Copyright by Roy Edward Casagranda 2017 The Dissertation Committee for Roy Edward Casagranda Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Colonization of the Normative Realm in the Age of Instrumentality Committee: Katherine Arens, Supervisor Per Urlaub John Hoberman Kathleen Higgins Robert Jensen Colonization of the Normative Realm in the Age of Instrumentality by Roy Edward Casagranda Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin August 2017 Dedication To my mother, Awatif Istafanus Casagranda. Acknowledgements This dissertation could not have been written without the endless and tireless help of my committee chair, Dr. Katherine Arens, and my wife, Dr. Banafsheh Madaninejad. I am also grateful to my committee: Dr. Kathleen Higgins, Dr. John Hoberman, Dr. Per Urlaub, and Dr. Robert Jensen for their support, feedback, and wonderful defense experience. In addition to those mentioned above, I am eternally indebted to Dr. Donald Lutz, Dr. Ross Lence, Dr. Phil Carspecken, Dr. Christian Davenport, Dr. Ken Brown, Dr. Pauline Kolenda, Dr. Cynthia Freeland, Prof. Charles Newkirk, and Prof. Bruce Hull for the profound impact that they have had on my understanding of the world. iv The Colonization of the Normative Realm in the Age of Instrumentality Roy Edward Casagranda, PhD University of Texas at Austin, 2017 Supervisor: Katherine Arens This dissertation aims to establish a contemporary model of why apolitical actors engage in the political realm. The project will intersperse practical cases with theoretical concerns. I look at two cases: the role of Soccer Hooligans in the 2011 Egyptian Revolution and the Occupy Austin Movement (2015). The goal of these juxtapositions is to provide insights into the realities behind political theories, as I accommodate additional strands of theory that have received little attention to date in studies of political motivation. I begin by showing how inadequate Rational Choice Theory (RCT) has proven in explaining political action and then move onto employing central concepts from Heidegger, Arendt, Marcuse, Foucault, Habermas, and Wendy Brown to create a richer picture of what choice means for subjects. With the aid of the categories these thinkers provide, I then build an analytical heuristic device called the Three Realms of Action Model. My claim is that this model, which explains the relationship between the normative, political and economic realms can better explain political choice. The actions of nonpolitical actors might seem non-rational when viewed from within a purely economic realm, but switching between the three realms and the rationalites they inhabit, provides the three-pronged lens needed to make a more nuanced study of the power v relations between political actors. To better illustrate how subjects negotiate the realms, I use familiar historical sites. Each historical event allows us to inhabit an epistemology that describes how the realms bargain for dominance with each other. The insight I come away with here is that the economic realm has colonized the normative and political realms in the United States. But despite the dominance of the economic realm, political action or choice is not driven “only” by market rationality but also by a shifting play of the power in the three realms where we see new and competing rationalities. This allows us not only to see “choice” as a more dynamic and nuanced category but also better clues us into how it is manipulated and even subverted. vi Table of Contents TABLE OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... ix INTRODUCTION: Being and Revolution in the 21st Century .......................................... 1 CHAPTER 1: How the Ultra Soccer Hooligans' Choices Challenge Political Science ... 21 How Rational Choice Theory Defines Political Participation .............................. 21 Correcting RCT: New Considerations .................................................................. 31 A Corrective is Necessary: But What? ................................................................. 42 The Rationalities of the Ultra Revolution: Some Conclusions ............................. 44 CHAPTER 2: Heidegger and His Children—The Three Realms Model ......................... 51 Beyond Self-Interest and Altruism: Heidegger's Redefinition of Human Action 53 Origin of the Three Realms of Action: Adding the Economic Realm to Action .. 65 The Three Realms of Action: An Overview ......................................................... 71 CHAPTER 3: The Three Realms as an Analytic Heuristic for Power Relations—The Evolving Definition of Public Political Choice ................................................................ 83 The Three Realms of Action: Extended Version .................................................. 84 1. The Economic Realm ............................................................................ 84 2. The Normative Realm ........................................................................... 88 3. The Political Realm............................................................................... 90 Historical Case Study 1: Frederick II Challenges the Dominant Order of the Realms—The Political Realm Competes with the Normative Realm .................. 95 Historical Case Study 2: The Republic of Venice Challenges the Dominant Order of the Realms—The Economic Realm Competes with the Normative Realm ..... 98 Historical Case Study 3: The Republic of Florence Challenges the Dominant Order of the Realms—The Political Realm Competes with the Normative Realm ............................................................................................................................. 102 vii Historical Case Study 4: Theodore Roosevelt Challenges the Dominant Order of the Realms—The Political and Normative Realms are in Dialogue and Subordinate the Economic Realm ....................................................................... 106 The Three Realms of Action: A Historical Epistemology? ................................ 116 CHAPTER 4: The Contemporaneity of the Economic Realm—Domains of Rationality and Manipulations of the Normative Realm ................................................................... 120 The Political Realm in Extremis: When the Economic Realm Rises to Power .. 120 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 127 CHAPTER 5: The Contemporary Rise of the Economic Realm Through the Act of Colonizing the Political Realm ....................................................................................... 131 Amplifying Arendt's homo faber ........................................................................ 132 The Emergence of Alternate (Non-)Rationalities ............................................... 141 Some Conclusions: The Three Realms and Rational Choice Theory ................. 159 CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the Occupy Movement ............................................. 167 Bibliography: .................................................................................................................. 189 viii Table of Figures Figure 1: Allais’ Two Lottery Scenarios ...........................................................................27 Figure 2: Habermas and the Three Realms of Action ........................................................80 Figure 3: Arendt and the Three Realms of Action .............................................................80 Figure 4: Typical Ancient and Medieval Vectors of Power within the Fused Realms......97 Figure 5: Venice’s Vectors of Power within the Fused Realms ......................................100 Figure 6: Florence’s Vectors of Power within the Fursed Realms ..................................104 Figure 7: Longevity of and Persuasive Value of Economic and Normative Symbols ....163 ix INTRODUCTION: Being and Revolution in the 21st Century “The two biggest political parties in Egypt are Ahly and Zamalek.”1 Assad, Leader of al-Ahly’s football Ultras I was inspired to conduct this inquiry by a question: “Why is voter turnout so low in the US?” Yet that inspiration came not because I wanted to ask that question, but rather because I thought it was the wrong question. It seemed to me that the real issue was almost the exact reverse: “Why is voter turnout so high in the US?” In light of single member district representation, winner-take-all elections, winner-take-all legislative processes, the quirky electoral college, and gerrymandering it is actually a wonder that anyone would waste their time voting, at least in recent national elections. For example, in 2014, all but 26 congressional districts in the US House were safe districts, meaning 1 Montague, J, “Egypt's Politicized Football Hooligans,” Al Jazeera, February 2, 2012, accessed May 12, 2016, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/20122215833232195.html. 1 that they were firmly in the hands of one party and unlikely to change, given their demographics.2 In other words, the outcome of the election was a foregone conclusion for 94.0% of the US House races. Thus, I came to formulate the mystery of current electoral politics rather differently than has been conventionally done: I wondered not why is voter turnout a mere 36.4%,3 but rather why is it more than