PARTECIPAZIONE E CONFLITTO (Participation and conflict), SCOPUS Journal of
Socio-Political Studies
Volume 10, Issue 2, 2017
http://siba-ese.unisalento.it/index.php/paco <
http://siba-ese.unisalento.it/index.php/paco>
Call for paper for the Special issue on:
De-Politcization in the Neoliberal Era: Its Features and Consequences
Editor: Fabio de Nardis, CSPS - University of Salento [email:
fabio.denardis@??? <
mailto:fabio.denardis@unisalento.it>]
The objective of this special Issue is to collect contributions on the
theme of the De-Politicization of the [representative] politics in the era
of neoliberalism.
De-politicization has been defined in many ways [Foster et al. 2014]. We
consider it, in short, to be a set of changes in the ways power is
exercised. These modes downgrade the political nature of decision-making
[Burnham 2001] and, through representation, give legitimacy to actors
apparently less able to bear witness to the presence of the political
[Wood and Flinders 2006; Hay 2007]. Politics appears less responsible for
the decisions that affect the regulation of society and the impact of
their costs and failures on economic and cultural processes. Political
choices conditioned by the market acquire the character of necessity and
inevitability. De-politicization has been consolidated in various ways. In
the European context, a government, a discourse and social
de-politicization have, in particular, been observed [Hay 2007].
The de-politicization of government in turn has different facets,
concerning the polity [Jessop 2014] and the relationship between
government and governance. It consists of the displacements of the
decision-making powers from elective offices to arenas presented as
neutral, objective as well as remote from or "above" institutional
politics [Flinders 2008]: central banks, independent regulatory
authorities, agencies of various types [Burnham 1999 ; Hay 2007; Kettel
2008], public utilities privatized and made dependent on the market rather
than on the interference of politicians and their short term visions
dictated by electoral rhythms [Flinders and Bullers 2006a]. These shifts
define de-politicization as one of the effects of the meta-governance
which re-regulates governance [Jessop 2011; Fawcett, Marsh 2014].
Another shift of powers, implemented through decisions of governments and
national parliaments, benefits non-elected and of higher scale actors,
such as strong (intergovernmental) bodies and procedures of the European
Union (e.g. the 2012 Fiscal Compact) and the so-called Troika (Council,
European Commission, IMF,ECB), and produces various forms of compliance
with the international agreements and rules, whose enforcement is handed
over to actors and technical tools [Flinders and Buller 2006b; Huggins
2015]. These shifts accumulate powers outside of state policy, but also
call for a de-accountability of political actors [Burnham 2001; Kettel
2008; Wood and Flinders 2014]. This mechanism also operates at the local
and territorial level.
Another side of this phenomenon is the use of meta-decisions that make it
impossible to make other decisions later, tying the hands of policymakers
[Flinders and Buller 2006b]. For example, constitutionalizing the
obligation of a balanced budget (as it happened in Italy) depoliticizes
the national economic policy. Its task is reduced to monitoring and
adjusting the process with measures that fall within pre-set standards.
Technicization of processes is also an important part of
de-politicization, with the assignment of regulatory effects and resources
allocation to technologies such as evaluation, with the primacy it gives
to the numbers, or technical procedures in support of political
decision-making. Choices become evidence-based and free from ideologies
and social pressures. Or, again, expert systems, algorithms, rating and
benchmarking. The technicians become the protagonists, sometimes called
on to directly perform the function of depoliticized politics, as in the
governments of national unity, legitimized in the name of emergencies and
exceptional situations. For these governments, representation and consent
have no value. They are chosen for their professional skills and their
reliability for the markets and the supra-national institutions.
The attempts to legitimize the investigation of public choices through
deliberative arenas governed by non-political parameters, based on
information and knowledge, are not external to this aspect of
de-politicization. A discursive de-politicization determines the
convergence of preferences [Flinders and Buller 2006b] into a single,
albeit diverse, cognitive construction of reality (frame for public
actions). It is no coincidence that the prevailing paradigm in the
contemporary liberal political economy has been narrated in the form of a
single thought demonstrating a clear cultural hegemony of the
trans-nationalized and financialized capitalism.
Policies become inevitable responses lacking rational alternatives to the
limits of development set by previous responses, with which contradictions
and conflicts had previously been appeased. Especially in Europe the
tarnishing of values and programmatic differences between left and right -
both give priority to growth and the market - is a consequence and
evidence of this kind of de-politicization. Convergence is helped by the
communication of imagery and knowledge brands [Jessop 2009; Sum and Jessop
2013] of great power (the influence of pre-rational emotional states
involving individuals, political decision-makers and epistemic communities
on the acceptance or rejection of an idea of policy) and by seductiveness,
i.e. a specific normative force, which is exercised by indicating what to
aspire to and how to strive for it. These are forms of communication and
construction of meaning based on appeals or slogans [Wood 2015], referring
to a shared sense imbued with moral values. The consensus is mobilized
around the assumptions that social acceptance cannot be doubted and this
therefore legitimizes unquestionable paradigms.
De-Politicization is probably one of the cause of the growing distance
between institutional politics and civil society in Western country and,
unavoidably, it determines some consequences. We think that, on the social
side, some consequences can be found in the political indifference on the
part of citizens (political apathy) and, on the contrary, in growing forms
of non-institutional social and political participation through the
practices of social resilience and resistance; on the political side, we
think that one of the consequences is the birth, everywhere in Europe, of
populist parties and movements that, in their rhetoric, emphasize its
intention to give back sovereignty to the people.
The main objective of issue highlight theses phenomena that, also in a
critical and provocative way, can contribute to describe the many aspects
of this process proposing both theoretical and empirical work.
Submission procedure:
Articles, written in English, should be submitted to the editor according
to the following schedule:
- Submission of long abstracts (about 1,000 words): 20th JANUARY 2017
- Selection of long abstracts: 1st FEBRUARY 2017
- Submission of articles: 1st APRIL 2017
- Provision of peer review feedback: 1st JUNE 2017
- Submission of revised drafts: 15th JUNE 2017
- Publication of the issue: JULY 2017
Articles should be no longer than 10,000 words, including notes and
references.
Please refer to the editorial guidelines available at
http://siba-ese.unisalento.it/index.php/paco/about/submissions#onlineSubmissions <
http://siba-ese.unisalento.it/index.php/paco/about/submissions#onlineSubmissions>
Please address any queries to the Editor Proposals and papers have to be
sent to him
