8/8/2019 303343[1]

1/18

Postmodernism and Neoliberalism in Latin AmericaAuthor(s): Martn HopenhaynSource: boundary 2, Vol. 20, No. 3, The Postmodernism Debate in Latin America (Autumn,1993), pp. 93-109Published by: Duke University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/303343

Accessed: 01/09/2010 08:42

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=duke.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Duke University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to boundary 2.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=dukehttp://www.jstor.org/stable/303343?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=dukehttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=dukehttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/303343?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=duke

8/8/2019 303343[1]

2/18

Postmodernism and Neoliberalismin LatinAmerica

MartinHopenhaynThedebateaboutpostmodernismas,at itsextremes, wooppositepositions:Onthe one hand, hatof"postmodernnthusiasts," hoproclaimthe collapseof modernity,f itscultural ases, andof itsparadigmsnthesocialsciences, politics,art,andphilosophy;n the otherhand, he posi-tion of the "criticalmodernists," horecognize he crisis of modernitysa pointof inflectionhatdoes notsupposethe obsolescenceof modernity,but rather ormspartof its inherent ynamic.From hisperspective,post-modernisms no more hanmodernityeflectingn itselfandexplainingtsunresolved onflicts.'Thecriticalmodernists ee inthe postmodernnthusiastsan intel-lectual ad of the decade of the eighties,which, ikeallfads, is markedbyfrivolityndinconsistency. hepostmodernnthusiasts, n the otherhand,

1. In the origin of the debate, Lyotardis the postmodern enthusiast-The PostmodernCondition (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1985)-and Habermas the criti-cal modernist-"Modernity, an Incomplete Project," n TheAnti-Aesthetic, ed. Hal Foster(Port Townsend, Wash.: Bay Press, 1983), 3-15.boundary2 20:3, 1993. Copyright 1993 by DukeUniversityPress. CCC0190-3659/93/$1.50.

8/8/2019 303343[1]

3/18

94 boundary / Fall1993see inthe idea of the crisis of modernityhe reflection f a widerangeofpolitical,ntellectual,ndcultural henomenahat ranscend he academicfieldandpermeate he sensibility f the people,daily ife,andthe modelsof communication.2nthe following ages, we willsituateourselvesinanintermediate osition,one of "criticismithout enunciation"f modernity,butconceding o the postmodernismebatea series of political nd cul-tural mplicationshatpreventus fromsimplydismissingtpejorativelysan intellectualad.What intend s to incorporatehepostmodern erspec-tive inorder o enrichorre-createpostponed hallengeswithinmodernityitself.Iwill ummarize hepositions fpostmodernismn a schematicman-ner,emphasizingts ideological mbivalence nd its differenceswiththeparadigms ndoptionsofmodernity.hen,Iwillattemptosurvey hechal-lenges thatpostmodernism oses inLatinAmericanparticularyshiftingtheemphasis rom he so-calledcrisisofmodernityo theequallymportantquestionof the crisisofstylesof modernization,hichwill eadme to con-siderthe connectionsbetweenpostmodernismndthe currentnfluence fneoliberalismnLatinAmerica.In Lyotard'swell-known efinition, ostmodernisms the crisis ofmetanarratives.Metanarrativesreunderstoods the transcendentalate-goriesthatmodernityas inventednorder ointerpretndnormalizeeality.These categories-such as theadvancement f reason, he emancipationof man,progressive elf-knowledge, nd the freedomof the will-springfrom he projectof the Enlightenmentnd functiono integrate,n an ar-ticulateddirection,he processof the accumulationf knowledgeandthedevelopment f the productiveorces and of sociopoliticalonsensus andcontrol.Theyallrefer,nturn,o an idealizationf the idea ofprogress, hatis, theconvictionhathistorymarchesna determinedirectionnwhich hefutures, bydefinition,n improvementn thepresent.Themetanarrativesconstitutehecognitiveparametershatdeterminentelligible,ational,ndpredictableeality. erceptivehought onsistsofusing he facultiesof rea-son to get to the bottomof phenomena-be theyof nature,of history, rof society-in order o be ableto predictheirbehavior rationally."nthisway,themetanarrativesuthorize s to describeandnormalize;heyshowus howthingsare,wheretheyshould eadto, and how to resolve he gapbetweenwhat s andwhatshouldbe. In hissense, bothclassical iberalismand Marxism re inspired ya shared,Enlightenmentrigin,nvoking ni-2. Baudrillardas been perhaps he mostcharismatic epresentative f thisposition.

8/8/2019 303343[1]

