How does neoliberalism reconcile democracy with capital? Why have states and governments come to increasingly represent firms and corporations with their balance sheets of debt and growth? How has the use of the term ‘governance’ instead of political rule vitiated state control? These are some of the questions academic and political theorist Wendy Brown aims to answer in her seminal and simply astounding book, ‘Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution’. The book itself aims to chalk out how ‘neoliberal rationality’ — to borrow from Michel Foucault — impacts states, individuals and politics in present day democracies. Wendy Brown’s argument begins from the premise that neoliberalism’s fundamental threat lies in transforming all individuals under its rule from ‘homo politicus’ to ‘homo oeconomicus’; beings that focus solely on their monetary benefits and competition. This transformation stems from neoliberalism’s implacable desire to view and portray the entire world from an economic lens. In fact, neoliberalism’s fundamental aspect lies in its desire to impose the ‘model of the market’, as Brown herself argues, on every domain of human life and to transform previous political actors such as states and individuals into ‘market actors.’ Neoliberal democracy, Brown argues, is plagued by an inherent contradiction that pits the apparent democratic aspirations of traditional liberalism against neoliberalism’s quest to economise everything Here is Brown herself, “Neoliberal rationality disseminates the model of the market to all domains and activities—even where money is not an issue — and configures human beings exhaustively as market actors; always, only and everywhere as homo oeconomicus.” For Brown, this is where neoliberalism’s threat to democracy lies, for the very structures that compose democracy and capital are fundamentally antagonistic to one another. Democracy, or at-least a quixotic vision of it, is based on the principles of equality, inclusion and justice. Capital, on the other hand, rests on the notions of competition and outdoing other economic actors. This is evident in how firms and individuals attempt to gain experience, skills or tools that allow them to ‘beat’ the competition, and to better sell themselves in the job, goods or financial markets. Neoliberal democracy, therefore, Brown argues, is plagued by an inherent contradiction that pits the apparent democratic aspirations of traditional liberalism against neoliberalism’s insatiable quest to economise everything. The book then chalks out how this ‘marketisation’ of democracy plays out on an individual and on the state level. The individual, in fact, is taken in by a neoliberal rationality that increasingly prioritises economic incentives over other motivations or passions in life. Political activity for instance, Brown argues, is a major victim of neoliberalism’s economisation of personal life. Since the dawn of neoliberalism in the 1970s, we have witnessed how people and firms have come to be increasingly ‘apolitical’, and the trope that ‘I do not indulge in politics’ has become far too common. This narrative has also emerged in the global conversation on development, where apparently neutral institutions such as the World Bank claim that too much political deliberation and influence from political agents — such as the state — encumber economic growth. This line of thinking, according to Brown, stems from neoliberalism’s ability to configure individual thinking and to force people to think solely in economic terms. Under neoliberal rationality, therefore, politics or political discussion becomes a dirty word that acts as a hindrance in economic growth and in the seemingly perfect working of the free market. Brown’s argument on how neoliberal rationality impacts individuals, however, acts on far more nuanced levels than simply claiming that people eschew political activities under neoliberalism. As Brown highlights, individuals consumed by neoliberal thought end up ‘investing’ in themselves. This investment takes multiple forms such as taking courses that enhance our ‘value’ in the job market, learning languages so we can work in companies abroad, and even personal health, fitness and grooming. This self-investment, in fact, mirrors investing in capital and thus gives birth to a phenomenon unique to neoliberalism — human capital. As Wendy Brown writes, “Both persons and states are construed on the model of the contemporary firm. Both persons and states are expected to comport themselves in ways that maximise their capital value in the present and enhance their future value, and both persons and states do so through self-investment, and/or attracting investors.” Through its conversion of individuals to human capital, neoliberalism in-fact once again eviscerates the very foundations of democracy — citizens who are aware of their rights, who clamour for public goods and who engage in political deliberation. Thus, neoliberalism essentially alters the relationship between state and individual, and gives birth to a hollowed-out, attenuated version of a state that aims to attract capital and that neglects its duties of public service. Under neoliberalism, states become increasingly obsessed with ‘governance’, ‘best practices’ and the ideal environment for investors. This narrative is in fact highly prevalent in our own country, Pakistan as well, where we see how the powers that be assure foreign and local investors that Pakistan is ‘ripe’ for investment. This language, and this depiction of Pakistan and indeed all neoliberal states, in reality, portrays states as nothing more than areas that consume capital and generate growth. To align themselves with this farcical image, states then pursue policies that further perpetuate neoliberalism’s hold on