View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Sydney eScholarship ‘Authoritarian Neoliberalism’: Crisis, the state, and the challenge of periodisation Matthew D J Ryan Department of Political Economy, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences The University of Sydney A thesis submitted in requirement for the degree of Master of Philosophy, 2017. 1 Police clash with miners, Tilmanstone, Kent, September 4th 1984 (PA Images, 2017) 2 This thesis is dedicated to all those who have struggled under the violence of neoliberalism 3 Acknowledgements My mother submitted her Master of Letters thesis when I was four years old. Now, as I come to the end of this Master of Philosophy thesis, I have a whole new appreciation for her balancing of work, family, and postgraduate studies. Well done, Mum. Although not nearly as impressive, this process has not been easy or straightforward, and there is no doubt that without the help of many people along the way, this thesis would not exist. First and foremost, thank you to my brilliant supervisors, Damien Cahill and Adam Morton. I could not have asked for two more passionate, dedicated, and overwhelmingly kind people to learn from these past eighteen months, or so. I am sure that this is just the start of many years of collaboration and friendship. My thanks go to the ECOP community at USyd. From ECOPsoc drinks at Herman’s on a Tuesday, to big group dinners after Wheelwright lectures, and many chats in between, the Department of Political Economy must be the most welcoming in the world, and I truly appreciate the many friendships made through this group – especially the Honours cohort of 2015, who treated me as one of their own. Thanks also to those students who I was lucky enough to tutor. Although I sometimes felt out of my depth, the experience of teaching in the Department has been an affirmation of my life choices to this point. I have probably learnt as much from you, as you (hopefully) have from me. And finally, to my partner, Isla. This thesis is as much yours as it is mine (the good bits at least). I hope to live up to the challenge of your love. MDJR. 4 Declaration This is to certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the content of this thesis is my own work. This thesis has not been submitted for any degree or other purposes. I certify that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work and that all the assistance received in preparing this thesis and sources have been acknowledged. Matthew Ryan, 23rd June 2017 5 List of Acronyms EC – European Commission ECSC – European Coal and Steel Community EMS – European Monetary System EMU – European Monetary Union ESM – European Social Model ESMe – European Stability Mechanism EU – European Union GFC – Global Financial Crisis IMF – International Monetary Fund NUM – British National Union of Miners UK – United Kingdom US – United States of America WTO – World Trade Organisation 6 List of Figures Figure 1 – The crisis sequence in the US . 72 Figure 2 – Long centuries and systemic cycles of accumulation . 80 7 Contents Abstract . 9 Introduction . 10 Chapter One – Depoliticisation: Theory, history and challenges . 26 Politics ‘at one remove’ . 29 The durability of depoliticisation . 33 The ‘political’ and the ‘economic’: depoliticisation through separation . 37 Theory against history . 45 Some resolutions . 50 Conclusion . 57 Chapter Two – State of Flux: Theories of the (capitalistic) state and periodisation . 59 Why periodise? . 62 Theorising the State . 64 Periodising Capitalism, Periodising the State . 75 ‘Long Waves’ . 79 Enter Gramsci . 82 The regulationist approach . 86 Towards a methodology . 89 Conclusion . 91 Chapter Three – Violence of abstraction, violence in neoliberalism . 94 Pinochet’s Chile . 98 Thatcherism . 103 The European Union . 110 Toward a periodisation of ‘authoritarian neoliberalism’ . 115 Understanding the claims: period or emphasis? . 116 Against ‘authoritarian neoliberalism’ . 120 For ‘authoritarian neoliberalism’ . 122 Conclusion . 125 Conclusion . 128 References . 