Marx, Weber and Foucault (Part Two)

I just finished working on two essays for my Modernist Political Theory class with Prof. James Ingram at the University of Oregon. This is the second half of the second essay, which explores the writings of Marx, Weber and Foucault in the critique of freedom and equality. The first half of the essay is here, while the previous essay parts can be found here and here.

So how do they all agree?

To show the point, look towards Marx’s arguments. In his most well-known work, Capital, Marx makes his case against capitalism in the name of the down-trodden proletariat injured by the elite classes. He rails against the injustices committed by the system.

“We suffer not only from the development of capitalist production, but also from the incompleteness of that development. Alongside the modern evils, we are oppressed by a whole series of inherited evils, arising from the passive survival of archaic and outmoded modes of production, with their accompanying train of anachronistic social and political relations. We suffer not only from the living, but from the dead. Le mort saisit le vif!” (Marx, 218)

However, also note that he is not arguing against the idea of democracy, the form of political government, but rather against capitalism, an economic system based upon the ideal of democratic freedom. He does not want to subvert the rule of law, but rather expects capitalism to slide naturally and democratically into socialism. And he is not arguing against freedom, per se, but rather for equality.

His revolution is a bloodless one, and supported by the people. This distinction is an important one to make, and mirrored in the critiques of the other authors, because it serves to show how similar their underlying values are.

In analyzing Weber’s The Vocation Lectures, one sees an extensive argument in favor of two things: the role of science and religion in society, and increased legitimacy of political leaders. In doing so, Weber argues for a bureaucratization of politics, as seen in science and academia, and a offers a justification for elites as often existing due to inherent qualities such as competence and charisma, though he acknowledges systemic reasons as well.

“We can hear from that beautiful song of the Edomite watchman … in the book of Isaiah. “One calleth to me out of Seir, Watchman, what of the night? what of the night? [sic] The watchman said, Even if the morning cometh [sic], it is still night: if ye inquire already, ye will come again and inquire once more.” … From it we should draw the moral that longing and waiting is not enough and that we must act differently. We must go about our work and meet “the challenges of the day” –both in our human relations and our vocation. But that moral is simple and straightforward if each person finds and obeys the daemon that holds the threads of his life.” (Weber, 31)

In the above passage, Weber cites a biblical passage to his students in order to promote his idea of science and politics as being vocational in nature. And although the end result of this line of thought allows the divide between the common and the elite, it stems from a belief in freedom and fulfillment, rather than some advocacy of inequality or injustice. The bureaucracy is engendered in order to protect individual freedoms from a demagogue or tyrant, not limit them for the benefit of the leaders. Like Marx, Weber only hopes to use democracy to give the public more freedom and equality, but he is similarly caught up in the difficult relationship between the two ideas acting in on a broad scale.

Finally, in his previously-mentioned works Discipline and Punish and The Birth of the Prison, Foucault seems to attempt to avoid the problems experienced by Marx and Weber, and he tries to limit the focus of his book to those who have historically lacked both freedom and equality: the criminal, the soldier and the student.

Foucault describes the historical relationship between the criminal and the state, and clearly contrasts the brutality of early times with the relative humanity of contemporary forms of punishment and incarceration. He uses the example of the prison Panopticon as a jumping off point to explore a system that promotes that impersonal equality and blind justice that was so lacking in prisons, but also in schools and military barracks.

“The panoptic modality of power – at the elementary, technical, merely physical level at which it is situated – is not under the immediate dependence or a direct extension of the great juridico-political structures of a society.” (Foucault, 221)

“There is no risk, therefore, that the increase of power created by the panoptic machine may degenerate into tyranny; the disciplinary mechanism will be democratically controlled, since it will be constantly accessible ‘to the great tribunal committee of the world’.” (Foucault, 207)

Once again, it can be seen that this author really is a proponent of democracy, though he spends much of his book outlining plans to close the fist of control around the society. His plan is centered around leveraging the democratic society at large in order to prevent abuses and mini-tyrannies. From this perspective, the Panopticon concept is an equalizer: it restricts everyone in the same manner, to prevent a small number from being especially molested.

Now that each author has been examined, it is clear that their opinions can be seen as complementary, even if they seem to be in tension and opposition at first glance. For though they disagree in the details, in doing so they also affirm the broad principles that govern a democracy: the sovereign will of the people, the rule of law, the importance of individual freedoms and collective equalities.

While they would likely never agree on their separate concerns with modern democracy, it is safe to say that their disagreements have nothing to do with the idea of democracy itself, but rather with its symptoms.

Marx, Weber and Foucault (Part One)

I just finished working on two essays for my Modernist Political Theory class with Prof. James Ingram at the University of Oregon. This is the first half of the second essay, which explores the writings of Marx, Weber and Foucault in the critique of freedom and equality. The previous essay parts can be found here and here.

“If these lines ever reach America, I am certain of two things: first, that all readers will raise their voice to condemn me; second, that many of them will absolve me in the depths of their conscience.”

- Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

Prompt four: Marx, Weber, and Foucault argue that, despite its undeniable advantages, modern liberal democracy fails to deliver on its promise of freedom and equality. Compare their accounts of why this is, paying special attention to their comments on democracy and the rule of law. Do you think their accounts are complementary, or are they in tension?

