgeous masterpiece of humanism.

There is a good reason for thinking more about what taming may mean.

***************

by any means we should erase any negative undertone when talking of a screw, highlight instead the independence and resistance.

Where to go …? – Obituary for Vaeterchen Franz, Looking Ahead

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

It had been the first program day of this year’s study visit with a group of students from Ireland: The Higher Diploma in Social Policy. A small group of students, entering with entirely different backgrounds from their first studies, doing this postgrad-course in order to be able to move on in studying social work, social policy, or just to leave it there after obtaining some fundamental knowledge in social (political) science. I had been near to write “basic” but it is really more about fundamentals. Not so much about how this society works at the moment and what contemporary issues are about. It is more about gaining an understanding of the principles …
…, and of course this includes some fundamental issues on political economy – what do figures mean: from the changes of some figures we don’t learn much as long as we do not know that the profit rate is not just a different name for turn over, corporate income or the like) and philosophy of law (paragraphs and regulations may change more or less on a short term basis – but law, legal systems will maintain their character as means of control: oppression and establishing a very specific hegemony for a long time, lasting much longer than their frequent offspring). And for the first time I took the opportunity to include a little bit history of arts: the tour through the exciting exhibitions of the old and the modern Pinakothek.

(Sure, mighty proud that Martha and Lorena, colleagues and friends from the Institute, joined – aren’t we all glad if people listen who do not have to listen, people who just are interested in what we are saying?
And also glad that the students asked me if I would join them the afternoon – apparently they cannot get enough from me 😉 – so we went for a visit at the memorial: KZ Gedenkstaette Dachau)

… the first program day, visiting two agencies, one working with ‘unaccompanied minor refugees’, the other an umbrella organisation, supporting self-help.

In the evening I still have some time left, thinking about the insights from the visits, also thinking about the words I read the other day:

that one cannot write about social policy issues like writing a music score, with the different chimes coming together, building one large symphonic piece.

And then I come across a sad news: Vaeterchen Franz …

Franz-Josef Degenhardt, born in December 1931 in Schwelm in Westphalia passed away the afternoon. Our first study day – the day he drew his last breath:
bearing the academic degree of Doctor of Law – a great poet, satirist, novelist, and – first and foremost – folksinger/songwriter left us, standing for decidedly left-wing politics.

Remembering having met him, remembering his songs … – perhaps he had been doing the impossible with his songs as it is perhaps more in general arts we have to pay more attention to as it is about:

writing about social policy issues like writing a music score, with the different chimes coming together, building one large symphonic piece.

He is gone – so it is even more now up to us not to forget and to move on, looking for the truth.

And we have to continue – we can hear the challenge ahead here: ….

Academic Strangulation – or …

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

… what is the parallel between modern academic life and fox hunting?

Much had been written on the effect of bureaucratisation, the emergence of an ‘iron cage’, contributing to the ‘specialist without spirit, sensualists without heart; this nullity imagines that it has attained a level of humanity (Menschentums) never before achieved’ as Max Weber developed it in his work on the protestant ethics. A process of rationalisation, entering into all pores of life. As such this bureaucracy is not much more than the political-administrative complement of what Karl Marx analysed as the penetration of daily life by the complete commodification of the capitalist economy- the hegemonic system with the two firm legs.
And in academic life we complain frequently about managerialisation as principle that brings these two legs as crutches into the university. We complain about the administrative burden and also about the requirements defined by cost-efficiency of research and the need of applicability of research results.
Surely, there are good reasons to ask researchers to show that what they are doing is ‘good’, is useful for society and not the waste of money in ivory towers.

But most part of the weeks work here in Barcelona – on PERARES (Public Engagement with Research and Research Engagement with Society) – overall surely an exciting enterprise, not least due to a highly committed team that runs the overall project – showed a dimension we do not take sufficiently into account, we easily forget by the more or less short-term orientation of the complains: the shift to ‘project’ financing of academic work and research is not just an administrative burden and a permanent threat – for many an existential threat. Beyond that – and reaching much deeper – is the adaptation of a narrowed thinking, not really reaching much beyond the three (or the like) project circle and instead even looking for ‘real questions’. Action plans instead of research plans – accountable and calculable … action research rather than search for sound social practice. Researchers being more politicians than anything else.
But politicians not in the sense of generalists with spirit, activists led by their heart; but like politicians of the mainstream ‘democracies’ of Western shape: hunting success measured in lack of substance: sentences written in figures and letters forced into calculations.