4/18

HopenhaynPostmodernismndNeoliberalism5versalprincipleshathave,for a longtime,exhibited normousmobilizingcapacity.The postmodernists uestionthe force of the metanarrativesfmodernity. heypointoutthatsuch axiomaticategorieshavelostexplana-torycapacityandlegitimizingorce.Theyassociatethisobsolescence withdiversecauses, amongwhich hefollowingtandout:(1)the revolutionfparadigmsn the exact and natural ciences and its subsequent mpacton the social sciences; (2) the acceleration f technological hange andthe consequentdiversificationf processesandproducts,whichpreventsthe perceptionof society in homogeneousand extended unitiesand im-poses increasingly igherdegreesofcomplexity,movement, ndflexibilityon it;(3) the microcomputerevolution,nd the resulting iffusion f dataprocessing,whichbringsa proliferationf signs and languagesthatpul-verizesthe singlemodelof rationalityour ituation ecomesinterpretablefrommanypossibleperspectives, ccordingothe softwarewe use to dealwithdifferentproblemswe confront);4) the loss of the centrality f thesubjectina historical eriod nwhich he complexity f culturaltructuresand fragmentationmakes the idea of a generichuman dentity,neces-saryforprojectsof human mancipation,ollective elf-consciousness,orany globalutopia, nconceivable;5) the depersonalizationf knowledgethroughtsconversionnto hestrategicnput f newproductive rocesses,and the multiplicationf informationo totallyunmeasurableevels,whichimpedespreservinghe ideaof the subjectas the "bearer" f knowledgeand makes any ideology hatpretends o integrateavailableknowledgeinto a comprehensiventerpretationf the worldmpossible;inally 6) the"communicativecstasy"(Baudrillard)aused bythe combined ffects ofdataprocessing,capital lows,andtelecommunications,yvirtueofwhichnational rontiers nd regionaldentities redissolvingunder he dizzyingpace ofcommunication.Thediscourseof the postmodernituates tself na positionof con-summatedacts. Itdoes notpresenttselfas anattemptodemystifymoder-nitybut ratheras an ex post factoverification f the fact thatmodernityhas alreadyost itsmystique.Thepostmodernists,t leastexplicitly,o notpretend o precipitatehe entropy f the conceptsandvisionsthatgovernmodernity,uch as therationalityfhistory, rogress, nd ntegrationiathehomogenizationf values.Rather,heyclaim o recognize hisentropy nthecondition fthe present.Nevertheless,or hosewhohavefollowedhedebate, t s notclearwhetherhiscrisisanddeclineofthemetanarrativesf

8/8/2019 303343[1]

5/18

96 boundary/ Fall1993modernitys merelybeingdescribedor whethert is beingprovoked fromoutside"bythepostmodernnthusiasts hemselves.3 hisambiguityomesout of thecontingentdeologicalunctionshatpostmoderniscourse endsto assume,whichwe willexamine ateron.Theprincipalargetsof postmoderniscourseare,insummary:1. The idea of progress.Forthe postmodernists, istorydoes notmarchnanascendingpath;t sdiscontinuous,synchronic, regnantwithmultiple irections ndwithgrowingmargins funcertaintybout hefuture.There s no internal ndspecificrationalityhatregulateshe movement fhistorybut, rather,multiple,ncongruousorcesthatgive resultsthatareunexpected,provisional, artial, nddispersed.42.Theideaof a vanguard. incethere snosinglerationalityrdirec-tionalityo history, ven less recognizable ndlegitimates the aspirationof a groupthatappropriatesor itselfthe rationalnterpretationf historyand that deduces a normative irectionalityn a globalscale based onthisinterpretation. hethernpolitics, cience, art,orculture, ndwhetherthe vanguards the party,he state,the educational lite,or an aestheticmovement,noone can claim o constitutehegroupchosenor destinedtoestablish otalizingrientations.Oncethecategoryof thedirectionalityndrationalityf historys questioned,allvanguardseem to be investedwithauthoritariannddiscretionary ower.53. The ideaof modernizingntegrationr of integratingmoderniza-tion.6Accordingo the criteria fmodernization,eing nstepwith hetimesinvolvesincreasingproductivity,evelopingever-higherevels of formaleducation n the population,nd incorporatingn enlightened ensibilityintothe masses. Thisis rejectedbythe postmoderns. he Enlightenmentandthe industrialtopiashatarethe basis ofmodernityndthatpermitheunderstandingfdevelopments a progressive rocessofhomogenization3. "Postmodern ulturedoes not guide or lead the process of secularization;t is itsproduct.Specifically, t is the expressionof a hypersecularization.erhapswe shouldunderstand tas an ex post factorationalizationf a disenchantment." orbertLechner,"Lademocratizaci6n n el contextode una culturapostmoderna,"n Cultura oliticaydemocratizaci6n, d. NorbertLechnerSantiago:FLACSO/CLACSO/ICI,987),253-62.4. This,of course, was the lesson of Foucault.See CarlosPareja,Mas alladel mitodelprogreso (Montevideo: LAEH,987);andBenjaminArditi, Una ramaticapostmodernaparapensarlo social," nLechner,Cultura oliticay democratizaci6n, 69-88.5. See, on this point,OctavioPaz, "TheTwilightf the Avant-Garde,"n Children f theMire Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversity ress, 1974),148-64.6. See PedroMorand6,Cultura modernizaci6n n Am6ricaLatina Santiago:Cuader-nos del Instituto e Sociologia,PontificiaUniversidad at6licade Chile,1984).

8/8/2019 303343[1]

