the neoliberalism of the adjustment bureau

I ended up watching The Adjustment Bureau last night, and I was surprised by how much I actually liked it. I'm not really a big fan of Matt Damon, or of romantic comedies in general, but I found the plot to be a lot more engaging and involved than most films about two lovers surmounting obstacles to their inevitable reunion. A friend of mine also reviewed it when it first came out, and I think he and his fellow reviewer make some interesting points.

For example, I agree that it's a relatively conservative film where the contradiction between freedom and determination found in Christianity, and to some extent the business world, is raised to an outright tension. I myself thought that it presented an odd mixture of individualism vs. collectivism (i.e., David Norris' desires vs. the centralized planning of the Chairman) with a tentative deference to authority (i.e., it presents no real challenge to the Chairman himself, who allows Norris the freedom to challenge his plan and eventually remolds it to fit Norris' new love interest) that's never fully resolved.

As my friend points out, there's freedom, but only when it can be made to serve 'the plan.' Which, in his opinion, "reflects a lot of post-fordist management theory and practice...where alienation and exploitation are obfuscated with things like choice and meaningfulness," suggesting that "it's more of a struggle between market corporatism and the kind of individuality it relies upon to function" than a struggle between individualism and collectivism.

From this perspective, I think the film evinces a sort of cosmic neoliberalism in which the Chairman can be viewed as a combination of the invisible hand of the market and government, with the 'ripples' created by adjustments to people's lives going 'off plan' representing market disruptions. So the moral of the story is, freedom's cool so long as it doesn't prohibit the efficiency and efficacy of the market in any serious way.

In this, I think the film illustrates some of the unresolved contradictions within neoliberal ideology, where producers and consumers in a rigged free market are allotted only enough freedom to keep the system running as smoothly as possible from the vantage point of capital, arguably the ultimate authority in a capitalist system. If people utilize their free will to go off plan and begin to disrupt the market, their lives are 'adjusted' (i.e., screwed with by market forces/capital without their knowledge or consent) in such a way as to minimize the ripples/market distortions.

So, in reality, the free market of neoliberalism isn't really as free as the name would imply, just as the free will of those inhabiting The Adjustment Bureau's world isn't as free and unrestricted as they're led to believe by the vaguely Christian-esque, corporate authority overseeing the evolution of the plan. And considering all the shenanigans that occur when only two people go off plan, it makes one wonder what would happen if everyone became aware of the Bureau's machinations and decided to follow suit.

pure michigan

Michigan state Rep. Lisa Brown was censured and barred from speaking by House Republicans for saying the word 'vagina' in reference to a package of bills regulating abortions: "Finally, Mr. Speaker, I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my vagina, but 'no' means 'no.'" Her comment was deemed too offensive, and she was prevented from speaking on an unrelated school employee retirement bill as a consequence. She responded at a subsequent press conference by asking, "If I can't say the word vagina, why are we legislating vaginas? What language should I use?" Good question. Maybe they were just confused by her female technobabble. Maybe she should have called it 'that part of my body that I have no rights over because it makes me a woman and only men are allowed regulate what I choose to do with it.' Because we all know that women are just baby-making factories, not human beings who have the right to decide for themselves if and when they have children. /sarcasm

i ♥ the symposium

Human culture has long celebrated the concept of love, Eros. And while many today only think to celebrate the conventional or appetitive aspects of Eros, such as romantic love and sex, there are other, more refined aspects of Eros to consider as well—aspects that transcend the heat of human passions and stimulate the rational part of the soul to reach for ever greater philosophical heights: From an appreciation of common beauty can arise an apprehension of the form of beauty itself; the celebration of erotic love can be transformed into the love of wisdom, of truth. Each acting as a stepping stone to the other—an idea that's beautifully illustrated in one of my favourite dialogues from Plato, the Symposium, which I find myself returning to again and again.

samsara

"Samsara"

