Didier Fassin and Bernard E. Harcourt - A Time for Critique

A TIME FOR CRITIQUE

NEW DIRECTIONS IN CRITICAL THEORY

NEW DIRECTIONS IN CRITICAL THEORY

Amy Allen, General Editor

New Directions in Critical Theory presents outstanding classic and contemporary texts in the tradition of critical social theory, broadly construed. The series aims to renew and advance the program of critical social theory, with a particular focus on theorizing contemporary struggles around gender, race, sexuality, class, and globalization and their complex interconnections.

For a complete list of titles, see

A TIME FOR CRITIQUE

EDITED BY
DIDIER FASSIN AND
BERNARD E. HARCOURT

Columbia University Press

New York

Columbia University Press

Publishers Since 1893

New York Chichester, West Sussex

cup.columbia.edu

Copyright 2019 Columbia University Press

All rights reserved

E-ISBN 978-0-231-54931-8

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Fassin, Didier, editor.

Title: A time for critique / edited by Didier Fassin and Bernard E. Harcourt.

Description: New York : Columbia University Press, 2019. | Series: New directions in critical theory | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2018060758| ISBN 9780231191265 (cloth : alk. paper) | ISBN 9780231191272 (pbk. : alk. paper)

Subjects: LCSH: Critical thinking. | PhilosophyPolitical aspects.

Classification: LCC B809.2 .T56 2019 | DDC 142dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018060758

A Columbia University Press E-book.

CUP would be pleased to hear about your reading experience with this e-book at .

Cover design: Noah Arlow

CONTENTS

DIDIER FASSIN AND BERNARD E. HARCOURT

DIDIER FASSIN

LINDA M. G. ZERILLI

AYE PARLA

PETER REDFIELD

KAREN ENGLE

MASSIMILIANO TOMBA

VANJA HAMZI

LORI ALLEN

FADI A. BARDAWIL

NICK CHEESMAN

DAVID KAZANJIAN

ANDREW DILTS

ALLEGRA M. MCLEOD

BERNARD E. HARCOURT

T he present volume has been prepared during the year 2017 through a series of seminars followed by a two-day workshop in the School of Social Science at the Institute for Advanced Study. We express our gratitude to Laura McCune for the congenial organization of these events and to Munirah Bishop for the thorough copyediting of the manuscript. We are also thankful to Wendy Lochner and Lowell Frye at Columbia University Press for their unwavering support of our project.

DIDIER FASSIN AND BERNARD E. HARCOURT

T he first decades of the twenty-first century have been marked by an accumulation of deeply troubling political events occurring in the wake of a global war on terror and the consolidation of neoliberal policies worldwide. The unexpected vote on Brexit, the unforeseen election of Donald Trump as president of the United States, the coming to power of authoritarian leaders in Italy and Austria, the illiberal turn of presumably democratic countries, such as Hungary and Poland, and the spectacular rise of nationalist and xenophobic parties in France, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands have shaken the Western world order. But this preoccupying polymorphic drift of politics has not spared the rest of the planet, from Egypt to Israel, from Turkey to India, from Venezuela to Brazil, from Thailand to the Philippines.

The global instability has generated a flow of somewhat baseless and sometimes contradictory interpretations by media commentators and public intellectuals always quick to recycle ready-made theories or offer skin-deep concepts, like posttruth. Meanwhile, this political evolution has left many social scientists in disarray. They were all the more distraught that they had not seen this wave coming and did not have adequate tools to analyze it. Moreover, they were confronted with the multiplication of so-called fake news and conspiracy theories, which mimicked critical thinking, and with the expansion of social media, which tended to displace traditional channels used by critics in the public sphere.

In these times of crisis, the predicament of critique coincided with contestation over its relevance and even the foretelling of its death, often by the very representatives of its self-proclaimed avant-garde in the social sciences and literary studies. Had not criticism gone too far, they asked? Was it not in part because of its excesses that people had lost their discernment in their questioning of knowledge and power, thereby rendering us all receptive to alternative facts and threatening ideologies? Was there not, then, a moral obligation, as well as an epistemological necessity, to reconsider critiques pertinence, and to move on, in order to address more pressing issues?

This reactionary stand was contemporaneous with a series of attacks launched in the academic world against critical theory as well as feminist studies, postmodern theory as well as postcolonial studies. Interestingly, the offensive also came at a time when positivism appeared to be at its peak in the social and cognitive sciences, with the ascendency of big data, the development of experimental techniques, the hegemony of the rational actor paradigm, and the supremacy of evidence-based research. This trend was itself supported by governments as part of the growing field of expertise and encouraged by the corporate world in the name of efficacy. Critical thinking carried little weight by contrast to this powerful alliance of science, politics, and economy.

The present undertaking stems from this dual series of challenges presented by both critical events and critical interpellations. Concerned by the increasingly disconcerting situation, a group of scholars from various disciplines of the social sciences and humanities decided to meet on a regular basis over the course of a year to discuss these challenges. What sort of critical thinking is needed in a time when its very existence seems threatened? How can one maintain sufficient distance from the ubiquitous and eventful present without doing it an injustice? How can we address contemporary issues without repudiating the intellectual legacies of the past? To what extent could critique still be a project for the future? These are some of the questions that we tackled based on our experiences of theoretical and empirical research in political science, philosophy, law, history, literature, sociology, and anthropology.

However, while it is important to evoke this context, which did incentivize our project, it is also crucial to emphasize that the book is neither a direct response to the current state of the world from a critical perspective, nor a systematic defense against the multifaceted rebuke to critical thinking. Indeed, whereas we take these challenges seriously, we want to distance ourselves from their immediacy and avoid the all-too-common reactive attitude to events and interpellations. With the sense of urgency often come hasty analyses, which are later refuted. For us, on the contrary, critique must allow time for consideration. We firmly believe that the challenges critique faces today call for a reappraisal of its practice, and simultaneously a deepening and a displacement of our own reflection. Reappraisal requires a reexamination of the meaning, significance, and complications of the critical gesture, and its reinscription in its political genealogy, historical temporality, and cultural diversity. Displacement entails the systematic questioning of the self-evidences of critical interventions and the recognition of their obscured issues, ignored debates, and neglected alternative traditions. In sum, far from deploring the challenges that critique faces today, we consider that they offer a unique opportunity for its thorough reassessment and a potential for novel openings. To be faithful to its core principle, critique must involve its self-critique. That is the only way, in these critical times, to move forward.