Multi-Level Marketing: Juice Plus as Enterprise and Self-Improvement as a Manifestation of Neoliberal Psychology

I recently found myself in the uncomfortable position of having to unfriend someone I know on Facebook due to her ceaseless advertising of the Juice Plus dietary supplements she had been duped into selling. These products aren’t to be found in stores, and have little to no actual health benefits. Crucially, they are pitched not only as life improvement in a pill, but also as an enterprising opportunity for the users in themselves. By encouraging users of the product to become distributers, Juice Plus both sell more of their products and help cement their relationship with existing customers.

Officially known as ‘Multi-Level Marketing’, these types of business models are effectively pyramid schemes, which have been heavily criticised as unsustainable and exploitative. This is because they rely on each customer buying much more stock than they sell, and as the available market isn’t large, distributers can only hope to make a profit by selling in bulk to their customers, encouraging them to sell the products, becoming distributers. The new distributers soon realise this, and so convert whomever they can into distributers to satisfy their orders. These pills, tropes of self-improvement, slide down the pyramid, passed from distributer to distributer, the only profits going to those at the top. Looking at the company holistically shows us that neoliberal ideals are alive and well in the business world, however looking at the agents in these schemes tells us something unique about the neoliberal psyche in all of us.

To better understand why, we will examine some of Foucault’s criticisms of the modern psychological disciplines, as well as what he called dispositifs – the apparatus by which agents in a system are disposed to act. Sam Binkley does both of these in his paper ‘Psychological life as enterprise: social practice and the government of neo-liberal interiority’ linking changing psychological norms with neoliberal psychology. Beginning with the observation that the neoliberal system not only offers freedom but actually obliges it, we see the way states enforce this freedom on its subjects. Collectivism and regulation are abandoned, replaced with insentivisation, privatisation, and marketisation, the old principals cast as dependant or deficient. This change of values incentivises the individual agents to competitive differentialism and opportunism, as they can no longer be dependent on community or collectivism to become successful. This change in the individual was what Foucault called subjectification, meaning the construction of a subject (by the state). The means with which this is done by, he names the dispositif; a structure that promotes a way of thinking that enhances and maintains the excise of power. An example could be austerity; the more a government curtails its own apparatus for control in the name of austerity, the more likely the circumstances of individuals in the system arise that help to normalise the neoliberal psyche that champions individualism, and so repudiates social government.

Psychological disciplines had a homologous shift toward the individual along with neoliberalism, focussing on self-optimisation as psychological well-being. Unlike Freudian psychoanalysis that centred on familial relations as the cause of any characterological abnormalities and attempted to contemplate these reasons by examining the past, the anti-Oedipus school focussed on self-optimisation by acting, not reminiscing, which they thought depressive and dangerous. Binkley makes the point that this competitive self-optimisation in a neoliberal world is a manifestation of self-interest and individualism. He relates this to the modern ‘self-help book’, which as well as championing action-based optimism, denunciates expertise in the field, and so psychologists are in part replaced by ‘life-coaches’.

Relating both neoliberal subjectification and the evolvement of psychological disciplines to Juice Plus, we can see it as an extension of both the self-optimising and individualistic enterprising values discussed. The dietary pills are not only a means to achieve the better self, but also act as the subject for that better self to then become enterprising, which is in part why the self-improvement was required. This duality of purpose captures neoliberal psychology in an almost pedantic light, the only disparity being that it is the body as well as the mind that Juice Plus claims to improve. In addition, the business model relies on distributers both selling to, and making distributors out of, friends and family, perhaps the epitome of the marketisation of social relationships discussed by Foucault. Though this particular fad may pass, the underlying causes are systemic. The devaluation of companionship, cohesion, collectivism and community, perpetuates the subjectification of agents in the system by the neoliberal state today.

