political economy of care

(well, I never did make a post out of this, so I might as well just put it out there as a small puddle of barely-begun thoughts...)

Over the past few years, especially since my relationship with RC revealed itself to be irreparably fucked and not at all what I thought it was (ie not feminist in nature), I've been interested articulating the concept of "care" (and love, for that matter) in a social and political way.

I've found quite useful Arlie Hochschild's concepts of "emotional work" (usually unpaid, in personal relationships) and "emotional labour" (usually paid, in relationships with strangers/customers) (also called "affective labour" by Hardt and Negri -- and Sara Ahmed refers to "affective economies").

This article is focused particularly on childcare, which is only the most obvious (and not my favourite) example of domestic and reproductive care labour. But it is at least a starting point of a conversation I want to have.

As is this: "Polyamory as a Reserve Army of Care Labour" (which has been removed *again*):

"Pretending that polyamorous relationship itself were a liberating mechanism, simply because they don’t have a conventional framework for relating, has done a few things: in some cases it has provided men with immunity to womanize, in many cases it provides men with a reserve army of care labor while giving them less impetus to be mutually responsive to the activity of the relationship, and so I would argue that there is potentially even less of a two-way mutual flow of care labor between men and women in polyamorous relationships. Beyond that, heterosexual polyamory, can at worst be a threat to sociability and solidarity between women."

 And the part on "hedging" and care labour:

"As often happens, responsibility and empathy can be replaced by the care work of another relationship. If she demands that a male partner treat her better in some sense, or commit to her emotional or sexual well being, he has the option of not relating to her subjectivity (my experience in the relationship), and going to another woman for gratification."

I also watched the Public Feelings Salon with Lauren Berlant and took some very brief notes:

• optimism and trauma make you non-sovereign 
• (a good non-sovereignty, dependence)
• forms of losing control are forms of belonging to the social
• attachment to the political
• relationship between personal romantic and political fantasies
• trying to imagine intimacies where they feel recognized (I want to have that feeling again of being recognized and held in the world) - political and personal guiding fantasy

an honest account of how i've been spending my time online

• comparing images of tarot decks
• reading reviews of tarot decks on amazon
• looking up reason why my homemade yogurt fails
• browsing ravelry for knitting patterns
• revisiting the yarn.com page that lists the interchangeable circular needle sets for sale
• lurking on okcupid but never doing anything

I'm a cliché spinster. 

the state and all that (a post from october that never made it to the public realm)

I've been fixated for years on the pervasive impact of neoliberalism, not simply as a retrenchment of social institutions at large and the privatization of the public, but in the insidious ways its ideological influence festers everywhere, beyond the larger and institutional impact -- including in so-called radical or liberatory ideals. I feel like way more of us embrace neoliberal subjectivity than we'd like to admit.

I really appreciated this piece by Henry Giroux, that addressing this influence, and calls for the reclaiming of radical democracy. It's been helpful at a time when I've been considering and reconsidering my imagining of the state within my political framework.

Here are a bunch of excerpts from that piece:

1/

Economic Darwinism individualizes the social by shredding social bonds that are not commodified and in doing so depoliticizes, atomizes and infantilizes the broader public. All problems are now defined as a problem faulty character and a deficient sense of individual responsibility. At the same time, freedom is reduced to consumerism and self-interest becomes the only guiding principle for living one's life.

2/

What is crucial to recognize is that the central issues of power and politics can lead to cynicism and despair if capitalism is not addressed as a system of social relations that diminishes - through its cultural politics, modes of commodification and market pedagogies - the capacities and possibilities of individuals and groups to move beyond the vicissitudes of necessity and survival in order to fully participate in exercising some control over the myriad forces that shape their daily lives.

 
3/

If neoliberal authoritarianism is to be challenged and overcome, it is crucial that intellectuals, unions, workers, young people and various social movements unite to reclaim democracy as a central element in fashioning a radical imagination that foregrounds the necessity for drastically altering the material and symbolic forces that hide behind a counterfeit claim to participatory democracy. This means imagining a radical democracy that can provide a living wage, decent health care, public works and massive investments in education, child care and housing for the poor, along with a range of other crucial social provisions that can make a difference between living and dying for those who have been cast into the ranks of the disposable. This means at the very least recognizing that government has a responsibility to serve the public good rather than the financial and corporate interests of the rich and powerful who are driving the United States into the dark recesses of authoritarianism.

4/

The rebuilding of a radical democracy must be accompanied with placing a high priority on renewing the social contract, embracing the demands of the commons and encouraging social investments.

I want to emphasize that I am not suggesting that reviving the radical imagination, as a call to reclaim a radical democracy, be understood as simply a pragmatic adjustment of the institutions of liberal democracy or a return to the social democracy of the New Deal and Great Society. On the contrary, any rethinking of the political can only be comprehended as part of a radical break from liberalism and formalistic politics if there is to be any move toward a genuine democracy in which matters of equality, power and justice are central to what can be called a radical democratic politics.