Robots and Immigrants: Employment, Precarisation and the Art of Neoliberal Governance
This article identifies the points of divergence and convergence between the discourses of technological displacement and low-skilled immigrant labour and argues for the understanding of a new model of neoliberal governance. New technologies, new managerial and organisational strategies, and new mod...
Gorde:
| Argitaratua izan da: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/angles, |
|---|---|
| Egile nagusia: | |
| Formatua: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Hizkuntza: | Anglais |
| Argitaratua: |
Angles
2020
|
| Gaiak: | |
| Sarrera elektronikoa: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| id |
openedition-oai:revues.org:angles_570 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
openedition |
| collection |
OpenEdition Journal |
| language |
Anglais |
| format |
Article ou chapitre numérique |
| building |
0/Bibliothèque numérique/ 1/Bibliothèque numérique/OpenEdition Journals/ |
| topic |
néolibéralisme automatisation immigration précarisation homo œconomicus gouvernance neoliberalism technological displacement immigration precarisation homo œconomicus governance |
| spellingShingle |
néolibéralisme automatisation immigration précarisation homo œconomicus gouvernance neoliberalism technological displacement immigration precarisation homo œconomicus governance Maronitis, Kostas Robots and Immigrants: Employment, Precarisation and the Art of Neoliberal Governance |
| description |
This article identifies the points of divergence and convergence between the discourses of technological displacement and low-skilled immigrant labour and argues for the understanding of a new model of neoliberal governance. New technologies, new managerial and organisational strategies, and new models of exploitation emerged in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis in the UK. What are the main features of this crisis? The article points to two different yet interconnected processes. First, due to demands for higher productivity and economic growth the advent of automation, robotics and AI is presented as an irreversible process capable of producing a new corporate environment in which low labour costs and efficiency co-exist with massive job losses, waning of workers’ collective defences and re-training programmes. Second, for all the increasing popularity of protectionist politics and of demands for tight immigration controls the need for low paid and low-skilled immigrant labour across several sectors of the UK economy remains unchanged. Demands for economic growth render the presence of low-skilled immigrants necessary as long as they are subjected to the minimum political, economic and social provisions such as wages, political participation and mobility. As a result, low-skilled immigrants must exist within a political and economic environment in which they are perceived as useful and at times essential accessories for sustaining economic growth and public services. The concepts of precarisation and precarity provide a useful insight into the underlying logic that connects and differentiates those two discourses. In particular, precarisation becomes at once the dominant mode of governing the population and the most effective means for capital accumulation. In contradistinction to old understandings of government that demanded political compliance in exchange for the promise of social protection, the neoliberal process of precarisation increases instability and provides the minimum of insurance. Precarisation is not limited to employment but more generally to the formulation of homo œconomicus as a collective neoliberal subject living in fear and uncertainty. Precarity, on the other hand, designates a sense of hierarchy amongst insecure workforce and the compensations they receive. The article concludes by arguing that the dividing lines between national and foreigner, domestic and immigrant, become integral notions of neoliberal governance for differentiating between precarious groups and maintaining order in contemporary capitalism. |
| author |
Maronitis, Kostas |
| author_facet |
Maronitis, Kostas |
| author_sort |
Maronitis, Kostas |
| title |
Robots and Immigrants: Employment, Precarisation and the Art of Neoliberal Governance |
| title_short |
Robots and Immigrants: Employment, Precarisation and the Art of Neoliberal Governance |
| title_full |
Robots and Immigrants: Employment, Precarisation and the Art of Neoliberal Governance |
| title_fullStr |
Robots and Immigrants: Employment, Precarisation and the Art of Neoliberal Governance |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Robots and Immigrants: Employment, Precarisation and the Art of Neoliberal Governance |
| title_sort |
robots and immigrants: employment, precarisation and the art of neoliberal governance |
| publisher |
Angles |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| container_title |
URI:https://journals.openedition.org/angles |
| url |
https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://doi.org/10.4000/angles.570 https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://journals.openedition.org/angles/570 |
| _version_ |
1877293947780333568 |
| spelling |
