Vivek Chibber: Consent, Coercion and Resignation: The Sources of Stability in Capitalism

Рет қаралды 12,048

7 жыл бұрын

Organized by / organizacija: Centre for Labour Studies (Centar za radničke studije - CRS, radnickistudiji.org)
Seminar: "Ideology: Its Theories and its Critique(s)"
MAZ, Hatzova 16, Zagreb, 26.11.2016., 15.30h
Moderator: Marko Kostanić
Vivek Chibber: Consent, Coercion and Resignation: The Sources of Stability in Capitalism
This talk will suggest that the explanation of social stability in capitalism as developed by recent Marxist theory is deeply flawed. Under the influence of a correspondingly flawed reading of Antonio Gramsci, Marxists have argued that the essential problem in capitalism is the generation of ideological consent on the part of the working class, and it is this consent that provides social stability. I will suggest that this argument cannot be found in either Marx or in Gramsci. And in any case even if they had made such an argument, we ought to reject it. The main source of stability is the structural constraints imposed on the working class, and it is these constraints that need to be understood and changed. Marxists need to return to their materialists roots.
Vivek Chibber teaches sociology at the NYU and is an author of many influential studies, including his latest book Postcolonial Theory and the Spectre of Capital.
---
Vivek Chibber: Pristanak, prisila, rezignacija: izvori stabilnosti u kapitalizmu
Ovo će izlaganje nastojati pokazati da je objašnjenje društvene stabilnosti u kapitalizmu, razvijeno u suvremenim marksističkim teorijama, duboko pogrešno. Pod utjecajem jednako pogrešnog čitanja Antonija Gramscija, marksisti su tvrdili da je esencijalni problem u kapitalizmu stvaranje ideološkog pristanka radničke klase i da taj pristanak osigurava društvenu stabilnost. Pokazat ću da se ovaj argument ne može pronaći ni kod Gramscija ni kod Marxa. A ako su čak negdje i iznijeli, moramo ga odbiti. Glavni izvor stabilnosti su strukturne prisile nametnute radničkoj klasi i upravo se te prisile moraju razumjeti i mijenjati. Marksisti se moraju vratiti svojim materijalističkim korijenima.
Vivek Chibber je profesor sociologije na Sveučilištu New York i autor niza zapaženih studija među kojima se ističe Postcolonial Theory and The Spectre of Capital.
radnickistudiji.org/?p=335
Logistička podrška: Mreža antifašistkinja Zagreba.
Programme of Centre for Labour Studies is financed by Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung Southeast Europe

Пікірлер: 18

@SkriptaTV 2 жыл бұрын

continuation of the discussion here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nraTqdqFtJ2Xc30.html

@stephenwallace8782 2 жыл бұрын

Have you read his new book "The Class Matrix," yet? It's really great.

@nickgeffen8316 6 жыл бұрын

Aw, this is great! Thanks so much for the upload. Very provocative and illuminating.

@stephenwallace8782 2 жыл бұрын

This lecture is amazing, but the Q & A is where it's Chibber's time to shine

@SkriptaTV 2 жыл бұрын

more discussion here ;) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nraTqdqFtJ2Xc30.html

@jarahandala4107 7 жыл бұрын

17:30 Vivek implies that he exhaustively identifies, at the same degree of abstraction-concretion, three "mechanisms", "sources", that help to reproduce "capitalism": coercion, consent, resignation. Breaking with the consent/coercion coupling is to be welcomed if ruling is to be more adequately described & explained. Göran Therborn has also rejected such reliance, as he did with hegemony/domination, true/false consciousness, consensus/legitimacy/force. Additionally Therborn included resignation as one of six ideological ways of ruling. He took ideological practice as sense-making that both subjugates the ruled & qualifies them to suffer & to act - thereby giving the emancipatory & liberatory twist: a motivational capacity can develop encouraging action that modifies, even overcomes, their subordination. Therborn generated a six-cell typology: in terms of what exists, what is good, & what is possible, he asked whether the ruled believe a better regime is possible. If it isn't then ideological ruling is achieved by a sense of inevitability, deference, & resignation; if the contrary, present rule can nevertheless be accepted because of accommodation, a sense of representation, & fear (The Ideology of Power & the Power of Ideology 1980: 18-20, 93-100). Using Harré & Bhaskar's conception of a force as either a power or a susceptibility, I've identified a more exhaustive typology of ways of ruling, at the same degree of concretion-abstraction as the above. These are the effects of the unqualified exercise of 14 political forces: (1) ruling powers: the exercise of exploitative power causes exploitative domination; that of oppressive power causes oppressive domination; (non-violent) coercive power, (non-violent) coercive domination; & violent power (i.e. force), violent domination; & (2) ruling affordances: a sense of inevitability; trained deference; spontaneous meekness; merging self with the ruler or with the fetish; habits realised as routines; political indifference; political resignation; accommodation; sense of representation; frightened, fearful, feeling terrorised.

@kvaka009 2 жыл бұрын

Thanks

@MarvinRoman Жыл бұрын

Why intellectuals are attracted to ideology being the cause of capitalist stability 28:30 Why workers accept bourgeois ideology and their own exploitation 29:25 Reification explained 31:00

@Djordj69 3 жыл бұрын

maybe the ideology comes after the resignation.Is this what he is saying.?

@anaxa4883 6 жыл бұрын

Someone needs to show Zizek some of Vivek's ideas

@lupo-femme 5 жыл бұрын

Zizek is aware of Vivek's ideas. His praise appears in Vivek's book on Postcolonial Theory,

@Harry-zc8rg 2 жыл бұрын

Both Zizek and Chomsky praise his critique of Postcolonial Theory

@nasanka7428 2 жыл бұрын

Of course this is several years on, but its funny seeing this after watching their conversation on the Jacobin Show. It was billed as a debate between Vivek and Zizek but in his response Zizek wastes no time in identifying Vivek as the his Jesus of materialism hahah

@lamalama9717 2 жыл бұрын

@@nasanka7428 they make a good pair. Not just in terms of the way their theoretical contributions mesh but the contrasting style of expressing their views.

@jarahandala4107 7 жыл бұрын

Thanks for this. A basis of part of Vivek's argument appears in his 2007 talk, 'Capitalism & the state': kzfaq.info/get/bejne/iJuCYJyJxKjYgGg.html. This earlier talk draws on Przeworski's arguments concerning workers' (putative rational) expectations & judgments re opportunities, benefits, costs, risks, etc.

@Djordj69 3 жыл бұрын

neither capatalist nor workers are stupid in pursuit of their interesrs