Grammars of liberalism

Liberalism has been fundamental to the making of modern world, at times shaping basic assumptions as nature political, and in other cases existing a delimited political project contention with others. Across its long history, liberal projects have taken diverse range forms, which resist easy reduction single logic or history. This diversity, however, often escaped anthropological attention. In this introduction our special section on Grammars Liberalism, we briefly trace historical interrogate approaches conceptualising liberalism offer broad framework for studying that remains attentive both continuity difference. First, argue attention how claims made by unfold levels values, their interrelations (morphology) underlying rules governing expression combination intelligibility (grammar). Second, empirical values are expressed assembled across different social forms. We approach enables anthropology grasp diversity subject positions while still allowing scholars critically logics. Le libéralisme joué un rôle fondamental dans la construction du monde moderne, façonnant parfois des hypothèses de base sur politique, et d'autres cas, existant en tant que projet politique délimité conflit avec d'autres. Au cours sa longue histoire, les projets libéraux ont pris formes diverses, qui résistent à une réduction facile seule logique ou histoire. Cependant, cette diversité souvent échappé l'attention anthropologique. Dans notre spéciale « grammaires », nous retraçons brièvement historique, interrogeons anthropologiques conceptualisation proposons cadre general d'étude reste attentif fois continuité différence. Premièrement, plaidons pour l'on s'intéresse manière dont revendications politiques se déploient au niveau valeurs, leurs (morphologie) règles sous-jacentes régissant l'expression combinaison ainsi leur intelligibilité libérales (grammaire). Deuxièmement, empirique valeurs sont exprimées assemblés travers différentes sociales. Nous soutenons approche permet l'anthropologie saisir sujets tout permettant aux chercheurs d'aborder le critique d'interroger ses logiques sous-jacentes. world. Whether progressive ideology individual emancipation, governmental formation, justification capitalist expansion philosophical tradition informing imperialism anti-colonial resistance, sought ‘re-order world’ (Bell 2016) diverse, if related, ways. Liberal doctrines informed, become crystallised through, violent rule civic given rise institutions ‘code[s] living one’s life’ (Bayly 2011: 132) once extremely varied related through concerns they express. As such confirms, ‘the most dominant ethic age’ (Mahmood 2007: 148). Within current culture, predominantly focused ‘late’ neoliberalism, them phenomena late 20th century, situated within longer history global economy Western thought. Such efforts beg question ‘neo-’ liberalism’s relation historic contemporary relatives. More generally, prompt us ask discipline should broader thought practice. collection brings together ethnographies ‘actually-existing’ liberalisms propose novel study ideologies formations. borrow epithet ‘actually existing’ from state socialist notion ‘real’ – opposed ‘ideal’ socialism (cf. Brenner Theodore 2002) order foreground complex fraught between understand these emerging intersections historically interrelated traditions ordinary expert ideologies, common sense word (see Eagleton 2007; Freeden 1996; Martin 2015) concrete formations whose structural characteristics, organisation day-to-day flow reality traditional stuff ethnography. The contributors volume highlight interconnection actually-existing liberalisms, moving beyond characterisations uniform monolithic. They explore particular articulations characterised plural inflect temper one another, gain substance, specific relations. Collectively, contributions perspective it becomes possible compare members ‘family’. is no means new study. Anthropologists, primarily approached narrowly critical (and, indeed, self-critical) lens, interrogating spread ‘Western’ power. Focusing democracy, citizenship, humanitarianism, neoliberal governmentality multiculturalism, name just few topics (Ansell 2019), examined ‘dominant ethic’, critiquing internal contradictions practice, ways reason informs embedded everyday life, violence exclusions (for an overview, see Schiller 2015). Even when anthropologists recognise heterogeneity ‘on ground’ (e.g. Ong Collier 2005), tend ultimately equate fairly narrow set ends namely exploitation domination. turn, accounts those dimensions can be read ends, taking what open ethnographic question: exactly formed, come articulated impact worlds. Historically liberalism, even canonical iterations, demonstrably more plural, socially grounded self-critical endeavour than readings would suggest. There vertiginous amount scholarship theory ideas, seeking describe theorise Bell 2014, 2016; 2009; Jackson Stears 2012; Losurdo 2014; Trencsényi al. 2018). Several brief examples will suffice demonstrate ideas. Despite Adam Smith’s famous call ‘system natural liberty’, Wealth Nations (2008 [1776]), Smith self-interest market competition emerge not themselves. Rather, his work he vehicles securing interpersonal recognition moral alignment growing, increasingly mediated