{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"e38ef66b-e3ac-494b-b5ea-9cc05b2975d8","title":"Democracy and Other Neoliberal Fantasies Communicative Capitalism and Left Politics","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"e38ef66b-e3ac-494b-b5ea-9cc05b2975d8","id":"e38ef66b-e3ac-494b-b5ea-9cc05b2975d8","uuid":"e38ef66b-e3ac-494b-b5ea-9cc05b2975d8","title":"Democracy and Other Neoliberal Fantasies Communicative Capitalism and Left Politics","normalized_title":"democracyandotherneoliberalfantasiescommunicativecapitalismandleftpolitics","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"isbns":[],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":229,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/e38ef66b-e3ac-494b-b5ea-9cc05b2975d8","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Democracy%20and%20Other%20Neoliberal%20Fantasies%20Communicative%20Capitalism%20and%20Left%20Politics","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/e38ef66b-e3ac-494b-b5ea-9cc05b2975d8/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/e38ef66b-e3ac-494b-b5ea-9cc05b2975d8/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/e38ef66b-e3ac-494b-b5ea-9cc05b2975d8","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/e38ef66b-e3ac-494b-b5ea-9cc05b2975d8/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/e38ef66b-e3ac-494b-b5ea-9cc05b2975d8/search"},"page":{"printed_page":181,"pdf_page":191,"physical_index":191,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"84f5ed4677e3dcd9e5bae66e63b87e9a624e188f1faa68d044cbee12d63ab660"},"chapter":"Comunicative Capitalism & Left Politics","content":"American leftists were not wrong in their critique of the welfare state. Historically, its minimal provisions, trapped within states' discretionary powers, were highly moralistic, biased toward the deserving poor, a category which excluded unwed, nonwhite mothers. The struggle to establish that welfare benefits were owed to poor women-and that states could not impose eligibility restrictions -was a long one, fought through the courts (and sometimes through direct action) by groups united into the National Welfare Rights Organization. In fact, it had been in place barely thirty years when Clinton ended even that minimal entitlement to economic assistance. See .Mink, Welfare's End, chapter 2.\n\nAmong the key texts in political theory representative of this shift are Ladau and Moufe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy and Cohen, Class and Civil Society. Perelman, The Confiscation of American Prosperity, 56.\n\nFor a recent version of this retreat from the state, see Critchley, Infinitely Demanding. Critchley writes, \"I think politics should be conceived at a distance from the state,\" 112. Thus, it should come as no surprise that Critchley celebrates the humorous approaches of some contemporary anarchists: \"Groups like Pink Bloc or Billionaires for Bush are performing their powerlessness in the face of power in a profoundly powerful way;' 124. This mindset dearly exemplifes the contemporary failure of the left-a failure to take responsibility for power, in fact, a celebration of powerlessness. It also misreads the performance of the Billionaires in particular: participants dress as the very rich and carry signs such as \"More Blood for Oil\" and \"Save our Gated Communities\" in order to take the system at its word; they occupy the position of enunciation of the privileged thereby making it visible as such. For a discussion of \"taking the system at its word;' see Zizek, Tarrying with the Negative, 237.\n\nFor a longer discussion, see Dean, Publicity's Secret.\n\nFocusing on Stewart Brand, Fred Turner gives a detailed account of this process in From Counterculture to Cyberculture. He writes, \"AB they turned away from agonistic politics and toward technology, consciousness, and entrepreneurship as the principle of a new society, the communards of the 1960s developed a utopian vision that was in many ways quite congenial to the insurgent Republicans of the 1990s;' 8.\n\nThese bils made explicit a convergence of democracy and capitalism. As the 1996 bill afed: \"The market will drive both the Internet and the information highway;' Dyer-·Witheford, Cyber-Marx, 34-35·\n\nFor example, Cass R Sunstein looks t o blogs, wikis, and open-source software projects as \"important supplements to, or substitutes for, ordinary deliberation;' lnfotopia, 148.\n\n25\n\n27\n\n2s\n\n24\n\nNOTES TO CHAPTER ONE\n\n181\n\n28\n\n29\n\n30\n\n3 1","previous_page":180,"next_page":182}