The politics of globalisation

Pierre Bourdieu

Globalisation is not a fate, but a politics. For this reason, a politics of opposition to
its concentration of power is possible. This alternative must be international, and
draw on the experience of both trade unions and the newer social movements.

T he term ‘globalisation’ suggests the

inevitability of economic laws. This
masks the political reality. It is an
altogether paradoxical reality which relies upon
made up of fifty multinational companies, which
through all manner of ways and means,
including legal ones, are in the process of
imposing their will.
a politics of depoliticisation.
A different politics
It is a politics which threatens to confer a lethal
We need to counter this politics of
status on economic forces unleashed from all
depoliticisation and disempowerment. To do so
control or constraint. It is a politics which
it is necessary to retrieve a politics both of
secures the submission of governments and
thought and action: a politics capable of
peoples to those very economic and social forces
addressing itself beyond the nation-state at the
it says must be ‘liberated’.
same time as it engages with the political and
The term ‘globalisation’ is simultaneously labour movement battles within the nation
descriptive and normative. Everything states. For many reasons, this is a dauntingly
encompassed in it is the precise result, not of difficult task.
economic inevitability, but of a politics,
In the first place, it poses sets of political
conscious and calculated, which has led the
challenges which appear to be removed from
liberal and even social democratic governments
one another, are apparently inaccessible and
of several economically advanced countries to
seemingly have little in common, either in terms
divest themselves of the power to control
of they way they work or with the familiar,
economic forces.
formative political battles of the past.
They have at best relinquished those powers to
Second, the powerful agencies and institutions
see them concentrated in the ‘green rooms’ of
which today dominate our world, economically
big international concerns, such as the WTO; or
and socially, can draw upon an extraordinary
in such multinational ‘networks’ as the network
convergence of all forms of capital – economic,

1
political, military, cultural, scientific, A second common characteristic of social
technological – amounting to a fundamental, movements is the way their priorities lie with
unprecedented symbolic hegemony over all specific social issues such as housing,
channels and means of communication through employment and health.
which opposition will be reported.
A third typical feature is a fondness for direct
It is important to concede that some of the action, a desire that protests and demands
instruments for the politics which is needed are should manifest themselves in exemplary
to be found at the European level (at least to the actions which have a direct bearing on the
extent that European institutions and relevant campaign.
businesses can have a causal effect on the
The fourth distinctive and shared characteristic
dominant forces of the world stage). It follows
is that solidarity is the tacit
that the construction of a
moving force behind the greater
unified Social Europe, capable
of bringing together the The construction of part of their activities.
different forces in all their a unified Social Such similarities in the objectives
divisions, as much in the of disparate political struggles
national arenas as in the Europe...is the highlight the usefulness, if not of
international, is the priority of
all those who wish to resist
priority of all those the complete unification of the
disparate movements that young
effectively the dominant forces who wish to resist militant groups often urge, at the
of our time. very least of some coordination of
effectively the their action and demands. Such
Co o p er a t io n wi t h o u t
unification dominant forces of coordination might take the form
of a network able to bring
The social movements that are our time together groups and individuals
essential to a politics of in such a way that no one group
resistance are very various, dominates another; a network
thanks to their different origins, aims and able to conserve all of the advantages of the
objectives. Nevertheless they undeniably share a diversity of experiences, perspectives and
set of what we might call family traits. programmes of each group.
In the first place, this is because they are often Its main function would be to direct social
the result of a refusal of traditional forms of movements away from dispersed and
political mobilisation, particularly those typical fragmented actions, ensuring that they do not
of the soviet-type communist parties. Typically, become entangled in the specifics of one-off
they reject any kind of monopolisation of their local struggles (whilst at the same time avoiding
organisation by a minority, and positively concentrations of bureaucracy). This would
elevate and encourage the direct participation of have the benefit of empowering the groups to
all the various stakeholders, resembling in this overcome the inconsistencies between the
regard the libertarian tradition. moments of intense mobilization and the latent,
slower forms of existence essential to their
They are particularly prone to those forms of
preparation.
individually motivated politics requiring a light,
streamlined apparatus which will allow its Any such network would seek to define a set of
members to maintain control over their own shared objectives at the intersection of the
activity (in stark contrast to those party interests and concerns of all the different
machines with which they battle for political groups, a set of values that they could all
hegemony). recognise and collaborate in, at the same time as
2
bringing to bear their own competencies and
methods.
Reviving trade unionism
The neo-liberal politics of globalisation has also
contributed to the weakening of trade unions.
The flexibility and precariousness of a growing
number of workers’ jobs has had the effect of
hindering any unified action, at the same time
as social security is extended to fewer parts of
the workforce.
This illustrates simultaneously just how difficult
and how indispensable the task of reviving trade
union action is. It will entail rotating
responsibility, and re-examining the model of
unconditional delegation, as well as inventing
new techniques that are essential for mobilising
the fragmented and insecure workforce.
Any such organization would have to be capable
of overcoming the fragmentation both in terms
of objectives and nationalities, in addition to the
divisions within movements and trade unions.
Bringing trade unions together in circumstances
of lively debate and discussion must have a
revivifying effect upon them.
The existence of a stable and efficient
international network should allow the
development of an international trade union
movement which has nothing to do with the
official bodies in which unions are represented,
and would integrate the actions of all the
movements which are tackling very specific, and
therefore limited situations.
In addition to the development and
coordination of new social movements and the
willingness to work at a European level, it is also
important to renew the more traditional area of
trade unions, in any politics that seeks to
respond to globalisation and defy the efforts to
‘depoliticise’ the way we are ruled.
20 February, 2002
Copyright © Pierre Bourdieu, 2002. Published by
www.openDemocracy.net. Permission is granted to
reproduce articles for personal and educational use
only. Commercial copying, hiring and lending is
prohibited without permission.
If this has been sent to you by a friend and you like
it, you are welcome to join the openDemocracy
network. To subscribe, please email your full name
to: subscribe@opendemocracy.net

Pierre Bourdieu (1930-2002)was one of the foremost sociologists of French society and the
modern world. His 25 books include works on Algeria, taste, power, television, intellectuals, and
poverty. His later years were marked by increasingly public engagement with issues of globalisation
and state power. This article, translated by Sarah Verblow and Anthony Barnett, was published in Le
Monde on 24 January 2002, the day on which the paper reported Bourdieu’s death as its front-page
lead story.