Discourse and Lifestyle Politics

This results from neoliberal governance which is premised upon rational, individual, human agency. Upon this premise it follows that when human agency is informed by correct information (i.e. market signals) our collective buying decisions will collectively demand the appropriate solutions by governments and private firms for policies, goods and services. [1] However, what this neoliberal approach fails to factor in is the limitations of human agency and rationality.

Philosophers such as Michel Foucault have raised doubt on the notion that human individuals are free, rational thinking agents; rather he argues that the individual is conditioned by a plethora of texts which define what is normal, rational and ‘correct’.[2]  The combination of these forces produce what he terms ‘discourses.’ I would like to discuss the discourses which normalize the ‘lifestyles’ prevalent in the identities of myself and citizens of Canada and the United States more generally. I will consider how discourses produce and maintain ideals of lifestyle, and the political demands our lifestyle choices effect.

Discourses have a genealogy.[3] They evolve overtime through a series of random social mutations created by texts. These texts are produced by of various actors both human and non-human; political campaigns, green consumerism or the war on terror all involve words and ideas which coagulate into common sense discourses which condition what is normal, what is expected to be the case, and how people characterize themselves and others. In our geographical and historical location, texts are produced by a variety of media and historical influences.

Government and corporations influence our lifestyles to support economic imperatives. The suburbanization of Canada and the United States is a good example of how a particular, and unique urban geography has been normalized and actively encouraged by the government.[4]   The United States defends the consumptive habits of its citizens as a god given right and an essential kernel of the American ‘way of life.’ [5]

Our history is imagined as a story of progress over linear time. We expect the future to be different and better; we expect to have more of everything at an ever decreasing cost; we expect to travel the world and the country in short periods of time and at a ‘reasonable’ cost. But are these values universal or normal in any sense?My own needs have changed and become normalized over my short existence.  I now need a computer to complete my schoolwork, communicate with family and friends and make my life ‘easier.’  I need a cellphone as plans are made last minute and are subject many contingencies. I need a bus pass or access to a vehicle in Vancouver and Canada more generally to cover the vast distances between school, work, friends and family. I expect, over any given year, and over the rest of my life, to explore the world, on my weekends and summer vacations by plane, train and automobile. How has this standard of living been established as normal? The answer is impossible to pin on any single source, this is the nature of discourses, but culture plays an important role.

Culture and identity have  influenced my expectations of a normal standard of living. I grew up with the family summer road trip; we hit the road with a travel trailer every summer and saw some beautiful spots. I would always go hiking and skiing on the weekends; we would jump in the car every Saturday morning and head out; I grew up expecting to continue this luxury. This history cultivated my identity. The activities I enjoy and use to identify myself dictate the material requirements of my lifestyle. I now feel a sense of entitlement to continue living this lifestyle.  But what are the consequences of this lifestyle? Matthew Huber argues the how a similar sense of entitlement embodies the American lifestyle creating certain expectations; ideas such as freedom and independence have cultivated a sense of entitlement to low “price of gasoline.”[6]  While I don’t drive an Chevy Tahoe, I do feel an entitlement to the freedom of the freeway.  I remember countless conversations about outrageous gas prices after small talk about the weather grew tiresome; the worrying rise in prices since the blissful times of sub fifty cent litres of gasoline. I remember the implicit entitlement present in these conversations to our right of mobility and the lifestyles it allows.

The discourses created by culture determine our standard of living which leads to a sense of entitlement to certain activities and their continued affordability.  This sense of entitlement pervades most other consumer goods, from clothing to computers. We expect almost everything to become cheaper without questioning how this comes about. However it is important for us to question the normality of our standard of living. For instance Huber argues that our demands for cheap gasoline are directly linked to violent geographies of production.[7] This is certainly the case for almost anything else you consume that wasn’t grown in your back yard.  Everything we consume has a geography of production; everything requires energy, materials and labour to produce.  It is also important to realize that the the discourses governing our expected standard of living are political. Could the demand for cheap gasoline have driven the Unites States to invade a country with the lowest cost oil fields? [8] Could our demand for cheap tomatoes impel governments to fly destitute Mexicans here to work under slavery conditions? [9]

I think it is important to question the normalcy of our standard of living. To do this we need to realize the cultural and historical origins of the creation of discourses of normalcy.  Our standard of living and the demands we place on society to meet those demands have inextricably linked to the ugly geographies of other places. To question these discourses is a moral and political move. But to ignore the politics effected by our demands is equally so.  I don’t intend to take the moral high ground, but simply ask that we critically evaluate the political effects of our lifestyles.

Bibliography

1. Matthew Huber, “The Use of Gasoline: Value, Oil and the American Way of Life,” Antipode 41, 3 (2009) 469.

2. Gary Gutting, Foucault: A Very Short Introduction, New York: Oxford University Press, (2005) 32-33.

3. Gary Gutting, Foucault: A Very Short Introduction, New York: Oxford University Press, (2005) 45-46.

4. David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity (Oxford:Basil Blackwell, 1989) 185.

5. Matthew Huber, “The Use of Gasoline: Value, Oil and the American Way of Life,” Antipode 41, 3 (2009) 469.

6. Ibid., 478.

7. Ibid., 469.

8. Ibid., 482.

9. El Contrato, directed by Min Sook Lee (Montreal: National Film Board of Canada. 2003).