6/18

HopenhaynPostmodernismndNeoliberalism7areput ntodoubtbyascribingo theman excess of normativity,n ethno-centricbias and a pretensiono culturalohesion hatprovesanachronisticinlightof the "proliferationfvariety"f the "new imes."4. Ideologies.To the precedings added,forgood measure,thedisqualificationf all ideology,understood s an integrated ision of theworldhatallowsone to explaina greatdiversityfphenomenaroma fewbasicprinciples,rfromwhicha desired mageoforder, onsidereduniver-sallyvalid,canbe projected. hedisqualificationfideologiesautomaticallybringswithitthe disqualificationf utopias,understood s imagesof anidealsocial order hatpossess anorientingorce ordecision-makingn thepresentand thatprovide unified irectionalityowardhefuture. futopianthoughthas beenconsidered,romRenaissancehumanismo modernism,as an exerciseofthe freedomofspirit,npostmodernitytseems more ikean authoritarianuse.7If he "postmodernarrative"eclares heobsolescenceofthe ideaof progress,historical eason,vanguards,ntegratingmodernization,ndideologiesandutopias,what s itthatitproclaimsnexchange?Basically,theexaltation fdiversity,estheticandculturalndividualism,ultiplicityflanguages, ormsofexpressionandlife-projects,ndaxiologicalelativism.Thevagueness of thisproposal oes notdisturbtssupporters,ince it fitsinperfectlywith heideaof theindeterminacyf thefuture,which,accordingto them,sets thetone of thetimes.In hese generalorientations,hepostmodernarrativeorrowsrommultiple isciplinaryources. From nthropologyndethnologyt akes cul-turalrelativismndthe critique fethnocentrism.romphilosophyttakesthe critiqueof humanism nd of the centrality f the (universal/particu-lar, ree/conscious)subject,and from emiotics he primacy f structuresandsigns oversubjects.Fromantipsychiatryndthe "radical"ariantsofpsychoanalysist takes the exaltation f polymorphousesire andthe cri-tiqueof "philogeneticeductionism."rompoliticalheory ttakes the ideathatsociety is composedof an inextricablenterweavingf micropowersand "local,"atherhanuniversal, ower-games.Fromaestheticsittakes7. This negative evaluationof utopian houghtwas alreadypresentin the workof KarlPopper(e.g., TheOpenSocietyand ItsEnemies,5thed. [London:RoutledgeandKeganPaul, 1966]). Ina differentperspective,FranzHinkelammertlso undertakesa critiqueof specificformsof utopian hought n his Criticade la raz6nut6pica(San Jose, CostaRica:DEI,1984). See also my own "Construcci6nt6picay practicapolitica,"RevistaComunidad60 (1987):3-11; and "Mayo 8-Mayo 88: Realismoy revueltavienteanosdespues,"ElGalloIlustrado 353,Weeklyof ElDia(Mexico), 9 May1988.

8/8/2019 303343[1]

7/18

98 boundary / Fall1993the taste forcombining eterogeneous ndasynchronictyles (theclassi-cal and the romantic,hebaroque nd thefunctionalist,he rococoand thefuturist).Andfromsociologyittakes the recognitionf the heterogeneityandcomplexity f socialdynamics.Allofthismighteadoneto thinkhatpostmoderniscourse s a saneantidote otheexcessivelyethnocentric,ationalist,nd mechanist enden-cies of modern ociety.If hat s thecase, postmodernismouldbe thoughtofas an internalmovement fmodernitytself,a critiquemodernity uts ntoeffectinorder o exorcise tsentropy.But, nfact,postmodernismrequentlyacquiresverydifferent retensionsand functions: neffect, it transformsitselfinto an ideology,disguisingtsnormativeudgments s descriptions,andends upseeing what twants osee.Theideologizationf postmodern iscoursemaybe glimpsedwhenone focuses on the service thatit lends to the political-culturalffensiveof the market conomy.Postmodernisthetoric as beenprofitablyapital-ized on byneoliberalismnorder o update tslonged-for roject f culturalhegemony.Thisproject,he dreamof liberalismnitsformativetages, wasfrustrated ythe universalistthicof modernhumanism, ypoliticalmobili-zation,and/orbysocialpressures.Whatmanyneoliberalsaw,especiallyin the industrializedountries, s the possibilityhatreculturization,ia aseductivepostmodern arrative,ould erveto legitimizehe market ffen-sive of the eighties,inotherwords,couldmakethe desires of the publiccoincidewith he promotionf pro-marketoliciesandwith he consolida-tionof a transnationalapitalist ystem. It s no accident hat elementsofwhatwe arecalling he postmodern arrativeave been disseminated, tleast in good measure,by neoliberals nddisenchantedeftistsseducedbyanarcho-capitalism.8hatarethe connectionsbetweenpostmodernri-tiquesand the project f neoliberal ultural egemony?Schematically,hefollowing:1. The exaltation f diversityeads to the exaltation f the market,consideredas theonlysocialinstitutionhatorderswithoutoercion,guar-8. "But he dreamof the abolition f state powerno longer unctionsexclusivelyas partof the socialistvision of the future.On the otherhand,on the right ide of the politicalspectrum, hereappeareda radical onceptualizationf capitalismwhichsupportssimi-larconcepts. This unionof anarchismandcapitalism.. can be made plausibleby theprivatizationf up to nowstate functions"HansAlbert,quotedin FranzHinkelammert,"Utopia proyectopolitico:Laculturade la postmodernidad,"evistaNueva Sociedad91 [1987]:114-28).

8/8/2019 303343[1]

