sign in sign up
<<
Home , Liberal feminism, Nancy Fraser

, , and the Cunning of History

To cite this version:

Nancy Fraser. Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History: An Introduction. 2012. ￿halshs- 00725055￿

HAL Id: halshs-00725055 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00725055 Preprint submitted on 23 Aug 2012

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History An Introduction

Nancy Fraser N°17 | august 2012

An introduction to my forthcoming book, this essay takes a broad, sweeping look at second-wave femi- nism, situating the movement’s unfolding in relation to three moments in the history of capitalism. In the irst moment, feminism posed a radical challenge to the pervasive androcentrism of “state-organized capi- talism�.�.. In the second, the movement unwittingly sup- plied a key ingredient of what Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello call the “new spirit� of neoliberal capitalism. In the third (present) moment, of capitalist crisis, femi- nists have the chance to reactivate the movement’s emancipatory promise.

Working Papers Series

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 2/14

Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History An Introduction

Nancy Fraser

August 2012

The author Nancy Fraser is Henry A. and Louise Loeb Professor of and Politics and at for Social Research in New York. Currently Einstein Visiting Fellow at the Free University of Berlin, she holds the Chair «Rethinking social in a globalizing world» at the Collège d’études mondiales, Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme. She has published two books in French: Qu’est-ce que la justice sociale? Reconnaissance et redistribution (La Découverte 2005; 2nd edition 2011) and Le féminisme en mouvements. Des années 1960 au néolibéralisme (forth- coming from La Découverte in October 2012). Her English-language publications include Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space for a Globalizing World (2008); Adding Insult to Injury: Nancy Fraser Debates her Critics, ed. Kevin Olson (2008); Redistribution or Recognition? A Political-Philosophical Exchange (2003) with ; Justice Interruptus: Critical Relections on the “Postsocialist” Condition (1997); and Unruly Practices: Power, Discourse, and in Contemporary Social heory (1989).

The text his essay is the introduction to the forthcoming book under the direction of Nancy Fraser, entitled Le fémi- nisme en mouvements : De l’insurrection des années 60 au néolibéralisme, to be published in French in October 2012 by La Découverte (Paris). Citing this document Nancy Fraser, Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History: An Introduction, FMSH-WP-2012-17, august 2012.

Les Working Papers et les Position Papers de he Working Papers and Position Papers of la Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme the FMSH are produced in the course of ont pour objectif la difusion ouverte des tra- the scientiic activities of the FMSH: the vaux en train de se faire dans le cadre des chairs of the Institute for Global Studies, © Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 2012 diverses activités scientiiques de la Fonda- Fernand Braudel-IFER grants, the Founda- Informations et soumission des textes : tion : Le Collège d’études mondiales, Bourses tion’s scientiic programmes, or the scholars [email protected] Fernand Braudel-IFER, Programmes scien- hosted at the Maison Suger or as associate tiiques, hébergement à la Maison Suger, research directors. Working Papers may also Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme Séminaires et Centres associés, Directeurs be produced in partnership with ailiated 190-196 avenue de France d’études associés... institutions. 75013 Paris - France Les opinions exprimées dans cet article n’en- he views expressed in this paper are the http://www.msh-paris.fr gagent que leur auteur et ne relètent pas author’s own and do not necessarily relect http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/FMSH-WP nécessairement les positions institutionnelles institutional positions from the Foundation http://wpfmsh.hypotheses.org de la Fondation MSH. MSH.

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 3/14

Abstract An introduction to my forthcoming book, this essay takes a broad, sweeping look at second-wave femi- nism, situating the movement’s unfolding in relation to three moments in the history of capitalism. In the irst moment, feminism posed a radical challenge to the pervasive androcentrism of “state-organized capitalism�. In the second, the movement unwittingly supplied a key ingredient of what Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello call the “new spirit�� of neoliberal capitalism. In the third (present) moment, of capi- talist crisis, feminists have the chance to reactivate the movement’s emancipatory promise.

Keywords feminism, capitalism,

Le féminisme en mouvements : De l’insurrection des années 60 au néolibéralisme. Une introduction Résumé Une introduction au livre à paraître sous la direction de l’auteur, cet essai ofre un large balayage de la seconde vague du féminisme, et situe l’éclosion de ce mouvement en relation avec trois moments de l’his- toire du capitalisme. Dans un premier moment, le féminisme pose un déi radical à l’androcentrisme du « capitalisme stato-organisé ». Dans un second moment, le mouvement fournit à son insu un ingrédient indispensable à ce que Luc Boltanski et Eve Chiapello appellent le « nouvel esprit du capitalisme ». Dans un troisième moment - actuel - de crise du capitalisme, les féministes ont une opportunité de réactiver la promesse émancipatrice du mouvement.

