Managing Precarity: The Universal Basic Income – A ‘Double Movement’ for the 21st Century?

Abstract

This thesis explores the concept of precarity, which has emerged both as a strategic political concept and as a sociological condition to be investigated, in response to conditions of heightened labour insecurity. The concept is one of growing academic and popular importance, thanks in large part to the work of Guy Standing who has played a significant role in defining and popularising it. It is central to explanations of the obvious failings of contemporary capitalism, of possibilities for policy and reform, and as a challenge to the main strands of Marxist theory. The latter conceptual challenge is significant in that Standing advances a class typology which supersedes class as historical category, and displaces the working class as the agents of history in favour of the Precariat – a ‘class-­‐in-­‐the-­‐making’. The policies and reforms that Standing champions are not the class-­‐based transfers of income (whose preconditions lie in the labour theory of value) associated with social democracy. Instead, he aims for a universalism that transcends 20th century social democratic attempts to decommodify labour and regulate the market system. In this sense, Standing’s support of a ‘Universal Basic Income’ is as much a rejection of social democracy and the “fetishism of labour” (Standing 2009, 5) as a rejection of the neoliberalism and austerity that followed. Precarity, the Precariat and a Universal Basic Income are concepts of importance both globally and in Aotearoa, setting the framework of debate for possible futures. This thesis presents chapters that address different aspects of the debates around precarity, in terms of the concept’s location in intellectual traditions and challenges to theory, as well as locating these debates in their socio-­‐economic histories. To that end, Standing is discussed in terms of, at times cross-­‐cutting deliberations involving Polanyi (Chapter 2), Harvey (Chapter 3) and Gramsci (Chapter 4). Where possible, the discussion is concretised in relation to Aotearoa New Zealand. Overall, this thesis speaks to three inter-­‐related themes: (i) what is the utility of precarity? (ii) does precarity make obsolete Marxist accounts of class? (iii) whose interests are served by the politics / reforms of precarity, in particular, the Universal Basic Income?