8/18

HopenhaynPostmodernismndNeoliberalism9anteeinga diversity f tastes, projects, anguages,andstrategies.Onlybyexpandinghe reachof the market an the interventionistndglobalizingexcesses of the state be avoided.The state itselfshouldbe restrictedosubsidiaryunctions n places wherethe market hows itselfto be insuf-ficient.Economicderegulationndprivatizationppearas almostad hocpolicies orthe fullrealization f the "ludicndividualism"eraldedby post-moderndiscourse.Deregulations the correlativenthe practical phereofthe theoretical elebration f diversity.nthe face of thiswager, nwhicheverythings potentiallyermissible, roblems f socialdisparity,tructuralheterogeneity,nsufficientevelopment,nd the like ose relevance.92. The critiqueof the vanguards ranslates nto:(a) a critiqueofthe transformationalunction f politics,unless the transformations inthedirection f privatizationndderegulationanarcho-capitalism);10nd(b)acritiqueof state planning nd interventionnthe organization, egulation,and direction f the economy (byreducinghe state to the status of onesocialactoramongothers, norder o thenobject o its interventionismsinvolvinghewill odomination f one actorover he rest).3. Without n emancipatory ynamic hat runs beneath events orthatguidestheactionsofhumanity,othing ermitshequestioningf con-sumersociety,waste,thealienation fwork,hegrowingplitbetween heindustrializednddeveloping ountries,ocialmarginality,echnocracy, rthe wayinwhichproductiveorcesare misused.4. Thecritique f ideologies ulminates,nparticular,na criticism fMarxismndits humanist-socialistariants;hecritique futopias endsto9. In hissense, a postmodern isionof LatinAmerica s provided yHernando e Soto'sbest-seller,Elotrosendero (Bogota:EditorialOvejaNegra,1987),translatedntoEnglishas The OtherPath(NewYork:Harper nd Row,1989).In hisbook,the Peruvian cono-mistanalyzedthe extensive informalconomyof Peruandarrived t the conclusion hatthe varietyof formsit displays,whichare unfolding espite state regulation, ives evi-dence of the benefitsof the market.Inthis way, de Soto transformed problem, heinformal ector, intoa virtue, gnoringhe vulnerabilityf resources and the poverty hataccompaniesthe vast majority f the informalector'spopulation.The book was heavilypromoted n LatinAmericaby neoliberal rganizations nd media,and RonaldReaganmentioned t withenthusiasm na speech.10. We findan exampleof this inJoaquinLavin'sbook,Larevoluci6n ilenciosa (San-tiago: Ed. Zig-Zag,1987), anotherrecentbest-sellerpromotedby the neoliberalmedia.As in de Soto's book,Lavin laboratesa political-culturaltrategyof market-hegemony,appropriatingermsthat, inthe past, were linked deologicallywith he criticismof capi-talism ("marginality,"informality,"revolution"),n orderto redirect hem as functionalstrategiesforthe expansionof the market.

8/8/2019 303343[1]

9/18

100 boundary / Fall1993focus inparticularn egalitarian topiasor on anyideal hatproposes,asa taskof the present, he redistributionfsocialwealthandpower.5. The critiqueof modernizing ntegrationransforms tructuralheterogeneitynto a healthyexampleof diversity nd relativizes onven-tional ndicatorsfdevelopment,uchas expandedandimprovedervicesinthe fieldsof healthandeducation.The synchronybetweenthe marketoffensiveand a cofunctionalpostmodernistulturalensitizing s noteworthy.tis herethat ouranaly-sis requiresprecision.Thedefense of a statusquo governedby unequalcompetition, ocial inequality,he willof the transnationals,nd the dis-cretionary elf-policingf financecapital annotbe automaticallyeducedfrom he verificationf the crisisof themodelsofmodernity.hediscursiveastutenessof postmodern eoliberalismesidesin itseffectivearticulationof euphemisms,whichthe interestsof the centersof politicaland eco-nomicpower,and of sectors identifiedwith he "free"conomy,can useto coverthemselveswithan aestheticaura hatundoubtedlymakesthemmoreseductive.It s moreattractiveotalkaboutdiversityhanthe market,aboutdesire than the maximizationf profits,aboutplaythan conflict,aboutpersonalcreativityhanthe privateappropriationf the economicsurplus,aboutglobalcommunicationndinteractionhanthestrategiesoftransnationalompaniesto promoteheirgoods and services. It is moreseductiveto speak infavorof autonomyhanagainstplanning, rin favorofthe individualhanagainst he state(andagainstpublic xpenditurendsocialwelfarepolicies).In hisway,thesocial contradictionsf capitalism,accentuatedon the LatinAmerican eriphery,isappearbehind he exal-tationof formsand languages.The economiccrisis-the worstwe haveexperienced n thiscentury-is hiddenunderheeuphemism f a beautifulanarchy,and structural eterogeneitys convertedntothe creativecom-bination f the modernandthe archaic,"our" eripheralncarnationndanticipationfthe postmodern.Theabovesuggests someof thewaysinwhichpostmodernismanbe used to producea "strategic"ackageof euphemismso dress uptheneoliberal roject f cultural egemony,which s the ideologicalorrelativeof the transnationalffensive, n a waythatpenetrates he sensibility fthe public. tdoes this,basically, y opposingan aesthetic ascinationwithchaostoanethicalconcernwithdevelopment. henegligenceofthefutureassumes the appealing igureof a passionfor the present.The postmod-ernnarrative, owever,s susceptible o many nterpretationsnduses. Itcannot be reduced to the marketoffensive and to the ideologicaluses that

8/8/2019 303343[1]