Mots-clés féminisme, capitalisme, néolibéralisme

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 4/14

rom today’s vantage point, the history hough not written with this aim in mind, the of second-wave feminism appears as a essays collected here can nevertheless be read drama in three acts. Emerging from the today as preliminary attempts at such a reckon- ferment surrounding the New Left, the ing. Composed over the past twenty-ive-plus F“movement for women’s liberation� began life as years as interventions in theoretical debates, they an insurrectionary force, which challenged male document major shifts in the feminist imaginary domination in state-organized capitalist societ- since the 1970s. For this volume, I have grouped ies of the post-War era. In Act One, accordingly, them in three parts, which correspond to the three feminists joined with other currents of acts of the drama I have just sketched. In Part I, to explode a social-democratic imaginary that I have included pieces that seek to marry a femi- had occulted gender injustice and technicized nist sensibility to a New Left critique of the wel- politics. Insisting that “the personal is political,� fare state. Targeting not only the latter’s andro- it exposed capitalism’s deep androcentrism and , but also its bureaucratic organization sought to transform society root and branch. and near-exclusive focus on distribution, these Later, however, as utopian energies began to essays situate second-wave feminism in a broader decline, second-wave feminism was drawn into ield of democratizing, anti-capitalist struggles. the orbit of . In Act Two, accord- Relecting the historical shift from mainstream ingly, its transformative impulses were channeled to the new social movements, into a new political imaginary that foregrounded they defend the latter’s expanded understanding “diference.� Turning “from redistribution to rec- of politics, even as they also criticize some inlu- ognition,� the movement shifted its attention to ential ways of theorizing it. Part II charts subse- cultural politics just as a rising neoliberalism was quent alterations in the feminist imaginary. Not- declaring war on . More recently, ing the broader cultural shift from the politics of however, as neoliberalism has entered its current equality to the politics of identity, these chapters crisis, the urge to reinvent feminist radicalism may diagnose dilemmas facing feminist movements in be reviving. In an Act hree that is still unfold- a period of ascending neoliberalism. Troubled by ing, we could see a reinvigorated feminism join the relative neglect of political economy at the in other emancipatory forces aiming to subject run- de siècle, they criticize the eclipse of “struggles for away markets to democratic control. In that case, redistribution� by “struggles for recognition,� even the movement could retrieve its insurrectionary as they also defend a non-identitarian version of spirit, while deepening its signature insights: its latter. Part III contemplates prospects for a revival structural critique of capitalism’s androcentrism, of feminist radicalism in a time of neoliberal cri- its systemic analysis of male domination, and sis. Advocating a “post-Westphalian� turn, the its gender-sensitive revisions of democracy and essays comprising this Part situate struggles for justice. women’s emancipation in relation to two other sets of social forces: those bent on extending the Historians will eventually explain how neolib- sway of markets, on the one hand, and those seek- eralizing forces succeeded, for a time, at least, in ing to “defend society� from them, on the other. defusing the more radical currents of second-wave Diagnosing a “dangerous liaison� between femi- feminism–and how (so one hopes) a new insur- nism and marketization, these essays urge femi- rectionary upsurge managed to reanimate them. nists to break of that unholy alliance and forge a For critical theorists, however, there remains a principled new one, between “emancipation� and prior task: to analyze alternative grammars of the “social protection.� feminist imaginary in order to assess their eman- cipatory potentials. Here the goal is to ascertain In general, then, the concerns shaping the vol- which understandings of androcentrism and male ume’s organization are both systematic and his- domination, which interpretations of gender jus- torical. A record of one theorist’s ongoing eforts tice and sexual democracy, which conceptions to track the movement’s trajectory, the book of equality and diference, are likely to be most assesses feminism’s current prospects and future fruitful for future engagements. Above all, which possibilities. Let me elaborate. modes of feminist theorizing should be incor- porated into the new political imaginaries now * * * * * * * * * being invented by new generations for Act hree?

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 5/14

When second-wave feminism irst erupted on In fact, the initial wave of postwar feminism the world stage, the advanced capitalist states of stood in an ambivalent relation to social demo- Western Europe and North America were still cracy. On the one hand, much of the early second enjoying the unprecedented wave of prosperity wave rejected the latter’s étatism and its tendency that followed World War II. Utilizing new tools to marginalize social divisions other than class of Keynesian economic steering, they had appar- and social injustices other than “maldistribution.� ently learned to counteract business downturns On the other hand, many feminists presupposed and to guide national economic development so key features of the socialist imaginary as a basis as to secure near full employment for men. Incor- for more radical designs. Taking for granted porating once unruly labor movements, they had the ’s solidaristic ethos and prospe- built more or less extensive welfare states and rity-securing steering capacities, they, too, were institutionalized national cross-class solidarity. committed to taming markets and promoting To be sure, this historic class compromise rested equality. Acting from a critique that was at once on a series of gender and racial-ethnic exclusions, radical and immanent, early second-wave femi- not to mention external neocolonial exploitation. nists sought less to dismantle the welfare state But those potential faultlines tended in the main than to transform it into a force that could help to remain latent in a social-democratic imaginary to overcome male domination. that foregrounded class redistribution. he result By the 1980s, however, history seemed to have was a prosperous North Atlantic belt of mass- bypassed that political project. A decade of consumption societies, which had apparently Conservative rule in much of Western Europe tamed social conlict. and North America, capped by the fall of Com- In the 1960s, however, the relative calm of this munism in the East, miraculously breathed new “Golden Age of capitalism� was suddenly shat- life into free-market ideologies previously given tered.1 In an extraordinary international explo- up for dead. Resurrected from the historical dust- sion, radical youth took to the streets–at irst bin, “neoliberalism� authorized a sustained assault to oppose racial segregation in the U.S. and the on the very idea of egalitarian redistribution. he Vietnam War. Soon thereafter they began to efect, ampliied by accelerating , question core features of capitalist modernity was to cast doubt on the legitimacy and viability that social democracy had heretofore naturalized: of the use of public power to tame market forces. materialism, consumerism, and “the achievement With social democracy on the defensive, eforts to ethic�; bureaucracy, corporate culture, and “social broaden and deepen its promise naturally fell by control�; sexual repression, , and heteronor- the wayside. Feminist movements that had earlier mativity. Breaking through the normalized politi- taken the welfare state as their point of depar- cal routines of the previous era, new social actors ture, seeking to extend its egalitarian ethos from formed new social movements, with second-wave class to gender, now found the ground cut out feminism among the most visionary. from under their feet. No longer able to assume a social democratic baseline for radicalization, Along with their comrades in other movements, - they gravitated to newer grammars of political the feminists of this era recast the radical ima- claimsmaking, more attuned to the “postsocialist� ginary. Transgressing a political culture that had privileged actors who cast themselves as natio- Zeitgeist. nally bounded and politically tamed classes, Enter the politics of recognition. If the initial they challenged the gender exclusions of social thrust of postwar feminism was to “engender� democracy. Problematizing welfare paternalism the socialist imaginary, the later tendency was and the bourgeois family, they exposed the deep to redeine gender justice as a project aimed at androcentrism of capitalist society. Politicizing “recognizing diference.� “Recognition,� accor- “the personal,� they expanded the boundaries of dingly, became the chief grammar of feminist contestation beyond socioeconomic distribution– claimsmaking at the in de siècle. A venerable cate- to include housework, sexuality, and reproduction. gory of Hegelian philosophy, resuscitated by poli- tical theorists, this notion captured the distinctive character of “postsocialist� struggles, which often 1. he phrase “golden age of capitalism comes from Eric took the form of identity politics, aimed more at Hobsbawm, he Age of Extremes: he Short Twentieth Cen- valorizing cultural diference than at promoting tury, 1914-1991(New York: Vintage: 1996).