134 8 Abstract The current context is one marked by twin crises: a crisis of neoliberal capitalism, and a crisis of the liberal-democratic state. The failure of the western economies to overcome deflation, rising public and private debt, high unemployment and low investment rates in the post-Global Financial Crisis has fuelled debate on whether neoliberalism remains viable way to organise the economy. Concurrently, the aspiration of democracy is facing multiple challenges: from the failure of referenda to instigate democratic change, as seen in Greece; and conversely the success of referenda to limit political freedoms, as seen in Turkey. We are seeing rising anti-establishment and anti-statist movements across the world, alongside the use of constitutional and legal mechanisms to limit the scope of democratic politics. Responding to these material conditions, the concept of ‘authoritarian neoliberalism’ has been presented as a way to understand the current conjuncture. But surely neoliberalism – and capitalism more generally – always presented with authoritarian tendencies? On what grounds can it be argued, that there has been a ‘qualitative change’ in the way the state attempts to cohere the neoliberal project post- 2007? This thesis argues that by separating the current moment of authoritarianism from a broader history of authoritarian tendencies, a ‘violent abstraction’ is made; the actual causal mechanisms producing the current crisis are obscured. If this periodisation is jettisoned, however, ‘authoritarian neoliberalism’ presents the potential to refocus attention on the way that authoritarian state transformations across neoliberal history have dialectically strengthened and weakened the state. This dialectic offers a new perspective on the origins of the current crisis of the state, as apparent in countries as diverse as Britain, the US, and Hungary. By moving past the ‘violent abstraction’ of this periodisation, a renewed focus on state violence under neoliberalism offers a real contribution to our understanding of the current moment. 9 Introduction We are witnessing the rise of authoritarian neoliberalism, which is rooted in the reconfiguring of the state into a less democratic entity through constitutional and legal changes that seek to insulate it from social and political conflict (Bruff, 2014: 113). The exceptional thing about the type of government called democracy is that it demanded people see that nothing which is human is carved in stone, that everything is built on the shifting sands of time and place… Forgetting [this], or remembering the wrong things, is dangerous for democracy, [and] things that seem timeless are never so (Keane, 2009: xii-iii). The current context is one marked by twin crises: a crisis of neoliberal capitalism, and a crisis of the liberal-democratic state. The failure of the economy to overcome deflation, rising public and private debt, high unemployment and low investment rates in the post- Global Financial Crisis has fuelled debate as to whether neoliberalism remains a viable system of economic management. Concurrently, democracy has faced multiple challenges, from the failure of referenda to instigate democratic change, as seen in Greece, and inversely the success of referenda to limit political freedoms, as seen in Turkey. These salient moments of authoritarianism are paralleled by rising anti- establishment and anti-statist movements across the world, and the use of constitutional and legal mechanisms to limit the scope of democratic politics – all of which constitutes a deep crisis of the state, in many places. Responding to these material conditions, ‘authoritarian neoliberalism’ has been presented as a way to understand the twin crisis of the current conjuncture. ‘Authoritarian neoliberalism’ was first put forward by Bruff (2014) to understand changes to the state and the durability of neoliberalism. In particular, Bruff (2014: 116, 124) has noted a ‘shift toward constitutional and legal mechanisms and a move away from seeking consent’ in the construction and reproduction of neoliberal capitalism, in a process that ‘simultaneously strengthens and weakens the state’. As a conceptual apparatus with which to understand our current 10 conjuncture, ‘authoritarian neoliberalism’ has since been developed further in the edited volume States of Discipline: Authoritarian neoliberalism and the contested reproduction of capitalist order (Tansel, 2017). This thesis aims to develop a sympathetic critique of this emergent concept: critical in the sense that ‘authoritarian neoliberalism’ lacks conceptual and historical specificity; sympathetic in the sense that Bruff et al offer a suggestive reading of the history of neoliberalism, and through that history shine light on some of the generative mechanisms of the current crisis. Context Claims that the state and the economy are both in crisis, and that these changes demand new conceptual tools, are contentious – consider briefly the context from which these claims have emerged. Across the global North, voter turn-out is decreasing, while popular opinion is increasingly anti-democratic and anti-establishmentarian (Mair, 2013). Similarly, just as many citizens have become disconnected from political society, or the state, the state has been changing itself: trade agreements are isolating certain policy levers away from democratic control (Sinclair, 2015); balanced budget amendments have constitutionally limited the