10/18

Hopenhayn PostmodernismndNeoliberalism101some neoliberalstrategies make of it." This is so fora numberof reasons.Inthe firstplace, many enthusiasts of the postmodern narrativeare politi-cally situated at a considerable distance from neoliberalpositions.12 Inthesecond place, positions such as the passion forthe present, aestheticism,the exaltation of diversity, he rejectionof ethnocentrism,the desire foropensocieties, the returnto pluralist ndividualism, ulturalpolymorphism,andthe prioritizationf creativitycan be adaptedto politicalprojectsof anotherkind.Inthe thirdplace, the questioningof culturalparadigmsand matrices,in lightof emerging scenarios, does not necessarily lead to the defenseof anarcho-capitalism. Finally, he critiqueof paradigmsthat have directedthe styles of modernizationand development has also generated alterna-tive proposals and/or visions that, far from unitingwith the deregulatingoffensive of the market,seek to mobilize social creativity ntotallydifferentdirections.The followingconsiderations,oriented to LatinAmericanreality,maybe indicativeof such directions:1. The industrialmodel, centered in the substitutionof imports,wasdiscovered to have less integratingcapacity than was supposed at its be-ginning,as muchinterms of its internal nsufficienciesas of exogenous vari-ables (the heritageof Catholicism,etc.). The model also produceddestruc-tive, collateraleffects, especially by imposingan imitativepatterninwhich,in the name of modernization,questions of cultural dentityand ecologicalpreservationwere relinquished o sectors that incorporatedhe values and11. "Theeverythinggoes [of postmodernism]s neitherconservative,norrevolutionary,norprogressive .... Inreality,whathas triumpheds the cultural elativismwhichbeganits rebellionagainstthe fossilization f class-cultures ndagainstthe ethnocentricdomi-nance of an exclusive, correct,and authentic ulture"Agnes Heller,"Losmovimientosculturalescomo vehiculo de cambio,"RevistaNueva Sociedad 96 [1988]:44). Inthearticlepreviously ited, Lechnerobserves, "postmodernultureassumes hypersecular-ization nitstendency oseparatesocialstructures rom alue andmotivationaltructures.Thatis, it accepts the liberal isionof politicsas a market: n exchange of goods. Andwhathappensto nonexchangeable oods? Iamreferringo humanrights,psycho-socialnecessities such as social rootsandcollectivebelonging,he necessityoftranscendentalreferents,butalso to fear andthe desire forcertainty. do not see anyconsideration fthis inpostmodern ulture"258). ButLechner lso shares Heller's ision of the value ofthe relativizingunction hatpostmodern iscoursecan exercise inthe face of ideologicaland political eductionism.12. Among them are includedsome figuresalreadymentionedhere (Arditi,Lechner,Pareja,Baudrillard,nd Lyotard) nd othersfrom he Anglo-Saxonworld,such as HalFoster,CraigOwens,and Fredric ameson.

8/8/2019 303343[1]

11/18

102 boundary/ Fall1993expectationsof industrialulture, t thesametime eavingothersectorsina positionof frustratedxpectations, ondemnedo socialmarginalityndeconomicinformalityythe same modelofdevelopmenthatsaw the de-sired benefitsof growthpass themby.The insufficiencies rtrade-offs fthismodeldo not,however, aveto impelus toa neoliberal lternative. hedynamic nsufficienciesf accumulation,otedbythe EconomicCommis-sion on LatinAmericaCEPAL)ora long ime,and heprocessofeconomicgrowthwithout ocial equity,whichhas characterized ur countriesevenin times of relative onsensus regardinghe modernizationaradigm, onotfinda remedy nthe neoliberal rescriptions. nthecontrary,uchpre-scriptionsharpen heregressiveendencies nmatters fsocialintegrationandbalancedgrowthnsteadof bluntinghem.Finally, eoliberalismmas-sivelypromotesmitative atterns f consumptionhathavevery ittle o dowiththe exaltation f diversity nd the criticism f ethnocentrism. opro-mote, ntheparticular,diversityntheconsumptionfgoodsandservicesmaywell be a formofpromoting,nthegeneral,a specific,andimplacable,economic ogic.2. Thestyles of modernizationnLatinAmericahaveshownan ex-cessive privilege finstrumentalationalityversubstantiveationality.on-sequently,heyhavedelegated nstrumentalnowledge ndpower o eliteswhohavenotacquiredepresentativeegitimacyndwhohaveoften endedtoward echnocracy.Thepredominanceftechnical eason has frequentlyresulted n the sacrificeof socialparticipationndecisionsand measures,andina democracy estricted y hepower f"expertise."uriously,he un-critical xaltationhatpostmoderneoliberalsmakeof the new echnologiesdoes not reversethistendencybutrather elebrates t,under he pretextthat he newtechnologiesare"spontaneously"ecentralized. acedwithasimilar"technologist"riumphalism,hewarnings f the Frankfurtchooltotheeffectthat hecrisisofmodernityoes nothaveitscause ina supposedentropyof substantive ationalityr of collectiveutopias,but rathernthegrowingpredominancef instrumentaleasonover he values andutopiascharacteristicf humanism cquireull orce nLatinAmerica.13henatureof the corporatenterests nvolvednthe deregulationf the accelerationof technological hangeandthe productivistuphoriahataccompanies tdoes not annulbutrather onfirmshese "modern"uspicions.13. On thispoint,see the classic essays: MaxHorkheimernd TheodorW.Adorno,"TheDialecticof Enlightenment"ndMaxHorkheimer,ACritique f Instrumental eason," ntheirDialecticof EnlightenmentNewYork:Herder ndHerder, 972).

8/8/2019 303343[1]

12/18

HopenhaynPostmodernismndNeoliberalism033. Itis essentialto examine he roleof the state in LatinAmericansocieties in morethan one aspect. Inthe economicaspect, the centralityof the state in stimulatingevelopment as entered ntoa crisis of effec-tiveness. It s notnecessaryto be neoliberalo object o statehypertrophy,the gigantismof the public ector,or the rigidityf the bureaucracies.nthe political spect,theexaminationf thestate'srole s related o the newvitality f the themeof democracy,ts principles nd its mostappropriateforms.Theemphasison socialagreement, itizenparticipation,ecentral-ization, ivilsociety,andautonomy n a localorregionalcale aimto mini-mize the coerciveeffectsof the state and to increase ts sociallegitimacyas an articulatorfdifferentocialactors.Allof the abovedoes notsupposethe alternative f laissez-faire,however.The markethas notproven o be the most efficientmechanismof decentralization,emocratic articipation,ndautonomy.Undoubtedly,the markethasmadeimportantontributionsoeconomicdynamism ndercertain ircumstances ndinsomecountries.But requently,thas requiredthe helpof authoritarianndrepressive overnmentso avoid he conflictsgeneratedby its discriminatoryffects in mattersof access to goods and

services.4. It s importanto reconsiderhe roleof planningnthe economicand socialordering nddirectionalitymposedby development.Thissup-poses the critiqueof normative lanning,he incorporationf new per-ceptual nputs nthe exercise of the planner,he revision f the dominantrationalitiesedimented nthe practiceof planning, nd a greatercoher-ence inthe articulation etweenthe technicalandpolitical imensions nthe decisionprocesses.14 his,however, oes notforce he renunciationfplanningnorthe reduction f itto its minimalxpression.Nordoes itsup-pose thatall plannings the negationof diversity,he predominancef atechnocraticaste,ortheinhibitionfautonomy. lanningsopposed o thenegligenceof the future,'5utitdoes not have to sacrificepassionfor thepresent.This uture irectionalityan,providedtfinds tsappropriateorms14. On thispoint,see the papersfrom he ILPES Instituto atinoamericano del Caribede Planificaci6nEcon6mica Social),Revistade la CEPAL,1 (1987);and CarlosMatus,Planificaci6nde situaciones(Caracas:CENDES,1977).15. No one can doubtthatthe same transnationalorporations,n largemeasure linkedto the crisis of state planningandthe mostenthusiastic bout hiscrisis),planallthe timeand investconsiderablesums for this. The strategyof the accelerationof technologicalchange andof growingdiversificationf products esponds o an attentiveobof planningbythe transnationals.

8/8/2019 303343[1]

13/18

104 boundary/ Fall 993of application, ive meaning o the present.Itis not a questionof doingawaywithplanning utofdesigningt innewwaysto meet thechallengesof postmodernity.5. In andemwith hepreviouspoint,hecritique f thedirectionalityof ourpresenthistorydoes nothaveto be confusedwith he rejection falldirectionality.What s inquestionare the stylesof lineardevelopmenthatuse the presentstate of the advanced ndustrialcenter"ountriesas theguidingmodelfor the future.Thisis so fortwo reasons: nthe firstplace,because of growingdifficultiesausedbythedisproportionalemandsforinvestment apital orindustrialeconversion nd forcompetitiveesearchand development,andthe impossibilityf servicing he foreigndebtandstimulatingnternalrowth t the sametime; nthesecondplace,becausethe social and cultural osts of an imitativeevelopment re too highandunethicalunder he pressureof thecrisis.Thiscrisisof directionality,ow-ever,is not resolved hrough eregulation. nthecontrary,eregulationssimply he new versionof developmentwitha still-imitative odeland,forthe same reason,a specificdirectionality.6. Newpolitical,conomic,andtechnologicalonditionsmakeever-moredifficulthe desiredconfluenceof individualrojectsna jointprojectfor he transformationfsociety.Theprogressive emystificationf socialistexperiences, he social disarticulationausedbythe installationf repres-sivepolitical egimesandbywork-forceecomposition,he substitutionfin-surrectionalptionsbyarranged rnegotiatedettlementsntheresolutionof political onflicts-these have taken he mobilizingorceawayfrom heidea of revolution. heproliferationfcorporatenterests,hedisintegrationofthe traditionalorking-classmage, hefragmentationfidentities,whichmakesthe unitarymageof a "people"eem almostmetaphysical,he ac-celeratingnformalizationndtheproliferationf the mostvaried trategiesof survival-all of these factorsweaken he formulationf globalprojectsofstructuralhange capableofmotivatingastsocialsectors.Onceagain,however,crisis does notsupposethe collapsebutrathera challengetoplanning.Thecollapsewilloccurwhenthe crisisofprojectseadstoa kindof lazinessdisguisedas pragmatism,nwhichpoliticss convertednto hemere administrationfcrisis.Anunethical nd unaesthetic lternative.

Among he alternative roposalsand/orperceptionshatattemptofinda solutionothe crisisof modernizationnLatinAmericawithoutdenti-fyingwith he neoliberal rogram,twouldbefittingo mentionhefollowing:1. Thereappraisalf democracyor its intrinsic alue and as an in-dispensable rame ordynamicallyoining pluralityf socialinterestsand

8/8/2019 303343[1]

14/18

HopenhaynPostmodernismndNeoliberalism05demands.Politicalheorycertainly ffersdiverseconceptionsof democ-racy.But faced with the growing omplexity f the social fabricand theconsequentcrisisof authority,he kindof democracypositedas desirableis one based on extensivesocialagreement.16uchan agreements con-ceived as a platformorresolvingonflicts etween ectorswitha minimumof coercionand forarticulatingnthe mostharmoniouswaythe relationsbetweenthe state and civilsociety,the technicalandpolitical imensionsof development,planning ndthe market,he microand the macro,andthe localand the national.A democracywitharticulatoryapacitywouldpermitheoptimizationf levelsof socialparticipation,hedecentralizationof decision-making rocesses,the apportionmentf resourcesamongthevariousagentsofdevelopment, ndtheequitable istributionf the bene-fitsofgrowth.Finally, democracyounded n socialagreements the mostappropriatemeansforencouraging culture f civiccoexistence hatcouldconceiveprojectswith ociallegitimacy.2. The reorientationf planningntune with he new scenariosofsocial crisis and complexity.This supposes the relativizationf mecha-nisticparadigms nd requiresworkingwithgrowingevels of uncertaintyabout hefuture, penoutcomesandongoing, ontinuingdjustments,heactivation nd coordinationf dispersedsocialenergies,fields of multipleinteraction,nd mechanisms f cohesion hatcan articulateocialprojectswithouthomogenizing.3. Thechangeof perception nd attitude f social scientistsintheface of reality. nthe decade of the sixties,the analyticalxerciseof soci-ologywas, ingoodmeasure,determined ythe idea of a "militantcience"that was identifiedwitha modelof the state and socialorganizationhatprojectedan extremenormativismn questionsof the styles of develop-ment.Atpresent,a considerable umber f socialscientists nthe regionhaveoptedforgreaterdisciplinary umility,romwhich heyseek to com-prehend he complexity fdynamicshatare createdbetween he multiplesocial actors.Ina sense, theriskofglobalprojectshasbeensubstituted ythe "prudent"bservation f intrasocietalrticulations.1716. There s much iteraturehatpoints nthis direction.Thefollowing xamplesare note-worthy:NorbertLechner,La conflictivay nunca acabada construcci6ndel orden de-seado (Santiago:EdicionesAinavillo, LACSO, 984);AngelFlisfisch,"Consensodemo-craticoen el Chileautoritario,"n Lechner,Cultura olitica y democratizaci6n,99-128;NorbertLechner comp.),Estadoy politicaen Am6ricaLatina Mexico:SigloXXI,1981),andGinoGermani t al., Los limitesde la democracia(BuenosAires:CLACSO, 985).17. The influenceof AlainTouraine s wellknown nthistendency nLatinAmerica.Tou-