where virtuous deeds rhetoric less effect cultivating virtue (Smith 1976 [1759]; also Kalyvas Katznelson 2008; Montes 2019; Tronto 1993). Similarly, (2008) James Madison regarded father American Constitution personal liberty was essential limiting democracy. While argued fostered pluralism interests, fragmented power organised factions pursuing domination, saw individualistic fragmentation constraining capacity democracies strive good. He thus championed system representative representatives became legitimate arbiters of, advocates for, visions good, could justly restrict freedom. similar vein, Isaiah Berlin’s distinction negative positive (that freedom external constraint, act intentions), defence former against latter, emblematic deep belief universality paramount ethical importance autonomous, subject. Yet Two concepts (1969) reflection intellectual framings had National Socialism Soviet Communism, argument tempering universalism particularly found theories human rationality. relative value placed either form determined abstract, but ongoing sociological realities (Anderson Cherniss Hardy instances, were defined multiplicity self-interest, alignment, Smith, rationality liberty, Berlin do simply express overriding counterbalance, qualify another. Contemporary build heritage similarly heterogeneous. To seek do, redeem view it, including forms exclusion, domination arise woven into sincerely held good configurations ideas emerged developed settings struggles, leading patterns variation, contexts. For example, force during 19th century Balkan countries Serbia, Romania Bulgaria above all national concerned motivated European liberals surrounding empires (Mishkova 2014). After First World War, East Central countries, now independent imperial rule, assumed vitality greater range, bolstered ideological influence Allies, who promoted doctrine self-determination, democratisation constitutional liberties. historian Balázs collaborators (2018: 67–9) identify four types present Balkans period: ‘National liberalism’ ‘continued pre-1918 emancipation modernization’. contrast, ‘bourgeois defended social, economic position bourgeoisie’ 68). Often ‘cultural originating same bourgeois milieu embracing ‘progressivist’ vision democracy rights right- left-wing collectivist alternatives. Finally, somewhat distance ‘economic efficiency free markets, e.g. path modernisation liberation. These co-existed tension sometimes corpus author. meaningful conceive [of time] terms several axes options (from trade intervention, anti-nationalism advocacy homogenizing nation-building, mass politics enthusiastic praise participatory etc.) neighboring variants sharing many features two continuum containing very elements. 69) suggest take heed connective exercises, conceptualise way variation continuity. literature fact, some privileged over offered partial conceptualisations about (neo)liberalism stays changes sites. key strand neoliberalism ‘advanced mobilised Michel Foucault’s ‘formula rule’ technology guides collective conduct subjectivities ‘at distance’ various discursive, material techniques (Barry Rose 1999). vision, operates identified with, systems knowledge, wide representations, practices things regulate subjects exercise cultivate themselves (Rose 1993: 288). Sherry Ortner, presents ‘a virtually totalizing world every crevice (2016: 50) leads freely choosing hegemonic 55). Thus, paradigm subjectivities, multiple locales, problem traced thing, operate ways, contexts (Ferguson 2009). Our contention, then, only geared find too much able kind, cultural exceed technologies logics itself relevant ‘problem’.11 indeed recent ethnographies, (2011) Bear (2015), explored documenting institutional, sites flow. See Ganti (2014) overview. [b]ecause ideals always root variety institutional action reactions groups, commitments critiques tangibly manifest heterogeneous articulation transformation. (2008: 257) re-articulation core sensibilities i.e. effectively allows institutions, action, informed expressing Coleman Golub, say little whether affect (combine logically imply temper) discussion comparative thought, already pointed understanding combinations non-random Gray 1995). prefer building blocks’ rather sensibilities, emphasising normative weight, junctures. importantly, tracing configured better well connections among them. What commonalities differences exist different, (whether regards ‘content’, ‘form’ ‘function’) question. It problematic state, priori, general, universal presume single, overarching infuses liberalisms. But equally unproductive investigate without clarifying parameters help whether, how, relate vary.33 kind course anthropology: religion first Islam (Asad 2009), then Christianity (Robbins 2003, 2014) conceptual frames allow talk objects comparatively, time; done so strong anti-holist Bialecki’s (2012) formulation, ‘nominalist’ tendencies discipline, dissolve concreteness, denying need possibility identifying object. Therefore, guide sets framing descriptive analytical each helping answer ‘how something someone liberal’ ‘who liberal’. answered three analysis: morphology another grammar ‘use’ legibility, recombinations principles contexts, practical articulations. Beginning individuality, equality, rationality, accountability