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 6/14 economic equality. Whether the question was these not only with one another but also with a care work, sexual violence, or gender disparities new set of “political� concerns made by salient by in political representation, feminists increasingly globalization: How might emancipatory struggles resorted to the grammar of recognition to press serve to secure democratic legitimacy and politi- their claims. Unable to transform the deep gen- cal voice in a time when the powers that govern der structures of the capitalist economy, they pre- our lives increasingly overrun the borders of ter- ferred to target harms rooted in androcentric pat- ritorial states? How might feminist movements terns of cultural value or status hierarchies. he foster equal participation transnationally, across result was a major shift in the feminist imaginary: entrenched power asymmetries and divergent whereas the previous generation had sought to worldviews? Struggling simultaneously on three remake political economy, this one focused more fronts–call them redistribution, recognition, and on transforming culture. representation, the feminism of Act hree must join with other anti-capitalist forces, even while he results were decidedly mixed. On the one exposing their continued failure to absorb the hand, the new feminist struggles for recogni- insights of decades of feminist activism. tion continued the earlier project of expanding the political agenda beyond the conines of class Today’s feminism must, moreover, be sensitive to redistribution. In principle, accordingly, they ser- the historical context in which we operate. Situ- ved to broaden, and to radicalize, the concept of ating ourselves vis-à-vis the broader constellation justice. On the other hand, however, the igure of of political forces, we need to take our distance the struggle for recognition so thoroughly captu- both from market-besotted neoliberals, on the red the feminist imagination that it served more one hand, and from those who seek to “defend to displace than to deepen the socialist imaginary. society� (replete with hierarchy and exclu- he efect was to subordinate social struggles to sion) from the market, on the other. Charting a cultural struggles, the politics of redistribution third path between that Scylla and Charybdis, a to the politics of recognition. hat was not, to feminism worthy of Act hree must join other be sure, the original intention. It was assumed, emancipatory movements in integrating our fun- rather, by proponents of the cultural turn that a damental interest in non-domination with pro- feminist politics of identity and diference would tectionists’ legitimate concerns for social security, synergize with struggles for . But without neglecting the importance of negative that assumption fell prey to the larger Zeitgeist. , usually associated with . In the in de siècle context, the turn to recognition dovetailed all too neatly with a rising neolibera- * * * * * * * * * lism that wanted nothing more than to repress all memory of social . he result was Such, at least, is the reading of recent history that a tragic historical irony. Instead of arriving at a emerges from the essays collected here. he chap- broader, richer paradigm that could encompass ters comprising Part I document the shift from both redistribution and recognition, feminists postwar social democracy to early second-wave efectively traded one truncated paradigm for feminism, seen as a current of New Left radical- another–a truncated economism for a truncated ism. Exuding the heady spirit of the 1960s and culturalism. 70s, these essays relect the successes of the new social movements in breaking through the con- Today, however, perspectives centered on recog- ines of welfare-state politics as usual. Expand- nition alone lack all credibility. In the context of ing the political meant exposing neglected axes escalating capitalist crisis, the critique of political of domination other than class– above all, but not economy is regaining its central place in theory only, gender. Equally important, it meant expos- and practice. No serious social movement, least ing illegitimate power beyond the usual precincts of all feminism, can ignore the evisceration of of the state and economy–in sexuality and sub- democracy and assault on social reproduction jectivity, in domesticity and social services, in now being waged by inance capital. Under these academia and commodiied leisure, in the social conditions, a worth its salt must practices of everyday life. revive the “economic� concerns of Act One–with- out, however, neglecting the “cultural� insights of No one better captured these “postmarxian� Act Two. But that is not all. It must integrate impulses than Jürgen Habermas, the subject of