the state apparatus — thus giving birth to a vicious cycle of unending neoliberalism. Policies that states pursue under the aegis of neoliberalism are in essence, the very policies that weaken democracy and hurt the marginalised and less privileged. To ensure an ‘ideal’ milieu for investors, the state must not have exorbitant levels of debt or fiscal deficits. Thus, the state must cut back on the only leverage it has — state subsidies, welfare, healthcare and education. Again, a phenomenon that is evident the world over; from the United States’ curtailing spending on higher education to Pakistan increasingly privatising housing schemes. The state’s cutback on policies that would support the downtrodden further weakens democracy as people are pushed out of affordable housing, higher education and into a form of poverty that prevents them from engaging with political questions. This line of argument is, in fact, crucial to responding to the misguided claim that Pakistanis vote simply on monetary benefits. In a country that has completely failed to provide basic needs to its people, it is extremely difficult for people who struggle every day to provide for their families to engage in political questions or foreign policy issues. Neoliberalism, therefore, is eroding democracy by altering the very function of the state, and also by limiting peoples’ abilities to engage in politics. A neoliberal state, moreover, makes increasing use of an economic vocabulary to shore up support for its policies. The recent debate over refugees and immigrants in America, for instance. Posters by Democrats and many left-wing movements which came out in support of immigrants carried arguments such as ‘immigrants pay more taxes than normal people’, are ‘more productive than an average American’, etc. This narrative that rests solely on economic indicators once again highlights how successful neoliberalism has been in calibrating public imagination to think from such a myopic economic lens. Addressing this issue, Wendy Brown, while referring to America and to a speech then American President Barack Obama gave in 2013, says, “Attracting investors and developing an adequately remunerated skilled workforce are the goals of the world’s oldest democracy. More importantly, every progressive value—from decreasing domestic violence to slowing climate change—Obama represented as not merely reconcilable with economic growth, but as driving it.” This narrative of giving an economic justification for movements such as ending gender violence therefore, ignores the inherent goodness and justice in standing up against oppression, and once again highlights how neoliberalism alters our rationality and forces us to think solely from an economic perspective—the very basis of homo oeconomicus. Undoing the Demos, is therefore, an absolutely crucial read for understanding how the world has progressed since the 1970s—when neoliberalism first emerged in the United States and the United Kingdom. The book provides excellent insight into how modern economic actors—individuals and states—think, and why conversations surrounding politics have become increasingly trenchant and myopic. The book also perfectly highlights the conception, role and purpose of the modern neoliberal state, and how this purpose has changed from providing for citizens to attracting capital, thus upending the fundamental tenets of the social contract political thinkers such as Rousseau and Hobbes wrote about. We are no longer citizens of a state that seeks to protect us. Instead, we are consumers, producers and worst of all—human capital, in a system that can jettison us at the earliest signs of an economic downturn. This is once again highly evident in the austerity measures and job cuts that haunt countries in the grip of an economic crisis, with Greece being a prime example. These austerity measures and cuts in employment are justified using neoliberal rationality that claims that the ‘health’ and the ‘state’ of the economy comes before everything else; even the personal security of citizens. The book also raises questions that Wendy Brown leaves unanswered in the book itself, and that should be pondered further. The psychological impact of neoliberalism for instance. What mental toll does it take on people when they are forced to comport themselves as human capital? How do people reclaim their individualism and their sense of self? Increased consumption of drugs, more recourse to violence? In fact, suicide in South Korea actually increased five-fold when neoliberal reforms occurred in the country in the wake of the 1997-98 Asian fiscal crisis. Similarly, as neoliberalism focuses solely on individual human capital and on competition, how do people maintain personal relationships and intimacy with family? Has the definition of a family changed under this onslaught from neoliberalism? How much is investing in childcare predicated on securing a sound economic future than on developing informed and creative citizens? These are some of the questions that we should ponder over as we suffer from neoliberalism’s near ubiquitous presence. Wendy Brown’s analysis of neoliberalism also adds another dimension to the struggle of the Left, and how only a complete struggle against the pernicious effects of capitalism, neoliberalism, and the sale of the state to corporate interests can truly improve our world. For it remains true that no movement that stands for social justice can truly be successful unless we hold the malevolent forces of capitalism and neoliberalism culpable. The writer graduated from Aitchison College and Cornell University. He also studied at Oxford University, and his interests include studying the politics of class, gender and race. mabrahim.shah@gmail.com Published in Daily Times, April 27th 2018.