Is neoliberalism bad for your health?
The nature of public debates can sometimes be surprising to those exploring the field of economics; while it is good to discuss beliefs and dogmas, certain ideologies rarely seem to be the subject of major debates—and this is certainly true of neoliberalism.
Ousama Bouiss, Paris Dauphine University – PSL and Florence Rodhain, University of Montpellier
While the so-called “liberal” mindset— characteristic of the rationalist tradition of the Enlightenment—places the principles of liberty, equality, solidarity, and democracy at the heart of our Constitution, an ideology seems to have “stealthily” (in the words of political scientist Wendy Brown) carried out its revolution. This neoliberal ideology, based on a form of generalized market rationality, is well known to management researchers.
First, to understand “neoliberalism,” Alain Supiot suggests beginning the analysis by reading the Declaration of Philadelphia, adopted on May 10, 1944, by the General Conference of the International Labour Organization (ILO). This liberal-inspired text, aimed at building on the achievements of the New Deal implemented by Roosevelt in the United States, seeks to offer a counter-model to the ideology of the human being viewed as a resource. Thus, this declaration promotes social justice and is based on the defense of four fundamental freedoms proclaimed by Roosevelt: freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom from want, and freedom from fear. Furthermore, the ILO sets itself the goal of supporting public programs to enable workers to gain access to “occupations in which they may find satisfaction in giving full play to their skills and knowledge and in contributing best to the common good.”
The Rise of Competition
However, as Supiot notes, while the spirit of this declaration placed social justice at the center of discussions about labor, a “major shift” led to the rise of neoliberal ideology. Its primary characteristic is to view human beings as a resource that can be organized and managed according to the laws of science. Thus, labor is conceived as a commodity, and democracy is abandoned in favor of market forces, social justice in favor of competition. According to sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, at the institutional level, this gives rise to “a Darwinian world of everyone against everyone else, at every level of the hierarchy, where the motivation for commitment to the task and the company stems from insecurity, suffering, and stress.”
Do we personally suffer from neoliberal ideology?
This latest statement by the renowned sociologist echoes a recent study conducted by a team of social psychology researchers and published in *The British Journal of Social Psychology*. Although neoliberalism has become the dominant ideology par excellence across the globe, there has been little empirical research into its impact on the psyche. The researchers were able to demonstrate that neoliberalism, by promoting and seeking to increase a competitive spirit while reducing the sense of connection to others, thereby increases feelings of loneliness that lead to distress… and thus impacts health.
Previous research had already shown that social isolation, loneliness (unwanted rather than chosen), and living alone are among the most powerful determinants of mortality. Other studies have shown that loneliness is linked to stress hormones and affects immune and cardiovascular function. Loneliness—when it is imposed rather than chosen—therefore has a major impact on health. By promoting it, neoliberalism impacts human health. Of course, the subjective quality of social connections matters as well, beyond their quantity.
Neoliberalism promotes and values individualism and thus affects health through two related mechanisms, the authors explain. The first is the view of the individual as an entrepreneur competing with others, who must ensure his or her own personal development. The responsibility for success rests solely on the shoulders of the isolated individual; this breaks the bonds of solidarity, reduces well-being, and increases feelings of insecurity, anxiety, stress, and depression.
Furthermore, neoliberalism distances individuals from group life and its potential healing effects. Indeed, belonging to one or more groups, receiving support from them, and having a strong sense of social identity form the foundation of social and psychological resources that help improve health.
Are the democratic foundations of our society under threat?
However, such an approach seems insufficient to political theorist Wendy Brown of the University of California, Berkeley, who views neoliberalism as a “stealth revolution.” In her book Undoing the Demos, she demonstrates how neoliberal ideology was constructed through the synthesis of economic ideas (drawn from Austro-Germanordoliberalism and the Chicago Monetarist School) and its “stealthy” implementation. For Brown, the main characteristic of neoliberalism is not the competitive ideal as the overarching logic for regulating the social world, but rather the idea that this competition must be produced by the state. Consequently, “growth is the raison d’état of the state.”
This then leads to the gradual spread of competitive logic into the management of public affairs, as well as to a rise in authoritarianism. Thus, “public life is reduced to problem-solving and the implementation of programs—a conception that sidelines or eliminates politics, conflict, and deliberation regarding shared values and goals.” Moreover, for both Wendy Brown and Alain Supiot, neoliberal ideology contributes to a weakening of the law, which is itself subject to economic logic. According to Supiot:
“The rule of law is thus replaced by‘law shopping,’ so that the law is subject to a cost-benefit analysis, rather than economic calculations being subject to the law.”
A law against neoliberal “separatism”?
The various scientific studies cited in this article strongly support economist Joseph Stiglitz’s conclusion: “Neoliberal fundamentalism is a political doctrine serving private interests; it is not based on economic theory. It is now clear that it is not based on historical experience either. This lesson is the only benefit to be drawn from the threat hanging over the global economy.” What should we do with this lesson? Enact a law to combat “neoliberal separatism”? Indeed, there is no shortage of researchers who have worked on this subject. The few studies by eminent scientists from various disciplines clearly demonstrate the risks that neoliberalism poses to our individual and social health.
For Alain Supiot, a legal scholar, philosopher, and professor at the Collège de France, a possible solution lies in labor law reform. In the face of the digital revolution, neoliberalism has revealed its inability to provide organizational frameworks for collective life capable of addressing the challenges of social justice and equality. The challenge, then, is “to establish a certain economic democracy, without which political democracy can only continue to wither away.” To this end, he calls for efforts to “give everyone greater autonomy and responsibility in managing their working lives, in exchange for new forms of security.”
Finally, according to sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, “it is in fact the persistence or survival of the institutions and agents of the old order—which is in the process of being dismantled—along with the work of all categories of social workers, as well as all forms of social, familial, and other solidarity, that prevent the social order from collapsing into chaos despite the growing number of people living in precarious conditions.” Thus, resistance to neoliberal ideology could involve the formation of “collectives oriented toward the rational pursuit of collectively developed and approved goals.”
In short, as proposed by Wendy Brown and many others before her, such as the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the novelist George Orwell: a radical return to democracy that would necessarily subject market rationality to a democratic rationality—one that would prioritize governance through deliberation over governance by numbers; and the clash of arguments for truth and the common good over competition for profit.
Ousama Bouiss, PhD candidate in strategy and organizational theory, Paris Dauphine University – PSL and Florence Rodhain, Associate Professor (HDR) in Information Systems, University of Montpellier
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Readthe original article.