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 7/14 chapter one. A radical critic of postwar social democracy. Chapter two, in contrast, marks a democracy, Habermas sought to scrutinize aspects shift to constructive feminist theorizing. Aiming of the Keynesian welfare state that escaped to put to work the lessons of the previous chap- standard liberal analyses. Eschewing the “labor ter, I sketch a gender-sensitive critique of the monism� of his Frankfurt School predecessors, structural dynamics and conlict tendencies of while seeking to continue the critique of reiica- late-capitalist societies. “Struggle over Needs� tion by other means, he proposed a “communica- (1989) reconceptualizes the welfare state by resi- tions-theoretic� reconstruction of Critical heory. tuating distribution within discourse. Building he upshot was a new diagnosis of late-capitalist on Habermas’s insights, it employs a version of ills: the “internal colonization of the lifeworld by the linguistic turn to underwrite the expanded systems.� Endemic to postwar social-democracy, understanding of politics associated with second- colonization occurred when “systems rationality� wave feminism. he key move here is a shift from was illegitimately extended beyond its proper the usual social-democratic focus on conlicts purview, the and state adminis- over need satisfaction to a new, democratic-femi- tration, to the “core domains of the lifeworld,� the nist focus on the “politics of need interpretation.� family and political . In that case, he efect is to replace the distributive paradigm, as administrative coordination replaced commu- which posits a monological objectivism of basic nicative interaction in domains that required the needs, with a gender-sensitive communicative latter, the welfare state spawned “social patho- paradigm, which construes the interpretation of logies.� Equally important, this development needs as a political stake. his approach difers sparked new forms of social conlict, centered less from Habermas’s in a crucial respect. Instead of on distribution than on the “grammar of forms naturalizing hegemonic notions of public and of life.�2 Resonating with New Left antipathy private, I treat those categories, too, as discursi- to bureaucratic paternalism, Habermas’s dia- vely constructed, gender- and power-saturated gnosis validated the “post-materialist� concerns objects of political struggle; and I link the politi- of the new social movements. Exceeding liberal cization of needs to feminist struggles over where criticisms of distributive injustice, it promised and how to draw the boundaries between “the to broaden our sense of what could be subject to political,� “the economic� and “the domestic.� he political challenge–and emancipatory change. efect is to repoliticize a range of gender issues that Habermas unwittingly took of the table. Nevertheless, as I argue in “What’s Critical about Critical heory?� (1985), Habermas failed “Struggle over Needs� also borrows from, and to actualize the full radical potential of his own revises, another great New Left-inspired critic critique. Substantializing analytical distinctions of the democratic welfare state, . between public and private, symbolic reproduc- Like Foucault, I maintain that needs politics is tion and material reproduction, system integra- implicated in the constitution of subject posi- tion and social integration, he missed their gender tions, on the one hand, and of new bodies of dis- subtext and naturalized androcentic features of ciplinary expertise, on the other. But unlike him, the social order. Lacking the resources adequately I do not assume that welfare professionals mono- to conceptualize male domination, he ended up polize the interpretation of needs. Rather, situa- suggesting that “juridiication� in familial matters ting “expert discourses� alongside the “oppositio- led necessarily to colonization–hence that femi- nal discourses� of democratizing movements, on nist struggles to expand women’s and children’s the one hand, and the “reprivatization discourses� were problematic. he efect was to jeopar- of neoconservatives, on the other, I map conlicts dize the analytical insights and practical gains of among those three types of “needs-talk.� hus, second-wave feminism. where Foucault assumed a single, disciplinary, logic, my approach discerns a plurality of compe- In general, then, this volume’s irst chapter cri- ting logics—including some with emancipatory tiques an important leftwing critic of social potential, capable of challenging male domina- tion. Drawing not only on empirical insights, but 2. Jürgen Habermas, he heory of Communicative Action, also on normative distinctions, it aims to guide especially chapter VIII, “Marx and the hesis of Internal Colonization,� in Volume Two: Lifeworld and System: A Cri- feminist activism that would transform social tique of Functionalist Reason, English translation by homas reality. McCarthy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1989).

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 8/14

If “Struggle over Needs� maps the contours of the coexistence of diverse family forms, increased welfare-state discourse in the 1980s, the next divorce and non-marriage, widespread female chapter examines a term that became central in participation in waged work, and more precarious the 1990s. Co-authored with the feminist his- employment for all. It must give way, in the wel- torian , “A Genealogy of ‘Depen- fare states of the future, to arrangements that can dency’� (1994) reads the changing vicissitudes institutionalize gender justice. of that “keyword of the welfare state� as a baro- What, accordingly, should a postindustrial wel- meter of shifting political winds. Written at the fare state look like? “After the Family Wage� eva- height of the “welfare reform� frenzy in the Uni- luates two alternative scenarios, each of which ted States, when attacks on “welfare dependency� qualiies as feminist. In the irst, the age of the dominated policy debates, this essay charts the family wage would give way to the age of the process by which that characteristic neoliberal “Universal Breadwinner.� Presupposed by libe- preoccupation came to supplant the longstanding rals and “equality feminists,� this approach would social-democratic focus on combating poverty. guarantee social security chiely by facilitating “A Genealogy of ‘Dependency’� excavates buried women’s wage-earning–above all, by reforming layers of discursive history that continue to weigh labor markets and providing employment-ena- on the present. Mapping changing conigurations bling services such as day care and elder care. In of political economy and gender dynamics, this a second vision of postindustrial society, the era chapter analyzes two epochal historical shifts in of the family wage would give way to the era of the meanings of “dependency�: the shift, irst, “Caregiver Parity.� Favored by conservatives and from a preindustrial patriarchal usage, in which “diference feminists,� this approach would sup- “dependency� was a nonstigmatized majority port informal carework in families–especially condition, to a modern industrial male-supre- through caregiver allowances. hese approaches macist usage, which constructed a speciically assume divergent conceptions of gender justice: feminine and highly stigmatized sense of “depen- whereas the irst aims to conform women’s lives to dency�; and then, second, to a postindustrial the way men’s are supposed to be now, the second usage, in which growing numbers of relatively would elevate caregiving to parity with breadwin- prosperous women claim the same kind of “inde- ning in order to “make diference costless.� Yet pendence� that men do, while a more stigmatized neither approach, I argue here, is wholly satisfac- but still feminized sense of “dependency� attaches tory. Whereas Universal Breadwinner penalizes to “deviant� groups who are considered “super- women for not being like men, Caregiver Parity luous.� Along the way, Gordon and I demons- relegates them to an inferior “.� I trate that racializing practices play a major role conclude, accordingly, that feminists should deve- in historical reconstructions of “dependency,� as lop a third, “Universal Caregiver� model, which do changes in the organization and meaning of would induce men to become more like women labor. Questioning current assumptions about the are now: people who combine employment with meaning and desirability of “independence,� we responsibilities for primary caregiving. Treating conclude by sketching a “transvaluative� feminist women’s current life patterns as the norm, this critique aimed at overcoming the dependence/ model would aim to overcome the separation of independence dichotomy. breadwinning and carework. Avoiding both the workerism of Universal Breadwinner and the If the dependency essay provides a feminist cri- domestic privatism of Caregiver Parity, it aims to tique of post-war welfare states, the following provide gender justice and security for all. chapter seeks to envision a feminist alternative. he key, I claim in “After the Family Wage� In general, then, the chapters comprising Part (1994), is to modernize the obsolete underpin- I advance a radical critique of the welfare state nings of current arrangements–especially the pre- from a feminist perspective. Exuding an optimis- supposition of long lasting male-headed nuclear tic sense of expansive possibility, they assume that families, in which well paid, securely employed feminist movements could help to remake the husbands support non-employed or low-earning world, dissolving male-supremacist structures and wives. his assumption, which descends from overturning gender hierarchies. Simultaneously industrial capitalism and still undergirds social presupposing and radicalizing the socialist ima- policy, is wildly askew of postindustrial realities: ginary, they validate the eforts of second-wave