In the window of the cafe
I see
haunting eyes
as deep as the deepest ocean
staring back at me.
Their piercing gaze
unfolding into tomorrow,
reflecting back
beginningless time.
Portals revealing bits and pieces,
glimpses and hopes,
of things yet to come,
that have already happened before.
Peepholes into the tragic reality
of my existential ouroboros.
Drifting
ceaselessly,
like a wayward vessel
hoping to find the safety of the other shore,
I sail down the river of forgetfulness
and crash
over and over again
into the rocky shores of beauty:
the siren song of desire
forever leading me
astray.

snatching defeat from the jaws of victory

From a leftist point of view, I completely agree with Doug Henwood that both Democrats and union leaders are to blame for blowing a major opportunity in Wisconsin; and Gov. Walker's victory vividly illustrates the weakness of their continual reliance on electoral strategies to the exclusion of all else, as well as the relative ineffectiveness of de-radicalized, bureaucratic labour unions to capitalize on popular movements and agitate on behalf of the entire working class. Purely electoral solutions are limited, and ordinary working-class people looking for truly progressive victories need to stop letting themselves be fooled into funneling all their time, energy, and money into the Democratic Party.

While the Democratic Party tends to present itself as pro-labour, in reality it's anything but, as its continual support of neoliberal policies at home and abroad clearly demonstrates. Not to mention its unwillingness to call for, or to support calls for, direct actions like general strikes. It's high time the left in this country started thinking outside the box of two-party electoral politics and got back to the more 'radical' roots of the American labour movement—a time when, in the words of Stanley Aronowitz, "Workers ... used to fight for their demands continuously and agree to return to work only when they were met."

A "popular campaign ... to agitate, educate, and organize on the importance of the labor movement to the maintenance of living standards" and/or for something like single-payer healthcare would've been far more useful and effective, in my opinion, than channeling everything into a pointless recall campaign geared towards trying to get an already-defeated Democrat elected into the governor's seat. /rant

the austerity agenda

I'm not really a huge fan of Paul Krugman, but I think he brings up a fairly decent (albeit obvious) point in his most recent op-ed originally made by John Maynard Keynes 75 years ago: that by pumping money into the system during slumps, the government can stimulate aggregate demand and help put people back to work in times of economic decline, and their subsequent spending will further help speed recovery. And conversely, that 'starving the beast' (i.e. the government) will most likely do little besides prolong and/or exacerbate the slump of an already depressed economy.

The bottom line is that austerity measures, particularly in combination with lower taxes on the wealthy and fewer regulations for corporations, ultimately hurt the working class and poor, eroding years of hard won gains by the latter while strengthening the former's capacity to accumulate more profit, as well as letting them off the hook for their greed and irresponsible behaviour. By "using deficit panic as an excuse to dismantle social programs," then, capital and the oligarchical ruling class have essentially found a way to utilize austerity measures as a means of privatizing gains and socializing losses under the guise of, ironically, fiscal responsibility.

obama's 'kill list' would make thrasymachus proud

In my opinion, President Obama has set another dangerous precedent with his new role as judge, jury, and executioner, personally selecting and ordering the deaths of suspected terrorists and militants around the world via drone strikes and other means. And if you think what Obama is doing in that regard is bad, just wait until a hawkish Republican or Democrat who isn't a Nobel Peace Laureate or as concerned about civil rights gets into the White House now that that cat is out of the bag.

Despite his apparent conviction that we've been able to "restore a sense of America as the sole, indispensable power" and "mobilize around a set of values and a set of principles, and ensure that the international rules of the road are followed," what Obama really seems to be doing is solidifying our reputation as 'the Great Satan,' a global bully who personifies the spirit of Thrasymachian justice, which is nothing but "the advantage of the stronger."

Just take the recent reports about Obama's acceleration of cyberattacks begun in the Bush administration as another prime example. If a foreign nation were to use a cyberattack against the US to cripple our infrastructure, it'd be considered an act of terrorism and war (e.g., from the Wall Street Journal, May 30, 2011: "The Pentagon has concluded that computer sabotage coming from another country can constitute an act of war, a finding that for the first time opens the door for the U.S. to respond using traditional military force"). When we do it, however, it's totally legitimate and the other country must obviously deserve it. If that's not the epitome of Thrasymachian justice, I don't know what is.