Working Class Subjectivities and Neoliberalisation in Kyrgyzstan: Developing Alternative Moral Selves

Elmira Satybaldieva

doi:10.1007/s10767-016-9251-5

Elmira Satybaldieva

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-016-9251-5

Copy DOI

Abstract

This article investigates the subjectivities of working class people in Kyrgyzstan, examining their boundary work produced in response to neoliberal changes. While working class people are depicted as unenterprising and ‘backward’ by the rich and the middle classes, they often react with anger and lament the colonisation of life by market values, usually invoking non-market norms and nostalgia for the Soviet era of labour, solidarity and equality. Most importantly, they draw upon alternative cultural resources and discourses, such as traditional morality and Islam, to develop alternative ‘caring’ and ‘pious’ selves, which dissociate wealth from moral worth and provide other sources of self-esteem. But these counter-values can also be problematic, as they are ineffective in countering market forces and hardening class divisions.

Highlights

This article investigates the subjectivities of working class people in Kyrgyzstan, examining their boundary work produced in response to neoliberal changes
This article will examine how working class actors respond to new structures and discourses and perform boundary and dignity work to counter the neoliberal vision of human agency
This article has examined the moral dimensions of working class subjectivities in post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan in the context of neoliberal pressures to reform the self

Summary

Introduction

This article investigates the subjectivities of working class people in Kyrgyzstan, examining their boundary work produced in response to neoliberal changes. It will contribute to the literature on post-Soviet subjectivities by examining how working class people draw upon cultural resources to develop alternative moral selves in the Central Asian context. A 28-year-old working class self-employed builder, first de-politicises social inequalities, believing that individuals have the means to shape their own lives: ‘Poor people bring poverty upon themselves.

Results

Conclusion