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 9/14 feminists to expand the political agenda beyond “Against Symbolicism� discloses the self-defeat- the conines of social democracy. Repudiating ing character of Lacanian feminism. Building welfare paternalism, they shift the focus of cri- on my earlier eforts to theorize the discursive tical scrutiny from class distribution to gender dimension of women’s subordination, this chap- injustice, broadly conceived. Whether critical or ter assesses the relative merits of two ideal-typ- constructive, these chapters seek to render visible, ical approaches to signiication: a structuralist and criticizable, the entire panoply of structures approach, which analyzes symbolic systems or and practices that prevent women from partici- codes, and a pragmatics approach, which stud- pating on a par with men in social life. ies speech as a social practice. If one’s goal is to analyze the workings of gender domination in * * * * * * * * * capitalist societies, and to clarify the prospects for overcoming it, then the pragmatics approach has Part II, in contrast, evinces a more sober mood. more to ofer, I argue here. Written during a period of waning leftwing ener- gies, the chapters included here map the shift “Against Symbolicism� elaborates this claim via from early second-wave feminism to identity critical discussions of Jacques Lacan (as read by politics. Interrogating various currents of feminist feminists) and . Although both theorizing, they document the process by which thinkers are widely viewed as poststructuralists, the cultural turn seemed to swallow up political I contend that both continue the structura- economy, even as it should have enriched the lat- list legacy in important respects. hus, feminist ter. In addition, these essays track the growing eforts to appropriate Lacan have foundered on centrality of claims for recognition within femi- what I call “symbolicism�: the homogenizing nist activism. Situating those claims in historical reiication of diverse signifying practices into a context, they probe the fateful coincidence of the monolithic, all pervasive, and all-determining rise of identity politics with the revival of free- symbolic order. In Kristeva’s case, this problem is market fundamentalism; and they analyze the complicated but not overcome by the incorpora- dilemmas feminists faced as a result. More gene- tion of an anti-structuralist, “semiotic,� moment, rally, Part II diagnoses the shrinking of emanci- intended to historicize “the symbolic.� he efect patory vision at the in de siècle. Seeking to dispel is to establish an unending oscillation between the mystique of , these chapters two equally unsatisfactory alternatives: in one aim to retrieve the best insights of socialist-femi- moment, Kristeva naturalizes a reiied maternal nism and to combine them with a non-identita- identity; in another, she nulliies women’s identi- rian version of the politics of recognition. Only ties altogether. such an approach, I maintain, can meet the intel- he feminist quarrel over essentialism is broached lectual and political challenges facing feminist more directly in chapter seven. Diagnosing the movements in a period of neoliberal hegemony. shriveling of the feminist imagination, “Feminist “Against Symbolicism� (1990) scrutinizes one Politics in the Age of Recognition” (2001) charts inluential current of theorizing that unwittin- the progressive uncoupling of recognition from gly helped to divert the feminist imagination redistribution in feminist theorizing and femi- into culturalist channels. On its face, of course, nist politics. Troubled by the prevalence of one- nothing could be more opposed to identity poli- sided, culturalist , this essay proposes to tics than Lacanian psychoanalysis, which asso- marry the best insights of the cultural turn to the ciates the wish for a stable identity with a deva- nearly forgotten but still indispensable insights of lorized “imaginary register.� Nevertheless, as I socialist-feminism. Rejecting sectarian construc- argue here, feminist eforts to appropriate that tions that cast those perspectives as mutually theoretical paradigm inadvertently undermined incompatible, I analyze sexism as a two-dimen- their own professed anti-essentialism by failing sional mode of subordination, rooted simulta- to challenge some basic assumptions of Lacanian neously in the political economy and status order thought. Moreover, and equally unfortunate, by of capitalist society. Overcoming gender subor- slighting political economy and avoiding insti- dination, I argue, requires combining a feminist tutional analysis, they ended up colluding with politics of recognition with a feminist politics of cultural feminists in making language and sub- redistribution. jectivity the privileged foci of feminist critique.

