The quarantine of ideas
Nicholas Lynch1
During these days of confinement, I've been reading Edgar Morin, who, quoting Henri Bergson, said that these are times to reclaim inner time. In this endeavor, I've been going through my drawers, finding everything from old photos to personal papers, all from such different periods that they make me shudder. I'm taking refuge in my opinion pieces, those that engage in heated debates, which are the ones I enjoy most, the ones I believe have allowed me to survive this neoliberal winter that has already consumed most of my adult life. Perhaps that's why, even though they were public commentaries, they are also intimate. I have them online, but I prefer the old paper, damp with ink and yellowed, which, with its smell of Lima's dampness, makes me relive the small triumphs, the bitter defeats, and, worse still, the betrayals of these years.
I have lived by ideas, it's true, spurred on by different political circumstances like whips of truth and sometimes of falsehood. I recall Gramsci's statement on political analysis, when he points out that it is meaningless without a guiding project. Therefore, reviewing my articles on "polemics of ideas" allows me, from the narrow perspective we are currently experiencing, to observe longer periods and their relationship to the current events of pandemic and lockdown.
The words coup d'état, hegemony, legitimacy, transition, limited democracy, neoliberal, precarious, participation, mobilization, corruption, capture, cronies, capitalism, etc., etc., immediately spring to mind. I realize I haven't held back on epithets, and their effect has depended on the short timeframe—sometimes getting straight to the point and identifying weaknesses in the adversary, other times going unnoticed, almost inconsequential, as if to fade from this world. But my ideas have never been confined; they continue with their radar and orientation, searching for obstacles to overcome for the movement's development.
The same hasn't happened to others who went into quarantine some time ago. Or rather, they were quarantined by the neoliberal offensive, to such an extent that they don't even realize what's happened. The perfect scenario for hegemony that naturalizes domination. This is how this neoliberal right wing has developed, with opinions kept in check, some suppressed, suffering from Stockholm syndrome, and others repressed. But the fact is that now we are all confined, converts and non-converts alike, rebels and lifelong neoliberals. I know they say it's against the virus, or rather, the coronavirus, but I have the feeling it's against all former or current dissidents, virus included.
That's why I say that the greatest triumph, truly of significant proportions, of neoliberal hegemony in the last thirty years has been its dominance in the world of ideas. But not as ideological development, rather as the reiteration and, when possible, the methodical imposition of a set of imported principles that they have skillfully unpacked to organize our daily lives. In this, they are no different from the encomenderos who also brought their imported catechism and imposed it; perhaps that's why both have a colonial stench. It may be that the most important of these ideas has been "the path to success for all," which the neoliberal right claims to have charted in Peru. They also invented, at some point—almost forgotten, it must be said—the figure of the informal hero who was the master of the future and who was embodied in the ideal of the entrepreneur, who appeared out of nowhere and, based on personal effort, achieved everything, or almost everything.
This ideological import, which has raised illusions in millions, has certainly been successful because it has allowed a very small social sector, characterized by its racist and colonialist thinking, to exert uninterrupted control over the entire country since the 1990s. The promise of success in a country impoverished and frightened by hyperinflation and terrorism has been effective. Moreover, it has done so in the manner of the landowning class, capturing or recapturing the State, where, in their “modern times,” politicians act, technocrats manage, and large landowners oversee and buy. To achieve this, they have destroyed what little political modernity we had gained with the separation between society and State, brought about by the civil-military reforms between 1962 and 1980. But they don't care; they invent stories to discredit the past, because they have no intention of building a political community, much less a democratic one, in this country.
However, this ideological success has begun to be tarnished in recent years. First came the scandal, the corrosive power of scandal that often dissolves hegemony. In this case, it is a scandal of epic proportions. What we have come to know as the “Lava Jato Case,” or the fraud in public works contracts and similar schemes, as well as the use of black money for political campaigns, has, as we know, implicated all the presidents (except Paniagua) of the last 30 years and almost all the companies that have done business with the State. The scandal has exposed the emperor's nakedness, and this has triggered a regime crisis that has yet to be resolved—an organic, not episodic, crisis, but one with great and serious difficulties in reaching a conclusion and ushering in a new era in the nation's life.
This impasse, where those at the top are having increasing difficulty governing and those at the bottom are still unable to propose a different alternative for power, is how we arrived at the pandemic situation.
But the corrosive effect of the scandal on ideological hegemony has been spurred on by the quarantine, which not only confines people but also creates ideal conditions for deepening the ideological quarantine that the neoliberal right achieved in previous years and decades, and which now poses a clear danger of becoming widespread. In other words, physical confinement could project itself into a permanent ideological confinement. We must pay attention to the lack of debate on fundamental issues, including the appropriateness of the quarantine itself, which suggests that an authoritarian solution to the aforementioned systemic crisis may be brewing, thus returning to the neoliberal “normality” that lies at the root of the current pandemic.
The rationale for this return to normalcy would be the most important technocratic (and ideological) motto of the period: “do things right.” The technocrats, who manage the interests of the elite within the state, present themselves as an indispensable group for its functioning, because they supposedly know how to do things right. What better time to demonstrate the effectiveness of their expertise than this struggle against a virus that could cause our deaths? A situation in which decision-making would only involve “technical” matters—I'm referring to numbers, curves, and projections—that only the chosen few could interpret. Technocratic reasoning, weakened by scandals, could find renewed vigor with this logical desire of public opinion to find a solution to the problem that overwhelms us.
We must not allow this to happen. Everyone acts according to their own objectives and interests; nothing is arbitrary or coincidental. Therefore, we must oppose the stifling of ideas. If we were cornered by the dictatorship of April 5th and the failed transition to democracy—situations in which many saw an opportunity to return to normalcy—we must not allow the expression and debate of alternative solutions to be suppressed now. Even more so when this could mean remaining with the corrupt and the technocrats who have served them, returning to the normalcy they have made their way of life.
They are threatening us; they want us to remain physically confined, which is necessary, but also ideologically confined, which only benefits those in power. Therefore, at this critical juncture, it is essential that we be transgressors and dare to break free from ideological confinement. If they condemn us and, worse still, persecute us, that will be proof of our success. Today more than ever, we must go against the grain, once again, so that the defeat of this pandemic is not a return to normality but rather a step towards a more just country.
1- National University of San Marcos, Peru
If you would like to receive more information about CLACSO's training programs:
[widget id=”custom_html-57″]
to our email lists.
