‘Superfluous people’ at the turn of the era: Culture of utilization or culture of development?

Abstract

International relations have entered a new era of dramatic transformation, which has already manifested itself in the sharp aggravation of interstate rivalry. However, this transformation is underpinned by much deeper objective processes caused by the crisis of the entire neoliberal model of economic development. In this context, the world economy is said to be drifting towards deglobalization. In order to grasp the scale and prospects of these developments, it is necessary to analyze the key features of modern societies. One of them, which has become all the more important given the growing industrial automation, is the emergence of an ever-increasing number of ‘superfluous people’. The paper identifies the origins and distinctive characteristics of this socio-economic phenomenon, with a special focus on modern strategies to address the issue of ‘superfluous people’. In this regard the author outlines two key strategies, referred to as culture of utilization and culture of development. The first strategy places the struggle for rent at the heart of all social and political activities, which implies distribution of benefits according to one’s social status rather than economic productivity. A notable example is the creation of the so-called bullshit jobs, associated with recurrence of pre-capitalist and feudal forms of social relations. The second strategy entails the engagement of ‘superfluous people’ in socially useful forms of work aimed at improving the quality of education, medicine, environmental protection, etc. In conclusion, the author elaborates on the prospects for implementing these strategies under the present conditions. The author argues that deglobalization will not resolve the deep contradictions that give rise to the issue of ‘superfluous people’, but it will shift the responsibility for its solution to the regional economic and political entities. This, on the one hand, may facilitate the search for alternatives to the modern neoliberal model of social development. On the other hand, it may lead to the entrenchment or even exacerbation of the negative social and political processes outlined above.