openedition-oai:revues.org:angles_570 https://doi.org/10.4000/angles.570 urn:doi:10.4000/angles.570 en https://journals.openedition.org/angles/570 2020-07-16T02:00:00Z info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess article info:eu-repo/semantics/article urn:handle:20.500.13089/9myl https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Robots and Immigrants: Employment, Precarisation and the Art of Neoliberal Governance Angles Société des Anglicistes de l'Enseignement Supérieur info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/2274-2042 URI:https://journals.openedition.org/angles Maronitis, Kostas néolibéralisme automatisation immigration précarisation homo œconomicus gouvernance neoliberalism technological displacement immigration precarisation homo œconomicus governance This article identifies the points of divergence and convergence between the discourses of technological displacement and low-skilled immigrant labour and argues for the understanding of a new model of neoliberal governance. New technologies, new managerial and organisational strategies, and new models of exploitation emerged in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis in the UK. What are the main features of this crisis? The article points to two different yet interconnected processes. First, due to demands for higher productivity and economic growth the advent of automation, robotics and AI is presented as an irreversible process capable of producing a new corporate environment in which low labour costs and efficiency co-exist with massive job losses, waning of workers’ collective defences and re-training programmes. Second, for all the increasing popularity of protectionist politics and of demands for tight immigration controls the need for low paid and low-skilled immigrant labour across several sectors of the UK economy remains unchanged. Demands for economic growth render the presence of low-skilled immigrants necessary as long as they are subjected to the minimum political, economic and social provisions such as wages, political participation and mobility. As a result, low-skilled immigrants must exist within a political and economic environment in which they are perceived as useful and at times essential accessories for sustaining economic growth and public services. The concepts of precarisation and precarity provide a useful insight into the underlying logic that connects and differentiates those two discourses. In particular, precarisation becomes at once the dominant mode of governing the population and the most effective means for capital accumulation. In contradistinction to old understandings of government that demanded political compliance in exchange for the promise of social protection, the neoliberal process of precarisation increases instability and provides the minimum of insurance. Precarisation is not limited to employment but more generally to the formulation of homo œconomicus as a collective neoliberal subject living in fear and uncertainty. Precarity, on the other hand, designates a sense of hierarchy amongst insecure workforce and the compensations they receive. The article concludes by arguing that the dividing lines between national and foreigner, domestic and immigrant, become integral notions of neoliberal governance for differentiating between precarious groups and maintaining order in contemporary capitalism. Cet article identifie les points de divergence et de convergence entre les discours portant respectivement sur l’automatisation et sur la main d’œuvre immigrée peu qualifiée, pour défendre une compréhension nouvelle du modèle de gouvernance néolibéral. De nouvelles technologies, de nouvelles stratégies managériales et organisationnelles et de nouveaux modèles d’exploitation ont émergé à la suite de la crise financière de 2008 au Royaume-Uni. Quels sont les aspects principaux de cette crise ? L’article met en exergue deux processus, distincts mais reliés. Tout d’abord, en raison des exigences croissantes en termes de productivité et de croissance économique, l’avènement de l’automatisation, de la robotique et de l’intelligence artificielle est présenté comme une processus irréversible susceptible de produire un nouvel environnement professionnel, dans lequel la réduction du coût du travail et les gains en efficacité sont concomitants de suppressions massives d’emplois, d’un affaiblissement des protections collectives dont bénéficient les travailleurs et de programmes de requalification professionnelle. Deuxièmement, en dépit de la popularité croissante des politiques protectionnistes et des appels à un contrôle plus strict de l’immigration, les besoins de plusieurs secteurs de l’économie britannique en matière de main d’œuvre immigrée peu qualifiée demeurent inchangés. Les exigences en termes de croissance économique rendent la présence de ces immigrants peu qualifiés nécessaire, pour autant qu’ils bénéficient de droits politiques, économiques et sociaux minimaux — salaires, participation politique et mobilité. Il en résulte que les immigrants peu qualifiés doivent exister dans un environnement politique et économique dans lequel ils sont perçus comme des rouages utiles - parfois essentiels — de la croissance économique et des services publics. Les concepts de précarisation et de précarité fournissent un éclairage précieux sur la logique sous-jacente qui relie ces deux discours tout en les différenciant. La précarisation est devenue le mode dominant de gouvernement de la population et le moyen le plus efficace de permettre l’accumulation du capital. À rebours des conceptions anciennes du gouvernement, dans lesquelles l’obéissance politique était échangée contre la promesse d’une protection sociale, le processus néolibéral de précarisation accroît l’instabilité et ne fournit qu’un minimum de protection. La précarisation n’est pas limitée à l’emploi, mais s’inscrit dans la formulation plus large de l’homo œconomicus comme sujet collectif néolibéral vivant dans la peur et d’incertitude. La précarité, quant à elle, désigne la hiérarchie établie au sein des travailleurs vivant dans l’insécurité, et les formes de compensation qu’ils en retirent. L’article conclut en affirmant que les lignes de partage entre le national et l’étranger, le natif et l’immigrant, font partie intégrante d’une gouvernance néolibérale qui opère des distinctions entre groupes précaires pour maintenir l’ordre au sein du capitalisme contemporain. |