Freedom and equality - two concepts most often considered by political scientists and philosophers (whether they are renowned authorities or argumentative students). They are simultaneously synonymous and dichotomous. With freedom must come equality, but promoting one often dampers the other. Modern liberal democracy promises an abundance of both, but the details often seem to get lost in the fine print. As such, it is often the target of critics who fault democracy as being unable to provide a desired level of either quality. And although few would return to the dictatorial style of government of old, there is certainly a wide range of proposals for change.

If my previous essay compared the method and aim of modern political criticism, then this essay is an examination of that criticism itself. All of the authors read for this term (Friedrich Nietzsche and all the rest) have explored democratic freedoms and equalities in their own way, and from very different perspectives. J.S. Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville write from the beginning of the 19^th century, when kings and emperors still ruled the world, while Michel Foucault wrote until the waning years of the Soviet Union. It comes to no one’s surprise that these authors take different perspectives on these considerations. But there is a common strain throughout their works: a certain admiration for the idea of democracy and the rule of law.

Karl Marx, Max Weber and Michel Foucault focus upon different aspects of Western democracy, but despite some tensions, their conclusions as to the future of that democracy are largely complementary. Though they take issue with certain parts of democracy, they, collectively and individually, affirm the principles for which it stands.

So how do a revolutionary, a scientist-bureaucrat and a disciplinarian come together to agree on a system that they spend so much time haranguing? It sounds like something of a bad joke. Marx, the well-known socialist, wants to up-end the system and institute a new order that promotes equality above all else; Weber counters this proposal by legitimating the hierarchy between the common and the elite; Foucault seems to take the mid-line between these two, by wanting everyone to be imprisoned equally.

Increased Cost of Commuting

I finished writing this enterprise article today. I've been meaning to write about rising gas prices since the beginning of the term, but it wasn't until the end of the year that I found an opportunity to do so. This article was submitted to my Reporting II class with Prof. Mark Furman, and I also sent it over to Gini Davis at the Creswell Chronicle, where it hopefully will be published next week. Let me know what you think!

Commuting Costs on the Rise

A daily commute to work, a child athlete, and errands in town. What do these three things have in common? They are driving commuters to the fuel pump, which is up a third in price since last year.

“We’re on the road a lot,” said Christopher Presley, a Creswell resident who works in Eugene at Hynix Semiconductor.

Presley has been following the same 30 minute commute in for the last four years, and he estimates that with his wife’s Honda Accord he spends $170 per month in fuel for the commute alone, never mind his three sport athlete son, Garrett.

“I would like to ride a bike,” Presley said. But Creswell is 10 miles south of Eugene on the freeway so biking that distance isn’t viable, and he calls the bus service “really inconvenient.”

Presley said that he is thinking about buying a scooter to help mitigate fuel costs, though he does have concerns about safety. When asked if he might try out his son’s efficient homebuilt motorized bike, he replied, “Oh hell no.”

Rising gas prices are forcing drivers to be more frugal in their fuel consumption, and to consider cheaper ways of getting to work. Public transportation, carpooling and smaller vehicles can be good ways to drive down costs, but safety and convenience can be real concerns.

For many people, like Richard Milne of Eugene, conflicting schedules make it difficult to use public transportation or set up a carpool with co-workers.

“It’s not really an option,” Milne said. As a coach and teacher at Creswell Middle School, most of his colleagues have left by the time his athletes go home.

And while more and more people are using the bus system, the Lane Transit District saw an increase in ridership of 16 percent over the last year, LTD Service Planning and Marketing Manager Andy Vobora says that funding concerns make it harder to make it more convenient for people like Milne and Presley.

“There’s a couple of tough years coming up,” Vobora said. He said budget cuts and a slow economy have mixed with rising oil prices that “couldn’t come at a worse time.”

80 percent of LTD payroll funding comes from taxes, and recession worries are making the service look for other sources of funding. Vobora expects a five to ten percent decrease in bus service next year.

But there is hope for Creswell. The Creswell / Cottage Grove bus route is the highest utilized of the rural communities around Eugene, with busses serving the community 10 times each day. While expansion is unlikely, the service probably will not be cut down.

“Don’t expect any changes to that route,” Vobora said.

So if bus service isn’t expanding, how can people save money on gas?

Companies are beginning to take notice of the commuter’s dilemma. LTD is working with them to provide vanpools to help employees, where vans are rented by LTD, fueled by the company and driven by employees to provide a cheaper and more accessible solution.

Van-pools can also be set up by the drivers themselves via the LTD website. The vans are centered around Eugene, but there are van pools that run all the way down from Corvallis.

Hynix spokesperson Bobby Lee said Eugene Hynix recently began offering the service, as well as on site bus service, and that biking and traditional car-pooling are also very popular.

Despite these options, high gas prices remain frustrating for drivers.

“The number one talk is gas prices,” Presley said. Narrowing down that cause is difficult, and will probably play a large role in election politics and national policies to come.

Presley says that he and his wife are leaning towards Barack Obama in the upcoming Presidential election, in part due to Obama’s fuel policy.

“It’s affecting our voting,” Presley said.

But Milne doesn’t think that prices at the pump will impact who he will vote for.

“I don’t spend that much time thinking about it,” Milne said. He compares the fuel crisis to similar worries in previous eras.“It’s a new wave of change that’s going to happen in my lifetime.

“It’s futures in Wall Street,” Presley counters. “It’s people in Wall Street, it’s Americans getting rich on Americans.”