What Is To Be Done (With Lenin)?
By Slavoj Zizek | 1.21.04
... How does freedom effectively function in liberal democracies? Although Clintons presidency epitomized the Third Way of todays (ex-) Left succumbing to the Rightist ideological blackmail, his healthcare reform program would nonetheless have amounted to a kind of act, at least in todays conditions, since it would have been based on the rejection of the hegemonic notions of the need to curtail Big State expenditure and administrationin a way, it aimed to do the impossible. No wonder then that it failed. Its failureperhaps the only significant, although negative, event of Clintons presidencybore witness to the material force of the ideological notion of free choice. That is to say, although the large majority of the so-called ordinary people were not properly acquainted with the reform program, the medical lobby (twice as strong as the infamous defense lobby!) succeeded in imposing on the public the fundamental idea that, with universal healthcare, the free choice (in matters concerning medicine) will be somehow threatenedagainst this purely fictional reference to free choice, all enumeration of hard facts (in Canada, healthcare is less expensive and more effective, with no less free choice, etc.) proved ineffective.
We are here at the very nerve center of the liberal ideology: the insistence on freedom of choiceso urgent today in the era of what sociologists like Ulrich Beck call risk societyeven as the ruling ideology endeavors to sell us the very insecurity caused by the dismantling of the Welfare State as the opportunity for new freedoms. Do you have to change jobs every year, relying on short-term contracts instead of a long-term stable appointment? Why not see it as the liberation from the constraints of a fixed job, as the chance to reinvent yourself again and again, to become aware of and realize hidden potentials of your personality? Can you no longer rely on the standard health insurance and retirement plan, so that you have to opt for additional coverage for which you have to pay? Why not perceive it as an additional opportunity to choose: either better life now or long-term security? And if this predicament causes you anxiety, the postmodern or second modernity ideologist will immediately accuse you of being unable to assume full freedom, of indulging in the escape from freedom, of the immature sticking to old stable forms. Even better, when this situation is inscribed into the ideology of the subject as the psychological individual pregnant with natural abilities and tendencies, one automatically interprets all these changes as the results of their personality, not as the result of being thrown around by market forces.
Phenomena like these make it all the more necessary today to reassert the opposition of formal and actual freedom in a new, more precise, sense. Let us take the situation in the Eastern European countries around 1990, when the Really Existing Socialism was falling apart: all of a sudden, people were thrown into a situation of freedom of political choicehowever, were they really at any point asked the fundamental question of what kind of new order they actually wanted? People were first told that they are entering the promised land of political freedom; then, soon afterwards, they were informed that this freedom involves wild privatization, the dismantling of the social security, etc.etc. They still have the freedom to choose, so if they want, they can step out; but, no, our heroic Eastern Europeans didnt want to disappoint their Western tutors, they stoically persisted in the choice they never made, convincing themselves that they should behave as mature subjects who are aware that freedom has its price. And here one should risk to reintroduce the Leninist opposition of formal and actual freedom: the moment of truth in Lenins acerbic retort to his Menshevik critics is that the truly free choice is a choice in which I do not merely choose between two or more options within a pre-given set of coordinates, but I choose to change this set of coordinates itself. The catch of the transition from the Really Existing Socialism to capitalism was that people never had the chance to choose the ad quem of this transitionall of a sudden, they were (almost literally) thrown into a new situation in which they were presented with a new set of given choices (pure liberalism, nationalist conservatism). ...
<http://www.inthesetimes.com/print.php?id=568_0_4_0>
Carl
_________________________________________________________________ High-speed usersbe more efficient online with the new MSN Premium Internet Software. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=byoa/prem&ST=1