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 10/14

Developing such a politics is not easy, however, and economic injustices as a tactic aimed at tri- as gender cuts across other axes of subordination; vializing heterosexism. Claiming to deconstruct and claims for gender justice can conlict with my distinction between maldistribution and mis- other seemingly legitimate claims, such as claims recognition, she went on to argue that hetero- for minority cultural recognition. It follows that sexism is so essential to capitalism that LGBT feminists should eschew “single-variable� pers- struggles threaten the latter’s existence. pectives, which focus on gender alone, in favor “Heterosexism, Misrecognition, and Capitalism� of approaches that can handle hard cases, where (1997) rebuts Butler’s arguments. Defending injustices intersect and claims collide. To adjudi- my quasi-Weberian dualism of status and class, cate such cases, such as the “headscarf afair� in I maintain that heterosexism can be every bit as France, I introduce two conceptual innovations. serious and material as other harms and yet still First, at the normative-philosophical level, I be an injustice of misrecognition, grounded in the introduce the view of justice as parity of partici- status order of society, as opposed to the political . Designed to identify two diferent kinds pation economy. Tracing the economic/cultural diferen- of obstacles (economic and cultural) that prevent tiation to the rise of capitalism, I contend that, some people from participating as peers in social far from deconstructing that distinction, feminist interaction, the principle of participatory parity theorists should rather historicize it. Mapping overarches both dimensions of (in)justice–(mal) recent shifts in the institutionalization of eco- distribution (mis)recognition–and allows us and nomy and culture, I conclude that late-capitalist to bring them together in a common framework. forms of sexual regulation are only indirectly tied Second, at the social-theoretical level, I pro- to mechanisms for the accumulation of surplus pose to replace the standard “identity� model of value, hence that struggles against heterosexist recognition with a Aimed at avoi- status model. misrecognition do not automatically threaten ding the former’s tendency to reify identity and capitalism, but must be articulated to other (anti- displace struggles for redistribution, the status capitalist) struggles. he resulting approach dis- model posits that what deserves recognition is closes gaps in the current order that open space not group-speciic identities or cultural contents, for emancipatory practice. Unlike Butler’s fra- but the equal standing of partners in interaction. mework, mine makes visible the non-isomor- Applying these two concepts, the chapter ofers a phisms of status and class, the multiple contra- novel reading of the headscarf afair and a sym- dictory interpellations of social subjects, and the pathetic critique of French feminist understan- multiple complex moral imperatives that moti- dings of . More fundamentally, it proposes a parité vate struggles for in the present era. way of repositioning feminist politics in the “age of recognition.� In general, then, Part II assesses the state of the feminist imagination in a time of ascending neo- Chapter seven defends this approach against liberalism. Analyzing the shift from early second- the objections of . In a 1997 essay, wave feminism, which sought to engender the “Merely Cultural,� Butler sought to defend “the socialist imaginary, to identity politics, which cultural Left� against criticisms by me and others, jettisoned the latter in favor of one centered on whom she called “neoconservative Marxists.�3 recognition, these essays provide a sober accoun- Insisting that heteronormativity is just as fun- ting of the losses and gains. Leery of identity damental to capitalism as class exploitation, politics in a period of neoliberal hegemony, they she rejected theorizations that treat sexuality as aim to revive the project of egalitarian gender superstructural. From there, Butler might have redistribution in combination with a de-reiied gone on to endorse a model that construes “dis- politics of recognition. he goal throughout is to tribution� and “recognition� as two co-fundamen- develop new conceptual and practical strategies tal dimensions of capitalist society, corresponding for combating gender injustices of economy and respectively to class and status, and that analyzes culture simultaneously. Only a perspective that heterosexism as a deep-seated form of misreco- encompasses both of those dimensions of gender gnition or status subordination. Instead, however, justice can adequately inform feminist theory in a she rejected the very distinction between cultural capitalist society.

3. Judith Butler, “Merely Cultural,� Social Text, 52–53 (Fall/ * * * * * * * * * Winter 1997), pp. 265–277.

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 11/14

Part III shifts the scene to the present. Today, party, it identiies not two, but three analytically when neoliberalism is everywhere in crisis, reduc- distinct kinds of obstacles to parity of participa- tive culturalism is widely discredited, and femi- tion in capitalist societies. Whereas distribution nist interest in political economy is fast reviving. foregrounds impediments rooted in political eco- What is needed now, accordingly, is a gender-sen- nomy, and recognition discloses obstacles groun- sitive framework that can grasp the fundamental ded in the status order, representation concep- character of the crisis–as well as the prospects for tualizes barriers to participatory parity that are an emancipatory resolution. One imperative is entrenched in the political constitution of society. to conceptualize the multi-layered nature of the What are at issue here are the procedures for sta- current crisis, which encompasses simultaneous ging and resolving conlicts over injustice: how destabilizations of inance, ecology and social are claims for redistribution and recognition to reproduction. Another is to map the grammar be adjudicated? And who belongs to the circle of of the social struggles that are responding to the those who are entitled to raise them? crisis and reshaping the political terrain on which Directed at clarifying struggles over globalization, feminists operate. Crucial to both enterprises this third, “political� dimension of justice operates is the new salience of transnationalizing forces, at two diferent levels. On the one hand, I theo- which are problematizing “the Westphalian rize “ordinary-political injustices,� which arise frame�: that is, the previously unquestioned idea internally, within a bounded political community, that the bounded territorial state is the appro- when skewed decision rules entrench disparities priate unit for relecting on, and struggling for, of political voice among fellow citizens. Feminist justice. As that doxa recedes in the face of intensi- struggles for gender quotas on electoral lists are a ied experiences of transnational power, feminist response to this sort of ordinary-political misre- struggles are transnationalizing too. hus, many presentation. But that is not all. Equally impor- of the assumptions that undergirded earlier femi- tant, if less familiar, are “meta-political injustices,� nist projects are being called into question–revea- which arise when the division of political space led to be indefensible expressions of what Ulrich into bounded polities miscasts what are actually Beck calls “methodological nationalism.�4 transnational injustices as national matters. In he chapters comprising Part III aim to develop that case, afected non-citizens are wrongly models of feminist theorizing that can clarify this excluded from consideration–as, for example, situation. “Reframing Justice in a Global World� when the claims of the global poor are shunted (2005) observes that so-called “globalization� into the domestic political arenas of weak or is changing the grammar of political claims- failed states and diverted from the ofshore causes making. Contests that used to focus chiely on of their dispossession. Naming this second, meta- the question of what is owed as a matter of justice political injustice misframing, I argue for a post- to members of political communities now turn Westphalian theory of democratic justice, which quickly into disputes about who should count as problematizes unjust frames. he result is a major a member and which is the relevant community. revision of my theory, aimed at addressing trans- Not only the substance of justice but also the border inequities in a globalizing world. is in dispute. he result is a major challenge frame he following chapter applies this revised, three- to received understandings, which fail to ponder dimensional framework to revisit the historical in matters of justice. To meet who should count trajectory of second-wave feminism. Efectively the challenge, I argue, the theory of justice must recapitulating the overall argument of this book, become three-dimensional, incorporating the “Feminism, Capitalism and the Cunning of His- political dimension of , alongside representation tory� (2009) situates the movement’s unfolding the economic dimension of distribution and the in relation to three diferent moments in the cultural dimension of recognition. history of capitalism. First, I locate the move- “Reframing Justice� constitutes a major revision ment’s beginnings in the context of “state-orga- to the model developed in the previous chap- nized capitalism.� Here I chart the emergence ters. Adapting Weber’s triad of class, status, and of second-wave feminism from out of the anti- imperialist New Left as a radical challenge to 4. , “Toward a New Critical heoryh eory with a Cos- the pervasive androcentrism of state-led capita- mopolitan Intent,� Constellations: An International Journal of list societies in the postwar era. And I identify Critical and Democratic heory, vol. 10, no. 4 (2003): 453-468.

