「不完全な実現」か「内在的限界」か

Slavoj Žižek*1”Why the free market fundamentalists think 2013 will be the best year ever” http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/17/free-market-fundamentalists-think-2013-best


このスラヴォイ・ジジェクのテクストは、正直言って、全体として何が言いたいのかが少し見えにくいと思った*2。理解でき且つ面白かった部分だけ抜き書きしておこう。


(…) All radical thinkers, from Marx to intelligent conservatives, were obsessed by the question: what is the price of progress? Marx was fascinated by capitalism, by the unheard-of productivity it unleashed; but he insisted this success engenders antagonisms. We should do the same today: keep in view the dark underside of global capitalism that is fomenting revolts.

People rebel not when things are really bad, but when their expectations are disappointed. The French revolution occurred only once the king and the nobles were losing their hold on power; the 1956 anti-communist revolt in Hungary exploded after Imre Nagy had already been a prime minister for two years, after (relatively) free debates among intellectuals; people rebelled in Egypt in 2011 because there was some economic progress under Mubarak, giving rise to a class of educated young people who participated in the universal digital culture. And this is why the Chinese Communists are right to panic: because, on average, people are now living better than 40 years ago – and the social antagonisms (between the newly rich and the rest) are exploding, and expectations are much higher.

That's the problem with development and progress: they are always uneven, they give birth to new instabilities and antagonisms, they generate new expectations that cannot be met. In Egypt just prior to the Arab spring, the majority lived a little better than before, but the standards by which they measured their (dis)satisfaction were much higher.

自由とか経済的な豊かさといった望ましきものは、それが増えれば増えるほど、期待値が増大するので、あらゆる進歩は思ったよりもよくはなかったという失望として経験される。これは社会学において、相対的剥奪(relative deprivation)*3として議論されてきた筈だが、マルクス主義的というか弁証法的な矛盾の議論に接続できるわけだ。
現実は常に期待外れとして経験されるとして、ジジェクは、その期待外れが目標の「不完全な実現(incomplete realisation)」なのか「内在的な限界(immanent limitation)」なのかということを提起する。前者を強調するのが原理主義者(fundamentalist)。構造改革(革命)が期待外れなのは改革(革命)が足りないからであって、もっと改革(革命)を続けろ! ということになる。後者を重視すれば、期待外れは改革(革命)の不足というよりは目標そのもの、例えば資本主義(社会主義)の限界を示しているのだから、いくらもっと改革(革命)を続けても、期待外れが充填されるわけはないということになる。

When, during a recent TV debate in France, the French philosopher and economist Guy Sorman claimed democracy and capitalism necessarily go together, I couldn't resist asking him the obvious question: "But what about China?" He snapped back: "In China there is no capitalism!" For the fanatically pro-capitalist Sorman, if a country is non-democratic, it is not truly capitalist, in exactly the same way that for a democratic communist, Stalinism was simply not an authentic form of communism.

This is how today's apologists for the market, in an unheard-of ideological kidnapping, explain the crisis of 2008: it was not the failure of the free market that caused it, but the excessive state regulation; the fact that our market economy was not a true one, but was instead in the clutches of the welfare state. When we dismiss the failures of market capitalism as accidental mishaps, we end up in a naive "progress-ism" that sees the solution as a more "authentic" and pure application of a notion, and thus tries to put out the fire by pouring oil on it.

市場原理主義者」として批判的に言及されている Guy Sormanについて;


Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Sorman
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Sorman
Blog
http://gsorman.typepad.com/


また、


MATTHEW KAMINSKI “Guy Sorman: Why Europe Will Rise Again” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444375104577592850332409044.html
Guy Sorman “Japan's dangerous deglobalised dream” http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/09/japan-dangerous-deglobalised-dream
Guy Sorman “The appeal of far-right soft populism “ http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2011/mar/30/far-right-soft-populism-appeal


これらは取り急ぎダウンロードしたものの、まだ読んではいない。