The Paradoxes of Social Democracy,
Neoliberalism and other Systems of Government
I recently had the opportunity of
accompanying a house-mate to the hospital where he is being treated
for a fairly serious ailment (which he is thankfully recovering well
from). I found myself in a consulting room with him and the kindest,
most helpful nurse I've ever met. Sitting there, I felt my suspicion
of the state and public services drain away even as I thought, “Isn't
it wonderful that the NHS exists to take care of all, regardless of
means?” A few moments later, however, this illusion of an idyllic
welfare state dissipated as my memory catapulted me back to the
experience of being in the Accident and Emergency unit of another
hospital with the same house-mate, where he was treated horribly by a
rude, unsympathetic and completely unhelpful doctor.
As I am writing this, a couple of
hundred students are dashing around the streets and sidewalks of
Bloomsbury, pursued by 11 riot vans-worth of police officers,
including some from the infamous Territorial Support Group (TSG).
These students have committed the collective crime of gathering
outside Senate House, the headquarters of the University of London to
protest against the increasing use of force by the police – in some
cases instigated by university authorities – to quell student
dissent on campus. In one case, a student was arrested for
challenging a stop-and-search being imposed on a fellow student of
black ethnicity – one of the countless cases of racial profiling
that occur all throughout the country. In another case, the President
of the University of London (Student) Union was apprehended for
ostensibly failing to comply with laws regarding public processions
after an initially static demonstration by students turned into a
march. Most shocking, however, were the events of last night at
Senate House itself, where the police smashed an occupation by
students of the Vice-Chancellor's office and the main management
corridor to raise issues such as discriminatory policies in the terms
and conditions of outsourced cleaners and the planned privatisation
of student accommodation. This ruthless crackdown appears to have
been performed despite there being no injunction or warrants issued.
Students who had gathered outside to support the occupiers were also
subjected to punches, truncheons and other acts of 'responsible
policing' by the Met.
At first glance, these two stories may
seem quite unconnected. What does a benevolent arm of the welfare
state like the National Health Service have to do with heavy-handed
policing? In reality, however, they are intimately bound to each
other. The wonderful public services and national insurance that
operate under the ideals of social democracy cannot exist without the
other side of the coin, namely the force of the state. The Japanese
philosopher Kojin Karatani describes the state as operating under a
'mode of exchange' which he calls plunder-redistribution. In the same
way that medieval princes protected the cities and regions in the
sphere of their influence with their standing armies in return for
taxes and tribute, so does the modern capitalist state provide
welfare and protection to its obedient, tax-paying citizens.
Hence, one cannot enjoy state-backed
public services and reject the brutal force of the police and army
which are the state's boots on the ground. To do so would be akin to
the proverbial desire of wanting to have one's cake and eat it too.
Some might say that in a properly functioning liberal democracy, the
police and army are governed by just laws and systems of scrutiny.
This is, however, to ignore the fact pointed out years ago by Max
Weber, who characterised the state as that which has the monopoly
over the use of force. This force normally operates as rather subtly
veiled threat – do not all laws essentially carry the message, “Do
(or don't do) this, or else”? Nevertheless, in any situation in
which the authority of the state is seriously questioned, there can
be no doubt that the threat will be made real, as we have indeed
witnessed time and time again.
There is more, however, to the welfare
state than simply the paradox of the state giving healthcare and
benefits with one hand and taking away freedom and liberty with the
other. To explore this, let's consider the position of many
'reasonable', 'pragmatic' and 'moderate' people who often argue that
public order is necessary for the flourishing of humankind. There are
two flaws to this rather appealing argument. First of all, the only
sort of flourishing which is permitted under the political and
economic system of today is a capitalistic one. The might of the
state is, in essence, the guarantor of an economic system in which
the accumulation of capital is the central principle – indeed,
almost always the only one. Secondly, wherever one goes throughout
the world, the police and army do not work for all humankind, but
rather the illusory idea of the nation to which they have pledged
their allegiance.
This way of organising life on earth is
based on what Karatani calls the 'unholy trinity' of
Capital-Nation-State. All these three elements are intimately linked
in various ways. For example, capitalist enterprise is made possible
by the state guaranteeing the enforcement of contracts and the
maintenance of markets under the profit principle. Also, the ideology
of the nation, an imagined community of people who share a common
'culture' and goals in life, legitimates the might of the state, in
which the sovereignty of the people is deemed to rest as a result of
marking an 'X' on a piece of paper every four or five years. The
redistributive powers of the state help soften the unjust effects of
capitalist wealth-creation – in other words, Peter having been
robbed by Paul is thrown a little bag of coins, taxed from Paul's
substantial income. And so on. Each time one of these three elements
appears to be challenged, the other two are ready to rebalance the
system. To cite just a few examples: social democratic governments
temper the enthusiasm of capital but give the state increasing power;
Thatcherism weakened the state in certain respects but strengthened
the power of capital; and under fascism the discourse of nation takes
over. But at the end of the day, the Trinity lives on.
Some may cry, “But what can be done?
You've cut us off from all the usual solutions, such as reducing the
size of government to empower private enterprise, or regulating the
excesses of laissez-faire capitalism with state authority!”
It is not my intention to provide a
completely worked-out blueprint, or a detailed step-by-step guide for
us to reach a Promised Land. Nevertheless, I believe that we can work
towards better forms of living together. To cite Karatani once again,
what we need, in Kantian terms, is a regulative idea and not a
constitutive idea. The latter, like 20th century Really Existing
Socialism, believes that we can build the New Jerusalem by imposing a
clear plan. The former, on the other hand, acts as a horizon that we
journey towards. What is this horizon? It is one in which mutual aid,
co-operation and self-organisation are watchwords. It is one in which
the exploitation of capital, the coercion of the state, and the
inward-looking myths of nation are discarded in favour of commonality
even in the midst of diversity, free association, and a recognition
that there is only one world in which we all share. These ideals may
never be realised 'in full', but they are already present today in
the many radical projects, initiatives and shared lives throughout
the world, such as worker-owned co-operatives, Local Exchange Trading
Systems, time banks, social centres and free universities.
The task is thus, to quote the
Constitution of the Industrial Workers of the World, to 'build the
new society in the shell of the old'. This will not be easy, and will
have to be done alongside forms of resistance to and confrontation
with the forces of Capital-Nation-State, but given the ongoing
ecological and economic crises, the choice is indeed, as some have
said, to 'co-operate or die'. As the narrator in the film HOME says,
“It is too late to be a pessimist.” So let's hold on to, and
venture forward with, the 'Will to Believe' (William James).
Soo Tian Lee