Thinking in particular about young colleagues, growing up in the environment of good-will hunting: projects – at least a desk for some time, some kind of title …. – and …
… it reminds me a little bit of the life in the part of the world where I live, where fox hunting is still alive. In these hierarchies every member of the community has  a place. And everybody knows about the place: its opportunities and limitations …. – and as long as there is a fox we can hunt everybody is ‘better off’.
It is a little bit like researching about social exclusion: as long as we, the researchers know the terms and (claim to) define them we are better off. So it keeps all us busy, running like the fox: hoping for the ditch where we can hide, knowing that it will allow us only minutes of rest; hiding behind the next tree, allowing us to avoid for short times at least to face the barrel of the hunter, fleeing into a kennel, forgetting about the pack of hounds waiting for us at the exit.

When will we learn how to run together …? And when will as well younger colleagues learn again that are asked to do research and not write sentences rather then filling in forms …

… – at the end the experience of the week’s work shows: it is surely not a question of age and it is not true that all is and all are the same. There are even bright lights, also making shadows more visible.

Perhaps that made it especially enjoyable to visit before all this work started the Liceau, listening  to Scenes from Goethe’s Faust. Isn’t most important who is the last to break out in joyful Mephistophelean laughter?

Surely not another third way

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

In a presentation, titled

Quines són les competècies qu l’alumnat universtari necessita per a l’emprenedoria social?

(Facultat Pedagogia. Universitat de Barcelona – November 2nd, 2011), another dimension of the globalisation and crisis challenge will be looked at – different from what had been presented recently in the “ten arguments” adopted by the scientific council of attac.

Many debates on Third Ways can be found, accompanying revolutionary movements, aiming on overcoming the need for revolutionary changes or seeing themselves as some kind of fundamental change itself. Leaving these debates aside, there are especially in the current crisis surely good reasons to think about the co-operative sector or social economy. And doing so surely requires taking a perspective that is going beyond the more traditional stance of seeing them as ‘entrepreneurs with a broader understanding of entrepreneurial goals’. Point of departure is not another look at the enterprises of the social economy. Rather, central point of reference for the presentation will be a look at the processes of societal (dis)integration and (de-)focussing, in particular

* the loss of the wider understanding of economic processes as genuinely social, including the reference to processes of relational appropriation as matter of working on “different goals” such as the provision of goods and services, social integration, environmental maintenance and others;
* the loss of an integrated understanding of the different stages of production: from generating raw materials to processing them, manufacturing, distribution, exchange and consumption;
* the loss of local reference of production and consumption (the well-known strawberries for Christmas dinner in Alaska);
* last but not least, the dissolution of use value and exchange value as integrated moments of the overall process.

In this perspective, the social economy (rather than primarily the enterprises of the social economy) may actually function as at least one facilitator for a new debate on perspective global for economic development, complementing other areas. Also, this may open perspectives for teaching that is not oriented along lines of moral commitment, pleading for corporate social responsibility. We need indeed a new perspective in economic development that focuses again on political economy rather than improved economics and management techniques.

more or less a normal thing ….

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

… and nevertheless something that cannot be accepted in any way: the financial crisis. A normal thing as it is

the escalation of the financial instabilities that are unavoidable in capitalist societies.

And nevertheless, these are excesses that need to be answered on the two levels: the search for immediate intervention, aiming on ways to avoid the entire burden falling on the shoulders of those who barely can cope with life with the “normal burdens” of daily life; and the search for long-term policies that require at the end a fundamental overcoming of the conditions that actually caused the crisis.

The Scientific Advisory Board of attac published a document with

Ten Arguments for Dealing with the European Financial Crisis.

the downloadable file is kindly hosted by the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation.

Globalisation – Dissolution or consolidation of a Global Social Policy (and Security).

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

The following outlines a new teaching unit, organised for December at the University of Eastern Finland. The title reads as follows

Globalisation – Dissolution or consolidation of a Global Social Policy (and Security).

The unit continues from the lecture in Wismar* and is divided into four arrays of thought.

* First it will look at very basic issues not least of social policy, outlining the economic mechanisms behind the global division of labour. This is not least about the very core issues of learning about value theory.

* Second, an outline of globalisation will be provided, using the world systems theory as point of reference.

* Third, against this backdrop it will be explored what these emerging patterns mean for social policy beyond and possibly without nation states as main framework.

* Fourth, it will be explored which implications this has for law as means of regulation of social policy. Part of this is also the ventilating on some new approaches to human rights (the latter as part of work in progress together with Mehmet Okyayuz [Orta Dogu Teknik Üniversitesi, Ankara]).

______________________

* Participation in the Weimar lecture, held in September 2011 is not condition for participating in the Finland-lectures

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