This month, we discussed a theoretical paper by
David Fryer and Rose Stambe. Drawing on
the work of Michel Foucault, the paper examined the contribution of psy-power-knowledge
to the construction of the ‘unemployed’ subject, and the production of
neoliberal unemployed subjectivity.
We discussed our government’s invention of
cultural tropes; ‘the age of entitlement’ and ‘dependency culture’. We noted that proposed changes to welfare
policies reflect an increasing readiness to locate the problem of unemployment
in the unemployed individual, and not in broader society, which effectively
functions to obscure the social, political and economic aspects of unemployment
and to alleviate the neoliberal regime of responsibility. We asked what is required of the unemployed
individual? They must celebrate their
New Start by self-improving, up-skilling, and reporting their work search
efforts to our surveillancing government.
The unemployed individual may choose to, or even be required to, engage
with agents of the psy-industry to assist them to achieve their goals.
We considered how the psy-industry articulates
with neoliberalist ideology. The
psy-industry promotes happiness (e.g Seligman), the absence of mental illness,
the right to freedom, and fulfillment of an individual’s emotional,
intellectual and spiritual potential.
The dominant theme of two psy-products, ‘positive psychology’ and
CBT, is the idea that it is necessary to change the way one sees the world, as ‘mental-ill-health’
is the product of faulty or irrational ideas about the world, the self, and/or
others. Accordingly, these psy-products
neglect the impact of the structural inequalities on wellbeing and employment
status. Thus, we can see how these tenets
resonate with neoliberalism’s promotion of competition, freedom from others,
self-fulfilment and consumerism. So,
the psy-industry supports the maximization of productivity in a neoliberal
regime by treating and fashioning a healthy and motivated workforce. Accordingly, the psy-industry contributes to
the rejection of poverty and inequality as explanatory frameworks for
unemployment and unhappiness.
We reflected on the compromised social status
of the unemployed person, and in our efforts to bring to mind other
subjectivities, we realised the extent to which the hegemonic discourse of
neoliberalism has foreclosed other ways of being. We acknowledged the difficulty (and near impossibility) of envisaging
a different kind of society, with a multitude of subjectivities for both ‘employed’
and ‘unemployed’ individuals and collectives. We discussed the notion that psychology is political, sociological and
philosophical.
Naturally, the issue was then considered for its
expression in the mutually-constructed interpersonal space of psychotherapy. As the psy-industry is a knowledge producing
entity, and indeed constructs subjectivities, how do we move beyond the
taken-for-granted assumptions that we as practitioners bring to the therapeutic
space? While noting the discouraging
nature of this reality, the use of Foucault’s conceptualization of power and
resistance offers a way out. By
deconstructing reality, we undermine the familiarity of the present, and may be
somewhat comforted (and activated!) by Foucault’s theory that hegemony is
always subject to contestation..
