Is it possible that this collective amnesia is merely a coincidence? In any case, it’s clear that the way structural distributional issues have been entirely kept out of the discussion has hardly hurt the rich and powerful. It was not for nothing that, throughout history, progressive movements focused on collective action for the common good. What’s more: we need the capacity of the democratic state to get things done. It won’t do much for the climate if a lot of people (not all) give up steak and summer holidays but the fossil fuel industry blithely continues to build power stations.Īt the latest when the rich and powerful are supposed to be held to account, we will no longer succeed without the collective power of the many. The focus on the individual becomes a problem only if and when we don’t see the possibility and need for collective action. The epochal challenges of our time will not be solved unless individuals take the initiative. To avoid misunderstandings: it’s of course laudable when individuals take on responsibility for the whole of society. Under the banner of intersectionality, attempts are made to unify the progressive forces once again. Yet the ‘yellow vest’ protests in France show what happens when you try to draw up the bill without consulting the people who will ultimately have to pay it. We ignore conflicts about material distribution, asymmetries of power and class interests – partly because of resignation in the face of the impotence of democracy, and partly because of a narrow ideological perspective. The one thing we don’t see in this worldview are structures. But here, too, the political reflex remains at the level of the individual – ‘I don’t want to!’ Or we can dream of an imaginary golden past by firmly rejecting every form of change. Acting independently, we can make the world a little bit better, beginning with our own lifestyle. To tackle this, ‘safe spaces’ are set up, the culprits are publicly shamed, language is purified, waste is separated and light bulbs are replaced. This way, we focus on the individual’s microaggressions, their transgressions and violation of environmental rules. And secondly because voluntary self-optimisation is an inadequate tool when it comes up against concentrated power and vested interests.īut if therapeutic self-optimisation is not an approach capable of solving collective problems, why does it find so much support right across the political spectrum? The answer has a lot to do with the fact that we have learned, over decades of neoliberal hegemony, to focus first – and often exclusively – on the individual. Firstly because, in a liberal society, everyone has the right to not join in. But what can work at the micro level is doomed to fail at the level of society as a whole. In the therapeutic society, individuals work on themselves with gusto because they see it as the key to solving social challenges, from gender equality to climate change. The internal logic and language of therapy have now made their way from couples therapy, team-building and management seminars onto the societal level. respectful and constructive) use of language. Therapy promises the resolution of human conflicts through a better understanding of one’s own needs (what do I really want?), the realistic management of expectations (what can I achieve?) and a more sensitive (i.e. If all this reminds you of psychotherapy’s promise of salvation, you’re not entirely wrong. It’s only if people show themselves stubbornly unwilling that the state is called on to intervene. And if they don’t, a hefty dose of moral pressure may help to change their minds. Ideally, individuals recognise the urgency of social problems and voluntarily alter their behaviour accordingly. Notwithstanding their differences, all these positions have one thing in common: they seek to solve collective challenges through individual behaviour. We talk about social problems as if they were lifestyle issues. Or: no headscarves, no quotas, no political correctness. Don’t look at anyone for more than 20 seconds.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |