Monday, January 9, 2017

Zygmunt Bauman is dead: He put the pithy words of our time – financial times


There are thinkers one can come up with to refer to or quote without really knowing when or where you read it.

This is a kulturartikel. It is the writer who stands for the views that are put forward in the text, not the newspaper Aftonbladet.

Jürgen Habermas, Pierre Bourdieu, Hannah Arendt.

Polish-british sociologist Zygmunt Bauman, who died in Monday night’s 91-year-old, was one of them.

His ability to be constantly up to date by taking on her time, the new questions, and his humanism, and in which solidarity between people, compassion, and morality, always weighs heavier than the economy, the government or the rationality requirement, makes him one of the truly great intellectuals of his generation.

His own life personified a piece of european and jewish history. As a secular jew, he fled in his teens with his family from the nazi invasion of Poland, enrollerades in soviet military service and took part in the liberation of both Poland and Germany. He was a communist, and made a career in the Polish state. But only just over 20 years later, it was time to leave the country again – this time for good – to escape the pogroms in Poland in 1968. He settled in Britain and became a professor at Leeds.

There is no bold speculation to this the experience of a double exile and the experience of two different states of oppression played a role in the subjects he, in different forms, devoted his academic life to, not the least of modern society utdefiniering, control and in the worst case the destruction of those classified as aliens.

How good the intentions are to establish a well-ordered society, there will always be groups that are put outside, says Bauman. They are the most threatening, which through its existence confirms the "we" created. The jews in Europe is the most terrible example.

the Holocaust, so obeyed the thesis in his famous work Auschwitz and the modern society (1989) was not a temporary break with the trend in Europe, but were inherent in the modern society itself. It required careful bureaucratic planning, logistics, technology, and millions of conscientious citizens who themselves hate the jews, did their job.

This era of högmodernitet, or what Bauman calls "solid modernity", which rested on the (relatively) circumscribed nation-states, national välfärdsarrangemang and industrial production, is today about to be replaced by the Bauman denotes "liquid modernity". In this society wear the social bonds between people apart in a long time, individualism and konsumtionshets. No old promises, which have work today but tomorrow, all the fixed volatile and the world becomes an insecure place.

It is perhaps not completely original mind after a couple of decades of globaliseringsdebatt, but Bauman had a special ability to capture the displacements. You may sometimes annoyed at the lack of empirical evidence – he was no siffertrixare – but it is not going around that he was often very pithy set of words in our time.

An example of this is his thesis on the postmodern state transformations, performed in her essay collection, Collateral Damage (2011). The ultramodern welfare state’s raison d’être, argues Bauman, was to make the future more predictable, the failures less fatal. We would be protected from the economy’s fluctuations, against sickness and unemployment. Kapitalmakten inbäddades in the society, with regulations, unionisation, and a cultural consensus that everyone would with.

But with the globalisation of capital became the national policy, more powerless. Inequality exploded, but the problems individualiserades: illness, unemployment, poverty, has increasingly become the individual’s thing to take responsibility for.

Baumans points: we need to state that we are threatened. Therefore, the need state threats.

And if the economy is not something to do about, so get the focus of other threats: terrorists, criminals, immigrants – those areas where politics still has the power.

This is a topical observation.

But even more burning: Bauman did not see the solution on this far-reaching separation of politics and power, where power has been internationalised, but the policies are still national, in the reactionary attempts to restore nationalstatsmakten. It is probably not possible, and in any case immoral. We can’t block the us from either the world’s suffering or global chains.

His utopia was to the political power – democracy in any form – must be re-established at the supranational level.

It is an internationalist, and in Baumans bottling socialist dream, which may not die with him.


No comments:

Post a Comment