In 1996 Michael Sandel published democratic dissatisfaction. A few years after the fall of Berlin wall and the subsequent collapse of Unit Sovietwhen it was still sounding The end of the storyIn Francis fukuyamaand the democracy liberal While the US seemed to be living its glory years, few really heeded the warnings of the American political philosopher and professor Harvard University.
But today, 27 years later, hardly anyone doubts it democracies liberal are going through one crisis and that there is growth discontent. For this reason, sandal decided to dust off his notes and update his already classic work, whose title sounds different today.
“30 years ago we were in the mid 1990s War Cold “It was over and it seemed as if there was peace, prosperity and economic growth,” recalls the American authorturnedphilosopherrockstar, as described in a recent article in the Spanish newspaper El countryas he analyzed the reasons why he decided to republish the book.
“Below the surface, however, it seemed to me that there were two causes for the growing dissatisfaction: one, many people’s sense of not being heard, and the other, a sense that the social fabric was unraveling,” he says in the interview. for the La Tercerafrom home Boston.
The interview is from Juan Paulo churchespublished by La Tercera, 06/30/2023. The translation is by Cepat.
Here’s the interview.
And are these the same reasons that explain the current situation?
O discontent democratically became sharper and clearer. The loss of selfgovernment, the feeling of not having a say in decisionmaking, intensified. People are frustrated by politics and doubt their ability to have a say. So I think the two trends I wrote about three decades ago have just gotten worse.
The power elites have embraced the finance and marketdriven version of neoliberal globalization over the past three decades that has exacerbated inequalities Michael Sandel
Why haven’t governments paid attention to these problems?
Governments have neither listened nor acted on these problems. In contrast, the ruling elites have embraced the version for the past three decades globalization neoliberal, guided by finance and the market, which exacerbated inequalities. This version of globalizationWhile it is true that there was growth in many countries, the gains from that growth were not properly shared, reaching mainly the top 10 or 20% of the population, while the working class and middle class lost ground.
I don’t know the numbers Chilebut we conditions UnitedFor nearly five decades, workers’ incomes fell or did not rise in real terms. Real income has been stagnant for nearly five decades, and that’s because people at the top of the population have made huge gains.
That triggered resentment, not only because of the inequality economicallybut also from growing inequality in relation to social appreciation and recognition. At the same time, elites assumed that a guidance technocratic for politics, presenting the new economy and new economic arrangements not as a controversial issue but as data from nature. We don’t discuss these issues, we just adapt.
You talk about appreciation and recognition, but why should democracy promote people’s selfesteem? Is this the responsibility of democracy or should everyone strive for it?
The point is interesting because one might think that selfesteem is an issue that depends on each individual’s attitude. But I would make a distinction between selfesteem, which is the term you used, and Appreciation Social or social recognition. Whether we’re talking about selfesteem or Appreciation Socialit is not possible to be proud and respected unless social life provides the basis for that respect and appreciation.
Let me give you an example of that Selfesteem is associated with recognition and Appreciation Social. One of the things that has changed over the past few decades is the growing role of finance in the economy, measured by share GDP and percentage of corporate profits. However, over the past four decades, most of the growth has been in finance was not productive but rather speculative, speculating on the future value of existing assets, some of which were synthetically created for that purpose speculation.
We celebrate the achievements of people in the financial industry so much that they have had a demoralizing effect on the dignity of work and respect for those without a degree Michael Sandel
How does this relate to the question of recognition? Appreciation Social? Because a huge amount of money and social appreciation aimed at investors Wall Streetto the brokers of purse or investment bank manager. TV shows and films have been produced. In popular culture, their activities have been valued, while working in the traditional sense: going to work every day, be it in the service sector, whether in a factory or on the farm, this respect for work in the traditional sense has eroded.
We celebrate the achievements of both people Industry financially that this has a demoralizing effect on the dignity of work and in respect for those who do not have a professional degree or great qualifications and deeds, but nevertheless make great contributions to the wellbeing day in and day out Business and the common good.
An economist might say that the wages these workers receive are equal to the economic value of that work according to the existing economic consensus. How is that changing?
You used an interesting phrase in this question: “consensus economics says this is how it works,” and when you say consensus economics is correct, consensus economics really means the verdict of the market. And you’re right, we assume very easily that the Money What people earn is the true measure of their contribution Business and the very ordinary.
However, we must question this assumption. If that’s true, if the labor market and wages are the real measure of value, then we’d have to conclude Value Social a manager Investment funds it is two thousand times greater than that of a teacher, nurse or doctor. Even the most dedicated laissezfaire economist would find it difficult to defend this idea.
We need to reclaim from the market the moral judgment of what really is a valuable contribution to the economy and the common good Michael Sandel
In fact, we believe that when we talk about it Value Social, Are Mutual Fund Managers More Valuable? During the PandemicI don’t remember anyone saying they were mutual fund managers workforce essentials. We must reclaim from the market the moral judgment of what is truly a valuable contribution to the world Business and the Good together.
Also emerging in this debate about dissatisfaction with democracy is the issue of populism and the advance of the hardest sections of the right. Today we see that it is these sectors that have the best connection to the working class, a sector historically associated with the left. Why do you think this sector is so well connected to the working class today?
Historically, the working class has been the basis of progressivism. That was true conditions Unitedas new business In Franklin roosevelt. The working class voted for it democrats and the Broken republican It seemed to be the party of the rich, privileged, and corporate.