etc. situate ourselves certain shared overlapping 1995; 2013). focus because ground analysis is, worthwhile, undergird ideology, direct not, play out Recent ‘lived Hadley 2010) paid unpacking principles: prominently, autonomy/freedom derivatives life (Englund 2006; Lino Silva Wardle Reed 2015), tolerance (Dzenovska 2018), civility (Thiranagama conscience (Kelly 2020), non-violence (Lempert 2012), publicity (Graan reasoned dialogue examples. demonstrates useful ethnographers people embrace, mobilise respond expressions situations follow practices, arrangements uneven works deducing texts. How expressed, reshapes content themselves, investigated ethnographically. Illustrating her contribution collection, Brkovic explores gay-rights campaigners Montenegro up globalised discourses sexual liberation, effort claim autonomous freedom, eking space negotiating self-expression relationality might intermesh. Values meaning ‘through accumulative discourse, contexts’ (Freeden 1996: 4), Here, inspiration theorist Michael Freeden, ‘morphological’ arguing ‘ideologies distinctive concepts’ ‘create pool indeterminate unlimited combinations’ (1996: 4). view, differ promote, morphologically, When part configurations, implications practice meaning, cannot isolation another.44 Literary scholar Amanda Anderson (2016) traces embrace partially sceptically, locating mutual inflections counterbalances morphological configurations. At level morphology, may logics, hierarchy encompassment, domain differentiation, monism Dumont 1994; Robbins 1994, 2004, 2013; Rio Smedal Haynes Hickel 2016), prove durable. drawing fieldwork Northwestern Brazil, nexus local campaigning democratic reform movement, Ansell’s article issue creation distinct domains, dominated separate (such exchange hand bonds other), balancing conflicting (on ‘purification’, Keane Latour 1993; spheres cf. Weber, Gerth Mills 1998 [1946]). morphologies empirically, face task interrelate, relational permeate connect illustrated, Candea issue, ambivalent relationship procedural roles ‘thick’ identities French speech court. performative interplay judicial representatives, citizens self-conscious publics counter-publics, appeal detachment formality contested, echoed recast party strives assert own legitimacy authority public space. true whom expect secure subjects, judges, deeply aware achievement given. Taken together, considerations nuanced reach possess, re-worked instance, calculation autonomy subsume structure others, provides primary imagined another.55 Historians Mirowski Plehwe Slobodian 2018) note reformulation marked relations calculable, state–market relations, connotations goals, narrower wider central liberalism. (2018) specifically points departed 19th-century laissez-faire (hence self-designation ‘neo-’) control economy. noted far acquire weight make demands requiring actors best realise circumstances. demands, least partly, stem conventions, interpretations develop around relate. grammar, Ludwig Wittgenstein’s conception philosophy ‘grammatical investigation’ (developed Philosophical Investigations 2010 [1953]; commentary, Baker Hacker 2009: 55–67). From perspective, proposition ‘does involve decomposing [it] simple constituents, laying bare web connections, compatibilities incompatibilities, presuppositions’ propositions intelligible (Baker 59). comes ‘grammar’ refers implicit explicit ‘rules’ liberal. Take ‘liberty’ value, instance. seen, individuals, markets collectives nation). Morphologically, subordinating tempered constrained remain such, frame opposition constraint oppression, poverty dictates revealing grammatical re-imagined. language, unchanging, established use, shift gradually iteratively moments expression. Grammar, too, matter perspective. accepted actor dismissed nonsensical; (and gets write them) appear ivory tower, halls government picket line. them, perceive reflect grammars draw struggles Ansell, Fedirko Morningstar), attempt distinguish illiberal, undemocratic, on, use distinctions stake positions. Morningstar describes tensions brought surface politically inflected art performances Dublin, Ireland, counts effective criticism sphere hotly contested. artists’ attempts engage ‘parrhesiastic’ refused audiences, truth-telling opaque performances, judge misused esoteric understandable limited public. Late collective, University Chicago, important example look anthropology. especially aspects calculative utilitarian ethics, surpluses outsides created reasoning necessary abandonment beings dejection corollary purporting (Povinelli 2011). credible frameworks valuing pluralism, necessitated corresponding account redemption, frequently cast sacrifice sacrificial love, future-perfect justified later (Vogler Markell 2003; Povinelli 2009, 2011; Asad 2003). By analysing redemption entailments calculation, colleagues begin project. approach, attends interwoven scope variability. interrogates journalists’ struggle Ukrainian TV news production, valued pursue creative managerial censorial interference, case self-described censor. examines interlocutor’s pursuit journalistic professionalism oligarchically media Kyiv decisions professional self-avowed promotion grants. address second underpin, shaped ideologies. entails investigating