8/8/2019 303343[1]

15/18

106 boundary/ Fall 9934. The reappraisal f social movementsabove politicalpartiesas

protagonistsnthe rearticulationetweencivil ocietyandthestate.18 uchanoption ollows rom,ngoodmeasure, herelativencapacityfthe tradi-tionalsystemof political arties o fulfillhefunction f mediation etweensocial demandsand the state apparatus.The crisis of the partysystemhas givenplaceto a search for newformsof doingpolitics, r at least thediversificationf political ractices. nthatcontext,socialmovementsap-pearto be the bearersof newor differentogicsof collective nterests, ncontrasto the hierarchicalniformityhatcharacterizes arty rganization.The reappraisalf social movementsalso aimsto recover he richnessofthe socialfabric s opposed oa statethathasseldom aken t ntoaccount.5. The emergenceof new social movements,or grass-rootorga-nizations,or "popularconomicorganizations,"nd the enthusiasm hatthis proliferationf initiatives wakensin some academiciansand politi-cians disenchantedwithconventionalpproachesodevelopment.19hesenew socialmovements,as sociologistshavetaken ocalling hem,occupysectors of informalityhatdevelopat the community,r local, level, andtheyareorganizedaround ollective trategiesof survival r newformsofchannelingdemands.Inpractice,heycombinediverse unctions, uch astheadministrationfscarcity,hemobilizationfdispersed ocialenergies,the de-hierarchizationf productionelations,he construction f collec-

rainepositsthatthe reorientationf sociologytowardhe comprehension f social actorscoincideswith he political eappraisalfdemocracy.See his Le Retourde I'acteur Paris:Fayard,1984).18. See, forexample,Elizabeth elin(comp.),Movimientosociales y democraciaemer-gente (Buenos Aires:CentroEditorde Am6ricaLatina,1987);AlainTouraine,Nuevaspautas de acci6n colectiva en Am6ricaLatina Santiago:PREALC, 984); FernandoCalder6n(comp.), Los movimientos ociales ante la crisis (Buenos Aires:CLACSO,1986);FernandoCalder6nand MarioR. dos Santos, "Movimientosociales y gestaci6nde culturapolitica:Pautas de interogaci6n,"n Lechner,Cultura olitica y democratiza-ci6n, 189-98; and EnzoFaletto,"Propuestas arael cambio:Movimientosociales en lademocracia,"n Revista Nueva Sociedad 91 (1987):141-47.19. Forexample, see TilmanEvers,"Identidade: face oculta dos novos movimentossociais," in Novos Estudos CEBRAP 1984), 11-15; Jose LuisCastagnola,Participa-ci6ny movimientos ociales (Montevideo: uadernosde CLAEH9, 1986);LuisRazeto,Economiade solidaridady mercado democratico,two vols. (Santiago: ProgramadeEconomiadel Trabajo, 984-1985); LuisRazetoet al., Lasorganizacionesecon6micaspopulares (Santiago:Programa e EconomiadelTrabajo, 983);DevelopmentDialogue,Special issue (Dec. 1986);and MartinHopenhayn,"Nuevosenfoques sobre el sectorinformal,"ensamientoIberoamericano 2 (July-Dec. 1987):423-28.

8/8/2019 303343[1]