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, this pattern began to reverse, and not just in the US USbut also in Europewhere the centreleft parties became parties of the professional and educated classes and the Broken republicanEspecially under Trump, it became a party that appealed to the working class.
We saw something similar Great Britain with the vote Brexit, which was largely a vote by people without a college degree. This also happened in France and something similar happened in Germany. I think there is an explanation for this, at least in Europe and the United States.
Support for rightwing populist parties by uneducated people is because these movements appeal to politics of resentment and humiliation Michael Sandel
Supporting those without a college degree parties populist from the right is due to the fact that these movements appeal to the politics of resentment humiliation. The resentment and humiliation of workers who felt disrespected by educated elites.
This also has to do with the fact that the answer to inequality The task set by the centreleft parties was not to face the structural problems of this inequality, but offer workers valuable advice. Politicians and parties told them: if you want to take part and win Business globalizedwho attend university; What you earn depends on what you learn. If you try, you might get it.
As answer to inequality, offered them the promise of rapid social mobility through higher education. These elites did not understand the insult contained in that advice, and the insult was this: if you don’t go to college and end up struggling to survive in the new economy, you are responsible for your own failures.
This amplifies the insult and hurt from stagnant wages and inequality. I think that’s one of the reasons a lot of people without a college degree feel this way Fury It is resentment in relation to the centreleft parties and the elites.
Do you think identity politics has also helped distance popular sectors from leftwing parties?
It’s an additional factor, especially because it distracted the person elites traditional and the professional classes to combat inequalities and economic inequalities. Many Democrats affected by the election donald trump In the United States, they gave very simplified explanations because they never thought it was possible. In her opinion, this shows that people react when racism, misogyny and sexism are addressed. Many of the voters Trump card They were, as Hillary Clinton said, a bunch of unfortunates.
There is something true. Trump card appealed to racism and its antiimmigrant policy had a component xenophobic. I don’t want to downplay that, but for that Democratic Partyfor the liberal elites, by saying that it was only due to racism and xenophobia, they avoid their own selfcritical reflection and in particular their commitment to financial deregulation, which was part of the guidelines neoliberals. You contributed inequality which tended to generate the anger to which Trump card and other populists appeal.
I would say there are doubts about the future of US democracy Michael Sandel
This is too simplistic an explanation, and it leads the liberal elites to become complacent and not critically consider whether their own policies have anything to do with the situation we find ourselves in now. One of the reasons for writing this new edition of democratic dissatisfaction It aims to motivate these liberal elites to think critically about their contribution to the current discontent.
How do you see democracy in the United States and what could happen in next year’s elections? Are you pessimistic or optimistic?
Unfortunately, I believe that the future of democracy lies in this US is under suspicion I wouldn’t say it’s endangered but yes I would say it’s in question for the following reasons. If Trump cardDespite the allegations against him, despite promoting an attack on the Capitol on 1/6/2021, despite all of that and winning the next election, I think democracy will be at risk because it has shown it has no respect for constitutional limits and democratic norms.
Today it is very difficult to predict whether he will receive the Republican nomination or if he wins that nomination and whether he will be elected, but I would say that there are doubts about the future of US democracy. conditions United.
Continue reading
- “The left must offer a positive vision of patriotism capable of articulating a sense of community.” Interview with Michael Sandel
- “Meritocracy has a dark side.” Interview with Michael Sandel
- “An attitude shaped by the meritocracy is detrimental to the common good.” Interview with Michael Sandel
- “Today we know that a truck driver is more necessary than many economists.” Interview with Michael Sandel
- “We were not morally prepared for this pandemic,” says Michael Sandel
- “Meritocracy is a fair principle whose effects can be unfair.” Interview with François Dubet
- “Capitalism weakens classes and multiplies inequalities.” Interview with François Dubet
- Crisis of the middle class: from performanceoriented promises to existential resentment
- “Meritocracy? A trap for the poor, but also for the elites who seem to benefit from it.”
- Inequality in the 21st Century. The deconstruction of the myth of the meritocracy. Magazine IHU Online No. 449
- People’s performance society and the omnipresence of social inequality
- Meritocracy, dismantling a decoy
- “How can you defend the meritocracy when Brazil is the country with the lowest inheritance tax?” says Piketty’s student
- Meritocracy? An illusion that justifies inequalities
- Criticism of the critique of the meritocracy
- “Meritocracy is a system of legitimizing inherited privileges.” Interview with César Rendueles
- “The market is not God and the meritocracy is just a big bluff,” says the Italian banker
- Meritocracy, no. merit, yes. Article by Stefano Zamagni
- Youth without a future and without a past: the false promises of the meritocracy
- The historian says that meritocracy is a myth that feeds inequalities
- “Meritocracy is a fallacy,” says the 1st place in medicine at the USP Ribeirão Preto
- Don’t talk about meritocracy with the unemployed
- Inequality in the 21st Century. The deconstruction of the myth of the meritocracy
- The end of the socalled meritocracy
- The psychoanalysis of resentment as a social symptom. Article by Maria Rita Kehl
- What unites the new populist right is resentment, says the German professor
Report to the editors any errors in Portuguese, information or technical details on this page:
“Liberal elites must reflect on their contribution to the current democratic dissatisfaction.” Interview with Michael Sandel Instituto Humanitas Unisinos IHU