[11/20] Political Normativity: Cynicism and other forms of Ideology

Inaugural winter-symposium, March 19th to 22nd 2009, Nice, France.

The study group Political Normativity forms part of Nordic network for academics / Nordic Summer University (NSU). We will be organizing 2 symposia each year in the period from 2009-2011. The aim is to discuss the questions which emerge at the intersection of power and legitimacy. Generally speaking, such questions are of two kinds: On the one hand, contemporary forms of legitimization are to be revealed, described and criticized. On the other hand the study group also aims to take up normative discussions: Which forms of power, economics and politics can and should be considered legitimate today? Papers within the area of the humanities and social sciences are very welcome.

The winter session 2009 will take place in Nice, France (exact venue to be decided) from the 19th to the 22nd March. Researchers, post-graduate students, and professionals are invited to attend and give presentations of their work in a friendly and enjoyable atmosphere. Please note that participants are expected to present a paper. The presentations will be of two kinds: Longer presentations of an hour including discussions, or shorter ones of half an hour including discussions.

Abstracts are to be submitted by the 20th of November 2008

For submissions of title and abstract and for further information, please contact the Coordinators of study group 6: Olivia Pontoppidan, olivia.pontoppidan@gmail.com; Jacob H. Bock, filbock@hum.au.dk; or Rasmus Ugilt, filru@hum.au.dk.

Theme for the Winter Session: Cynicism and Other Forms of Ideology

The classical Marxist formulation of ideology goes: “They don’t know it, but they do it” (Marx 1972: 88). Ideology according to this formula is a structure of representations, beliefs and convictions which guide us on our journey through life, but which explicitly does so by steering clear of truth. A critique of ideology following this basic idea would consist in the unmasking of it – thereby revealing the unbearable truth of our lives hidden beneath. Ideology is false consciousness, and it is to be countered by confrontation with knowledge of the true state of things. In Kritik der Zynischen Vernunft (1983) Peter Sloterdijk has given a striking revision of this idea. The following “unhappy” experience presented in an autobiography by the German communist Ernst Toller (1933) might illustrate his point:

Does an emperor go to the toilet? To me that question was most intriguing, and I ran to my mother. – You will go to jail, mother said. Thus he does not go to the toilet.

This confrontation with the reality of things seems to be expressing the case of an hegelian ”unhappy consciousness” as it, troubled by the realization of its untrue state, for a moment “strives to hold on to what it is afraid to loose”, thereby justifying a state of “unthinking inertia” (Hegel 1988: Introduction). The contemporary Cynicism, says Sloterdijk, is a modernized form of this “unhappy consciousness”. It is the consciousness of a human being immune to critique because the critique is already internalized (Sloterdijk 1983: 399). His point is that ideology today seems to have adapted to the modern forms of enlightening critique by making the very unmasking procedures central to its own functioning. Thus the basic form of ideological consciousness is “enlightened false consciousness” (Sloterdijk 1983: 37). As Slavoj Zizek has formulated it, the Sloterdijkian counterpart to the classic Marxist formula would go “They know very well what they are doing, but still, they are doing it” (Zizek 1989: 29). In other words the primary way in which ideology functions today is through a certain emotional (dis)investment. Developing this thesis, Timothy Bewes (1997) claims that Tony Blairs reinvention of Labor in the nineties must be understood as a paradigmatic example of political cynicism today. Like in the case of the kid consulting his mother, Blair and the Labor Party, confronted with the political reality of the past decade, realizes that staying true to their socio-democratic beliefs and ideals would threaten their survival. To Bewes the late modern experience thus results in the general acceptance of a simulation politics: “It's really fake, but it works”, or “it doesn't work, but it is best if we pretend it does”. Such a thesis gives rise to a lot of questions: If ideology functions in this particular way, how can an adequate critique of ideology be formulated? And what alternative theoretical position or concrete action should one take? Does ideology enlist other forms of emotionality than cynicism (for instance enthusiasm, happiness, anxiety, boredom)? Does such a change in the functioning of ideology imply a corresponding change in the functioning of for instance political power or capitalism, such as the one suggested by Boltanski and Chiapello in their Le Nouvel esprit du capitalisme (1999)? We invite scholars working within the areas of humanities and social sciences to investigate this paradox of contemporary ideology either from a political, economical or cultural oriented interest and encourage papers that present theoretical reflection, conceptual analysis or combines theory with empirical and historical case studies.

Suggested nonexclusive list of literature:
Bewes, Timothy, Cynicism and Postmodernity, London: Verso, 1997.
Boltanski, Luc and Eve Chiapello, Le Nouvel esprit du capitalisme, Paris: Gallimard, 1999.
Hegel, G.W.F, Phenomenologie des Geistes, Felix Meiner Verlag, Hamburg, 1988.
Marx, Karl, Das Kapital, Marx und Engels Werke, Band 23-25, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1972.
- Die Deutsche Ideologie, Marx und Engels Werke, Band 3, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1972.
Sloterdijk, Peter, 1983, Kritik der Zynischen Vernunft, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Zizek, Slavoj, The Sublime Object of Ideology, London: Verso, 1989.
Gray, John (2007), Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia, London: Allen Lane.

Practical Stuff
1) Deadline for submission of abstracts is on November 20, 2008.
2) A participation fee of 350SKR (350NKR, 300DKR) is to be paid before the symposium. Additional information in this regard will be given when you send us your title and abstract.
3) Participants should state whether they prefer to give longer (1 hour including discussion) or shorter (2 hour including discussion) presentations.
4) Participants should inform the coordinators if they have special wishes with regard to their diet (i.e. Vegetarians, Vegans and others of similar mindset, let your voices be heard).
5) Transportation. The participants are required to arrange for their own transportation. (See economy below).
6) Hotel bookings. The coordinators will arrange for accommodation. At the outset we will be arranging for the participants to sleep together two or more persons in a room or apartment. If you prefer a single bedroom, or should you have other special requests in this regard, please let us know. (See economy below).
7) Economy. We hope to be able to cover the expenses to both accommodation and transportation. However, the following conditions apply. The study circle will cover the accommodation-expenses in so far as the participants are willing to share rooms/appartments. Should participants wish to have their own room, they will be required to pay the additional costs themselves. The coordinators will try their best to make room in the budget for travel reimbursements, but because of the fact that our economy is dependant upon the number of participants, we are as of yet not able to say anything final in this regard.
8) Tenured Staff and others who are able to fund their participation through their respective employers are kindly asked to inform us hereof.
9) Excursions. We will be planning excursions for those who are interested in connection with the symposium. These will be placed either before or after the actual event, and are thus to be viewed as completely voluntary.
The organizers will add further information in this regard, when the event approaches.