Transforming Capitalism Through Real Utopias
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ASRXXX10.1177/000312241246 4688828882American Sociological ReviewWright 2012 2012 Presidential Address American Sociological Review 78(1) 1 –25 Transforming Capitalism © American Sociological Association 2012 DOI: 10.1177/0003122412468882 through Real Utopias http://asr.sagepub.com Erik Olin Wrighta Abstract This address explores a broad framework for thinking sociologically about emancipatory alter- natives to dominant institutions and social structures, especially capitalism. The framework is grounded in two foundational propositions: (1) Many forms of human suffering and many defi- cits in human flourishing are the result of existing institutions and social structures. (2) Trans- forming existing institutions and social structures in the right way has the potential to substan- tially reduce human suffering and expand the possibilities for human flourishing. An emancipa- tory social science responding to these propositions faces four broad tasks: specifying the moral principles for judging social institutions; using these moral principles as the standards for diagnosis and critique of existing institutions; developing an account of viable alternatives in response to the critique; and proposing a theory of transformation for realizing those alterna- tives. The idea of “real utopias” is one way of thinking about alternatives and transformation. “There is no alternative” – Margaret and social structures. My focus is mainly on Thatcher, early 1980s the problem of alternatives to capitalism, but “Another world is possible” – motto of the aUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison World Social Forum, 2000s Corresponding Author: Erik Olin Wright, Department of Sociology, In this address I explore a broad frame- University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1180 work for thinking sociologically about eman- Observatory Drive, Madison, WI 53706 cipatory alternatives to dominant institutions E-mail: [email protected] 2 American Sociological Review 78(1) much of what I have to say would apply to ways that deepen and broaden the possibility other dominant institutions as well. My hope of meaningful democracy. I will begin by is to contribute to a normatively grounded briefly discussing two foundational proposi- sociology of the possible, not just the actual. tions shared by all varieties of critical and Developing a theory of alternatives to capi- emancipatory social science. The idea of real talism at the beginning of the twenty-first utopias is one response to the intellectual chal- century is a pressing task, for to most people lenge posed by these propositions. capitalism now seems the natural order of things. This was not always the case. Through- out the twentieth century, many people on both FOUNDATIONS the left and the right saw socialism as an alter- All varieties of social science that have critical native, either as a promise of emancipation or and emancipatory aspirations, whether they as a threat of oppression. Today, however, even are anchored in values and beliefs of the left or for most critics on the left, socialism as a future the right, share two foundational positions: to capitalism no longer has much credibility. This does not mean people have universally Foundational Proposition of Critical Social come to view capitalism as a benign social Science: Many forms of human suffering order within which humanity will flourish. and many deficits in human flourishing are Indeed, we live in a period in which many of the result of existing institutions and social the traditional socialist criticisms of capitalism structures. seem more appropriate than ever: economic instability and crisis harm the lives of masses Foundational Proposition of Emancipatory of people; inequality, economic polarization, Social Science: Transforming existing insti- and job insecurity in many economically tutions and social structures in the right way developed countries have been deepening; has the potential to substantially reduce capital has become increasingly footloose, human suffering and expand the possibili- moving across the globe and severely under- ties for human flourishing. mining the democratic capacity of states and communities; giant corporations dominate the The first proposition affirms the very general media and cultural production; the market idea that significant aspects of human suffering appears like a law of nature uncontrollable by and deficits in human flourishing are not simply human device; and politics are ever more the result of human nature, acts of God, or vari- dominated by money and unresponsive to the ations in people’s attributes, but are the result of concerns and worries of ordinary people. social causes. Stated in this abstract way, this The need for a vibrant alternative to capi- proposition is accepted by nearly all sociolo- talism is as great as ever. Yet the particular gists, whether or not they explicitly identify institutional arrangements that have come to with any of the traditions of critical sociology, be associated with alternatives—socialism and is thus not controversial. The proposition rooted in state control of the economy—are becomes very controversial, of course, when seen as incapable of delivering on their prom- concrete claims are made about the specific ises. Instead of being viewed as a threat to mechanisms that generate these harms. Writers capitalism, talk of socialism now seems more have proposed many social sources of harms: like archaic utopian dreaming, or perhaps the core structures of the capitalist economy; even worse: a distraction from dealing with unintended effects of the welfare state; enduring tractable problems in the real world. social and cultural structures of racism and sex- In what follows I propose a power- ism; educational institutions; changes in family centered framework for addressing these issues structures; and particular kinds of technology. A anchored in the idea of “real utopias.” At its great deal of sociological research attempts to core, this proposal revolves around transform- identify these sources of harm and adjudicate ing power relations within the economy in among rival arguments. Wright 3 The second proposition should not be con- having to provide serious arguments, they call sidered a simple corollary of the first. It could it utopian. Realists reject such fantasies as a be the case that various causal processes con- distraction from the serious business of mak- nected to capitalism explain much human suf- ing practical improvements in existing institu- fering, and yet any deliberate attempt at tions. The idea of real utopias embraces this transforming the fundamental structures of tension between dreams and practice: utopia capitalism would only make things worse. The implies developing visions of alternatives to cure could be worse than the disease due to dominant institutions that embody our deepest unintended and uncontrollable effects of aspirations for a world in which all people attempts at deliberate social transformation. have access to the conditions to live flourish- This is essentially Hayek’s (1988) argument in ing lives; real means proposing alternatives his attack on radical reformers. Following a attentive to problems of unintended conse- long tradition of classical conservative quences, self-destructive dynamics, and diffi- thought, Hayek makes two central claims cult dilemmas of normative trade-offs.2 A real (although not stated in precisely these terms): utopian holds on to emancipatory ideals with- first, the negative unintended consequences of out embarrassment or cynicism but remains deliberate social change are generally greater fully cognizant of the deep complexities and than the positive unintended consequences; contradictions of realizing those ideals. second, the larger the attempted social trans- The exploration of real utopias is an inte- formation, the bigger the negative unintended gral part of a broad agenda of an emancipatory consequences are likely to be.1 Taken together, social science that includes four basic tasks: these arguments suggest that even if one accepts the first proposition, in general the 1. Specifying the moral principles for judging second proposition should be rejected. The social institutions. emancipatory proposition constitutes the 2. Using these moral principles as the standards for “fatal conceit” of intellectuals, in Hayek’s diagnosis and critique of existing institutions. (1988:27) words, that “man is able to shape 3. Developing an account of viable alternatives in the world around him according to his wishes.” response to the critique. While I disagree with Hayek’s pessimism 4. Proposing a theory of transformation for real- and embrace the foundational proposition of izing those alternatives. emancipatory social science, I do not think such arguments can be dismissed out of hand. The I like to think of these tasks using the meta- folk aphorism “the road to hell is paved with phor of a voyage: the first two tasks tell us good intentions,” has too many historical exam- what is wrong with the world in which we live ples to be ignored, many of them animated by and why we want to leave it; the third tells us emancipatory aspirations. The idea of real uto- something about the destination we seek; and pias is a way of thinking about alternatives and the fourth helps us understand how to get from transformations that responds to these concerns. here to there. The rest of this address will look The expression “real utopia” is meant to be at each part of this voyage. a provocation, for “utopia” and “real” do not