16/18

HopenhaynPostmodernismndNeoliberalism07tive identity,he socializedprovision f basic necessities, the promotionof community articipation,nd the searchfordemocracyn smallspaces(or democracy n daily ife).It is noteasy to weighthe capacityof thesemovementso permeatehesocialfabric ndto influencehetechnical ndpoliticaleadership.Their mergence,however, ositsa challenge,namely,to recuperate opular reativityndimpelnew"cultures"fdevelopment.Thepostmodern ebatecanbe fruitfulnthe sense that tpermits,ngeneral, he articulationf the cultural imension f development. tsviewof modernity llowsus to interprethe crisisof stylesof modernizationsa cultural risis.With his,newlights shed ontheobscurityhatpresentlyenvelops economicstrategiesand the policiesof financial djustment rcontrol, ndthe discussionofpoliciesandstrategiess provided itha morecomprehensiveontext romwhich t s possible o articulatemmediate p-tions inthe operation f nationalprojectsorconcreteutopias.The returnto the cultural imensionof developmentpermitshe re-creation f hori-zons that infusepoliticsandpolicieswitha mobilizingorcethatconvenesandcommits ocial actors.The celebration f the newsocialmovementsshowsa concern or he constitutionf collectivedentities, etheyregionalor sectorial.The preference orsocial movements,as opposedto politi-cal parties,privilegesnew logicsof socialdynamism,he searchfor newformsof doingpolitics,and an ad hocgroundingf the exaltation f diver-sity.Thereappraisalfdemocracy ndpluralism oints o theconsolidationof a democratic ultureand notonlya majority-electedovernment.Thereorientationf planning utsinplacea changeintheparadigmsf the in-terpretationndpredictionfreality,ndrequires revolutionnperceptualstructures, s wellas inplansandprograms. he reorientationf the socialsciences also impliesa changeinthe formofcomprehendingocialreality,startingrom he verificationf the progressiveomplexity,ncreasingdis-articulation,ndpolymorphismf the social fabric. nallof these formsof"gropingn the dark,"he tension between instrumentalnd substantivereason,or betweenmeans and ends, is once againat issue. Is this not,perhaps,one of the greatestcultural ilemmas f modernity? s we notedatthe beginning,hepostmodernebatemaywellbe anattempto removethe cultural ase on which he road o modernizationnLatinAmericahasbeen constructed, e itsuccessfulorfrustrated,penor truncated.But hisdoes notnecessarily mplyhatthe invention f utopiasand the designofprojectshas to be renounced, orpoliticsimitedolazinessand thecynicaladministrationf crisis.Nordoes itmeanthatneoliberalismas to be em-braced. On the contrary, tis through he thematic insistence on the cultural

8/8/2019 303343[1]

17/18

108 boundary/ Fall 993foundation f modernizationhatwe can breakwith he neoliberal iciouscircleandwith hortsightedompulsion,ftendisguisedas pragmatism.Postmodernismequireshat we open ourperceptiono new con-texts. Ourbattery f interpretiveools cannotremainunchangedacedwithphenomena uch as theaccelerationftechnologicalhange,occupationalrecomposition,he deregulation f the financial ystem,the transnation-alizationof culture hataccompanies he globalizationf markets, ocialdisarticulation,ndtheconstrictionf resourcesandmargins foperation.Specifically,hechallengeconsists ofenrichingmanyoftheconceptsthat,for a longtime,permitted s to criticallyelateourselves o modernity, iththe aim of restoringheir ostefficacy.Therefunctioningf such conceptsinthe lightof newtimescan lendgreatassistanceforunderstandingurcontextandorientingur ask.Iamreferringoconcepts,orvalues,suchasalienation,he satisfaction fsocialneeds,structuralhange,socialpartici-pation,personaldevelopment,ocialsubjectivity,ndemancipationrompovertyand political ppression.Noneof these proves o be irrelevant rarbitraryoday.Inthe same way,itwouldnotbe sensible to renounce he interpre-tive and predictive ichnessof a structuralocus on peripheralapitalism.Thisfocus has permitted,nthe past,the exerciseof a notablecritical ndconstructiveapacitywithrespect o thestylesofmodernizationmplantedinLatinAmerica nd continues o encourageorientationsnd alternativesinthe present.20Many f itssuspicionsandwarnings egardinghe modelsof developmentnforcecontinue o be confirmed:he regressive endencyof the terms of exchange,the dynamic nsufficiencyf accumulationnperipheral apitalism,he difficultiesf reconciling rowthandequity,andstructuraleterogeneity,t cetera.21Moreover, e do notpossess anotherinterpretiveocus capableof givinga specificsense of totality nd coher-ence to the heterogeneityharacteristicf the processesof modernizationinLatinAmerica.Nevertheless,his focus cannotbe takenas prescriptive.Itsopeningto the alreadymentionedproblematicf social complexity rprogressiveuncertainty ecessitatesa critical evisionof the mechanisticparadigmwithwhich tusuallyoperates.20. Forexample,see the recentworksofOsvaldoSunkel, uchas "Las elacionescentro-periferia la transnacionalizaci6n,"ensamiento beroamericano1(Jan.-June 1987).21. Inthe extensivebibliographyf RaulPrebisch, he followingexts deserve to be citedhere: "Estructuracon6micay crisisdel sistema,"Revistade la CEPAL1978):167-264,and the bookCapitalismo erif6rico:Crisisy transformaci6nMexico:Fondode CulturaEcon6mica,1981).

8/8/2019 303343[1]

18/18

Hopenhayn Postmodernismnd Neoliberalism109Insummary,the question we are consideringhere can be posed in

the followingterms: How can the postmodern debate be incorporatedinorder to reactivate the culturalbase of development, withoutit leading tothe postmodernismfunctionally nherentin the projectof political-culturalhegemony of neoliberalism?How do we creatively confrontour crisis ofparadigmsand projects,without his confrontation ubmergingus in a twi-light "pathos"where the only option is the administrationof entropy,theuncriticalacceptance of a status quo that is criticalof itself? How do we re-interpret he challenges of planning,the role of the state, and the program,or programs,of modernization n lightof this inevitableculturalearthquakeannounced by the postmodern trumpets? How can we integrate the cri-tique of ethnocentrism(and along withit,the critiqueof imitativemodels ofdevelopment) without eadingto fantasies, fundamentalisms,regionalisms,particularisms,or other formsof wishfulthinking?The challenges and problemsthat are presented are very complexand can stimulate impotence as well as creativity.The multifacetedandstructuralcharacterof the crisis situates us before a moment of maximumentropy that is, in turn,a moment of intensity.That is our weakness, butalso our strength. Inthe throes of this dilemma,we go from enthusiasm todesperation, postmoderns by osmosis in the midst of a still-pendingmod-ernization.