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 12/14 the movement’s fundamental emancipatory pro- served emancipatory ends in one context became mise with its expanded sense of injustice and its ambiguous, if not worse, in another era. structural critique of capitalist society. Second, I Where does this argument leave feminism today? consider the process of feminism’s evolution in In the inal chapter, I propose a framework aimed the dramatically changed social context of rising at disrupting our dangerous liaison with neo- neoliberalism. Here, I chart not only the move- liberalism and liberating our radical energies. ment’s extraordinary successes but also the dis- Revisiting a landmark study of capitalist crisis, turbing convergence of some of its ideals with the “Between Marketization and Social Protection� demands of an emerging new form of capitalism– (2010) ofers a feminist reading of Karl Pola- postfordist, “disorganized,� transnational. And I nyi’s 1944 classic, he Great Transformation.6 suggest that second-wave feminism has unwit- Eschewing economism, that book analyzed a pre- tingly supplied a key ingredient of what Luc Bol- vious crisis of capitalism as a crisis of social repro- tanski and Eve Chiapello call “the new spirit of duction, as earlier eforts to create a “ capitalism.�5 Finally, I contemplate prospects for society� undermined the shared understandings reorienting feminism in the present context of and solidary relations that underpin social life. capitalist crisis, which could mark the beginnings In Polanyi’s view, such eforts proved so destruc- of a shift to a new, post-neoliberal form of social tive of livelihoods, communities, and habitats as organization. Here, I examine the prospects for to trigger a century-long struggle between free- reactivating feminism’s emancipatory promise in marketeers and proponents of “social protection,� a world that has been rocked by inancial crisis who sought to defend “society� from the ravages and the surrounding political fallout. of the market. he end result of this struggle, “Feminism, Capitalism and the Cunning of His- which he called a “double movement,� was fas- tory� constitutes a provocation of sorts. Conten- cism and the Second World War. ding that feminism has entered a dangerous Without question, Polanyi’s diagnosis is relevant liaison with neoliberalism, this chapter identiies today. Our crisis, too, can be fruitfully analyzed as four major historical ironies. First, the feminist a “great transformation,� in which a new round of critique of social-democratic economism, unde- eforts to free markets from political regulation niably emancipatory in the era of state-organized is threatening social reproduction and sparking a capitalism, has assumed a diferent, more sinister new wave of protectionist protest. Nevertheless, I valence in the subsequent period, as it dovetailed argue here, Polanyi’s framework harbors a major with neoliberalism’s interest in diverting poli- blindspot. Focused single-mindedly on harms tical-economic struggles into culturalist chan- emanating from marketization, his account over- nels. Second, the feminist critique of the “family looks harms originating elsewhere, in the sur- wage,� once the centerpiece of a radical analysis rounding “society.� As a result, it neglects the of capitalism’s androcentrism, increasingly serves fact that social protections are often vehicles of today to legitimate a new mode of capital accu- domination, aimed at entrenching hierarchies mulation, heavily dependent on women’s waged and at excluding “outsiders.� Preoccupied ove- labor, as idealized in the “two-earner family.� rwhelmingly with struggles over marketization, hird, the feminist critique of welfare-state pater- Polanyi occults struggles over injustices rooted in nalism has converged unwittingly, irst, with neo- “society� and encoded in social protections. liberalism’s critique of the nanny state, and then, with its increasingly cynical embrace of micro- “Between Marketization and Social Protection� credit and NGOs. Finally, eforts to expand the aims to correct this blindspot. Seeking to develop scope of gender justice beyond the nation-state a broader critique, I propose to transform Pola- are increasingly resigniied to cohere with neoli- nyi’s double movement into a triple movement. beralism’s global governance needs, as “femocrats� he key move here is to introduce a third pole have entered the policy apparatuses of the United of social struggle, which I call “emancipation.� Nations, the European Union, and the “inter- Crosscutting his central conlict between mar- national community.� In every case, an idea that ketization and social protection, emancipation aims to overcome forms of domination rooted

5. Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello, he New Spirit of Capi- 6. , he Great Transformation, 2nd ed. (Boston: talism, tr. Geofrey Elliott (London: Verso Books, 2005). Beacon Press, 1944 [2001]).

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 13/14 in “society,� as well as those based in “economy.� of socialist-feminism with those of newer para- Opposing oppressive protections without thereby digms, such as postcolonialism and ecology. becoming free-marketeers, emancipation’s ranks Whatever helpful lessons they can glean from have included feminists as well as the billions this volume will pale in comparison with those its of people–peasants, serfs and slaves; racialized, author expects to learn from them. colonized and indigenous peoples–for whom access to a wage promised liberation from tradi- tional authority. By thematizing emancipation, along with marketization and social protection, indeed as colliding with them, the triple move- ment clariies the political terrain on which femi- nism operates today. On the one hand, contra Polanyi, this igure discloses the ambivalence of social protection, which often entrenches domi- nation even while counteracting the disintegra- tive efects of marketization. On the other hand, however, contra mainstream , the triple movement reveals the ambivalence of emancipation, which may dissolve the solidary ethical basis of social protection and can thereby foster marketization, even as it dismantles domi- nation. Probing these ambivalences, I conclude that feminists should end our dangerous liaison with marketization and forge a principled new alliance with social protection. In so doing, we could reactivate and extend the insurrectionary, anti-capitalist spirit of the Second Wave.

* * * * * * * * * A compilation of essays written over a period of more than twenty-ive years, this volume’s ori- entation is at once retrospective and prospec- tive. Charting shifts in the feminist imaginary since the 1970s, it ofers an interpretation of the recent history of feminist thought. At the same time, however, it looks forward, to the feminism of future, now being invented by new generations of female activists. Schooled in digital media and at home in transnational space, yet formed in the crucible of capitalist crisis, this generation promises to reinvent the feminist imagination yet again. Already coming out of the long slog through identity politics, the young feminists of this generation seem poised to conjure up a new synthesis of radical democracy and social justice. Combining redistribution, recognition, and rep- resentation, they are seeking to transform a world that no longer resembles the Westphalian inter- national system of sovereign states. Faced with the gravest crisis of capitalism since the 1930s, they have every incentive to devise new, system- atic critiques that combine the enduring insights

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17 Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History 14/14

Dernières parutions

Working Papers Hervé Le Bras, Jean-Luc Racine & Michel Wieviorka, National Debates on Race Statistics: towards an International Comparison, FMSH-WP-2012-01, février 2012. , Ni dieu ni maître : les réseaux, FMSH-WP-2012-02, février 2012. François Jullien, L’écart et l’entre. Ou comment penser l’altérité, FMSH-WP-2012-03, février 2012. Itamar Rabinovich, he Web of Relationship, FMSH-WP-2012-04, février 2012. Bruno Maggi, Interpréter l’agir : un déi théorique, FMSH-WP-2012-05, février 2012. Pierre Salama, Chine – Brésil : industrialisation et « désindustrialisation précoce », FMSH-WP-2012-06, mars 2012. Guilhem Fabre & Stéphane Grumbach, he World upside down,China’s R&D and innovation strategy, FMSH-WP-2012-07, avril 2012. Joy Y. Zhang, he De-nationalization and Re-nationalization of the Life Sciences in China: A Cosmopolitan Practicality?, FMSH-WP-2012-08, avril 2012. John P. Sullivan, From Drug Wars to Criminal Insurgency: Mexican Cartels, Criminal Enclaves and Crimi- nal Insurgency in Mexico and Central America. Implications for Global Security, FMSH-WP-2012-09, avril 2012. Marc Fleurbaey, Economics is not what you think: A defense of the economic approach to taxation, FMSH- WP-2012-10, may 2012. Marc Fleurbaey, he Facets of Exploitation, FMSH-WP-2012-11, may 2012. Jacques Sapir, Pour l’Euro, l’heure du bilan a sonné : Quinze leçons et six conclusions, FMSH-WP-2012-12, juin 2012. Rodolphe De Koninck & Jean-François Rousseau, Pourquoi et jusqu’où la fuite en avant des agricultures sud-est asiatiques ?, FMSH-WP-2012-13, juin 2012. Jacques Sapir, Inlation monétaire ou inlation structurelle ? Un modèle hétérodoxe bi-sectoriel, FMSH- WP-2012-14, juin 2012. Franson Manjali, he ‘Social’ and the ‘Cognitive’ in Language. A Reading of Saussure, and Beyond, FMSH- WP-2012-15, july 2012. Michel Wieviorka, Du concept de sujet à celui de subjectivation/dé-subjectivation, FMSH-WP-2012-16, juillet 2012. Nancy Fraser, Feminism, Capitalism, and the Cunning of History: An Introduction, FMSH-WP-2012-17, august 2012. Nancy Fraser, Can society be commodities all the way down? Polanyian relections on capitalist crisis, FMSH- WP-2012-18, july 2012.

Position Papers Jean-François Sabouret, Mars 2012 : Un an après Fukushima, le Japon entre catastrophes et résilience, FMSH-PP-2012-01, mars 2012. Ajay K. Mehra, Public Security and the Indian State, FMSH-PP-2012-02, mars 2012. Timm Beichelt, La nouvelle politique européenne de l’Allemagne : L’émergence de modèles de légitimité en concurrence ?, FMSH-PP-2012-03, mars 2012. Antonio Sérgio Alfredo Guimarães, Race, colour, and skin colour in Brazil, FMSH-PP-2012-04, july 2012.

Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme - 190 avenue de France - 75013 Paris - France http://www.msh-paris.fr - FMSH-WP-2012-17