Bedtime for Democracy: the Power Elite As Sovereign
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
BEDTIME FOR DEMOCRACY: THE POWER ELITE AS SOVEREIGN ARISTOCRACY IN NEOLIBERAL AMERIKA A Thesis by PATRICK D. ANDERSON Submitted to the Office of Graduate and Professional Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Chair of Committee, Terence Hoagwood Committee Members, Robert Griffin Daniel Conway Head of Department, Maura Ives August 2016 Major Subject: English Copyright 2016 Patrick Anderson ABSTRACT Leftist political theory in Amerika has struggled to understand the two most important issues facing us today: sovereignty and neoliberalism. In their efforts to understand neoliberalism, most scholars rely on either neo-Marxist or poststructuralist (Foucault) approaches, and in their efforts to understand sovereignty, scholars commonly turn to Carl Schmitt’s legalistic notion of sovereignty. Unfortunately, these approaches cannot produce a sufficiently descriptive account of sovereignty in neoliberal Amerika, which is why I turn to the sociological political theory of C. Wright Mills, articulating a power elite theory of neoliberalism that provides a ground for identifying the aristocratic structure of sovereignty in our historical period. First, I provide an empirically-supported account of the development of the Amerikan power elite from the 1950s to today. Rather than consisting of three directorates as Mills observed in the 1950s – political, economic, and military – the power elite today rules from only two directorates: the Corporate-Juridical Directorate and the Military-Juridical Directorate. Second, I turn to early modern political theory to identify two modes of sovereignty: legislative sovereignty and executive sovereignty, the latter of which consists of two principles, executive enforcement (of law) and executive prerogative. Third, I argue that, in neoliberal Amerika, the Corporate-Juridical Directorate wields legislative sovereignty and the Military-Juridical Directorate wields executive sovereignty. Ultimately, the Left should abandon its reliance on pluralistic and legalistic notions in order to understand the aristocratic sovereignty of the power elite. ii “America’s history, her aspirations, her peculiar triumphs, her even more peculiar defeats, and her position in the world – yesterday and today – are all so profoundly and stubbornly unique that the very word ‘America’ remains a new, almost completely undefined and extremely controversial proper noun. No one in the world seems to know exactly what it describes, not even we motley millions who call ourselves Americans.” – James Baldwin, Nobody Knows My Name (3) “To be sure, at this decisive turn in the history of American life and thought, [American intellectuals] did grouse a bit, in a literary way, but, it was a grousing about a society with which in actual practice they were well satisfied. Now… they have come to celebrate this society. In reality, they know very little about it; in reality, they are not trying very hard to find out.” – C. Wright Mills, “The Decline of the Left” (215) For all those who lost their lives fighting for democracy, equality, and justice. Though the victors have attempted to relegate your struggle to the dustbins of history, no amount of defamation and propaganda can prohibit history from absolving you. You will not be been forgotten. All Power to the People! iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my committee chair, Dr. Hoagwood, for not only encouraging my research but also for ensuring my ambitious project did not grow beyond my capabilities. His comments on many drafts made possible the success of this thesis. I also thank the other committee members, Dr. Griffin and Dr. Conway, for taking the time and energy to provide thought feedback at various stages in the project. Your collective approval of this work means a great deal to me. Thanks also go to my friends and colleagues at Texas A&M University, especially Rocio Alvarez and John “Curry” O’Day, for listening to my ideas and helping me develop them over countless hours of conversation. I also want to extend my gratitude to the University Writing Center, especially Tommy Pfannkoch and Katelyn Werner, two amazing consultants who listened to me talk for hours and provided help feedback on chapter drafts. In addition, thanks to Dr. Tommy Curry and Dr. Dwayne Tunstall for being my mentors from my undergraduate days to today. I would not be the scholar I am today without both of you. Finally, thanks to my family – all of you – for you endless love and support. And for anyone I may have forgotten, please put your name here ______________________. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... ii DEDICATION ................................................................................................................ iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................. v CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION: C. WRIGHT MILLS AND THE LEGACY OF THE LEFT ............................................ 1 The Liberal Mood of the New New Left .............................................................. 3 Reviving the New Left: Mills and The Sociological Imagination ...................... 10 From the Overture to the Movements, or, The Plan of the Work ....................... 15 CHAPTER II OVERCOMING THE LIBERAL MOOD: THE POWER ELITE AND NEOLIBERAL AMERIKA............................................... 20 The Rise of the Power Elite ................................................................................ 23 The Neoliberal Power Elite I: The Corporate-Juridical Directorate ................... 30 The Neoliberal Power Elite II: The Military-Juridical Directorate .................... 38 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 43 CHAPTER III THIS AIN’T YOUR GRANDPAPPY’S SOVEREIGN: RETHINKING THE HISTORY OF SOVEREIGNTY FROM JEAN BODIN TO THE FEDERALIST ......................................................................................................... 46 Legislative and Executive Sovereignty in Early Modern Political Theory ........ 48 Social Ontology and the Separation of Powers .................................................. 55 The Legacy of Early Modern Political Theory in The Federalist ...................... 62 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 71 CHAPTER IV TRIUMPH OF THE SWILL: SEPARATION THEORY, SOVEREIGN POWER, AND THE NEOLIBERAL POWER ELITE .............................................................................................................. 74 Separation Anxiety: On the Bifurcation of Sovereignty and the State ............... 76 Legislative Sovereignty and the Neoliberal Corporate-Juridical Directorate ..... 81 Executive Sovereignty and the Neoliberal Military-Juridical Directorate ......... 90 v Page Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 97 CHAPTER V CONCLUSION: LETTER TO THE NEW NEW LEFT ......................................................................... 100 Liberal Mood, Liberal Fascism: The Imitation of Strife .................................. 102 Mood Swings: Research Agendas for a Revival of the Radical Left ............... 109 Democracy Goes to College ............................................................................. 114 NOTES.......................................................................................................................... 119 WORKS CITED ........................................................................................................... 129 vi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION: C. WRIGHT MILLS AND THE LEGACY OF THE LEFT “The ‘60s weren’t all failure. It’s the ‘70s that stunk.” – Dead Kennedys, “Chickenshit Conformists” “[T]he moral cowardice of the American intelligentsia is virtually complete.” – C. Wright Mills, “Letter to Walter Klink, March 1961” (328) In Amerika today, there is a crisis of the Left – if we can be called that any longer.1 It is not clear that our social theories are sufficiently descriptive, and it is not clear that we have developed sufficiently radical normative ideals. A descriptive account of social structures requires a holistic investigation into the political and economic organization of society and an analysis of these relations, all while suspending moral judgment. A normative critique requires a juxtaposition of a developed descriptive model of society with a set of ideal values, a comparison that allows for moral criticism based on the divergence between the actual and the ideal. Insofar as reality diverges from our ideals, we can criticize the status quo and fight for structural change. Unfortunately, structural accounts of the whole no longer constitute our descriptive theories of society, for we have replaced total views of society with a series of local views of the parts. Many on the Left believe it is no longer desirable – or even possible – to criticize society as a whole. Likewise, economic equality and substantive political power no longer constitute our normative ideals, for we have replaced these demands with the demand for the free expression of identities and the isolated reform of the self.