Bibliography

Sam Binkley - “Psychological life as enterprise: social practice and the government of neo-liberal interiority” 2011, History the Human Sciences, Vol 24, No.3 pp83-102

Michael Foucault - “Discipline and Punish” 1975

Simon Woof-Dwight 

HOW TO BE GREAT (AT EVERYTHING)

HOW TO BE GREAT (AT EVERYTHING)

Based on psychological life as enterprise: social practice and the government of neo-liberal interiority by Sam Binkley

Key author/concepts/quote

• Michel Foucault (1926-1984) – philosophical historian who was concerned with how history can help us to better our lives in today's world
• Subjectification – positions we naturally tend to move towards
• De-subjectification – breaking free from those subject positions
• Dispositif - the various institutional, physical and administrative mechanisms and knowledge structures which enhance and maintain the exercise of power within the social body
• Governmentality - the way in which a government guides us to the right direction
• Psy-function - a shifting field of knowledge and power, occupied by psychoanalysis, psychology, psychotherapy, psychiatry, social psychology, criminology and pharmacology

“Individuals are to become entrepreneurs of themselves, shaping their own lives through the choices they make among the forms of life available to them” - Nikolas Rose

--> Example: Kyle MacDonald, One red paperclip

• Traded the paperclip for a pen

• Traded box truck for recording contract

• Traded film role for a two-story farmhouse

1 – Dispositif

In the words of Michel Foucault the dispositif is "a thoroughly diverse ensemble consisting of discourses, institutions, architectural forms, regulatory decisions, laws, administrative measures, scientific statements, philosophical, moral and philanthropic propositions – in short, the said as much as the unsaid”

In other words exercising power, i.e. getting out and bettering ourselves, is influenced by factors such as sexuality, confession, psychology, liberalism and incarceration

As humans we have a natural tendency to move towards obstructing and fettering (synonym: restricting) positions of laziness, dependency, habit, social loyalties and have a fixed institutional mindset. It is our decision not to act independently which does not benefit society to the extent it should do.

The dispositif, therefore, encourages individuals to become free individuals through their own freedom ("shaping their own lives through the choices they make")

The neoliberal governmentality asks us to transform:

- How to be great (at EVERYTHING!)

- The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People

- How to stop worrying and start living

2 - Psy-function

In order for the government to "do things to people" and reinvent the technologies and opportunities of the general public, they attack the family model to get their way

--> Example: "Look at how historically the obligation of military service was imposed on people who clearly had no reason to want to do their military service: it is solely because the State put pressure on the family as a small community of father, mother, brothers and sisters...that the obligation of military service had real constraining force"

According to Foucault the family acts as an alleyway between one state of dispositif to another

--> Example: Commodities that are marketed as "fun for all the family"

• Changes children from state of laziness to a state of activeness

• Changes adults from state of dependency on caring for children to a state of having fun

3 - De-subjectification and state-phobia
Through an indirect set of processes in rolling-back the state, the neoliberal government aims to activate a vital, entrepreneurial and enterprising spirit among its subjects.
"Insentivization, responsibilization, privatization and marketization take the place of regulation, normification, standardization and collectivization"

State-phobia is "characterized by a paranoid and contemptuous regard for government and its interventionist policies" - a phobic believes that governments possess an indefatigable (synonym: relentless) power of expansion.

--> Example: The Ministries of Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell
• Belief that the government controls its people through means like the Thought Police
• People are living in a constant state of fear
• Solution? - fight back and make the individual an entrepreneur

Such phobia kicks us onto the path of de-subjectification, a denial of the government and denial of the dependence, docility, parasitism and inaction subjectifications that as we have already seen, are toxic in the pursuit towards making individuals entrepreneurs.

"In short, this is a vision of psychological life as enterprise, one centered on the individual pursuit of well-being as one of calculating self-interest, and a project of repudiation centered on the inherited dependencies of social government"

--> Example: Self-help books as mentioned above in point 1 - dispositif

4 - Coaching as neo-liberal dispositif (in other words - neoliberal psychology in practice)
Positive psychology - The science of happiness: "focus on the unlocking of the rich potentials for a fulfilling life of expressive well-being"
It is a new approach which is more beneficial compared to the previous therapeutic methods in which an individual in therapy was lulled into "reflective wallowing, rather than driving her or him to take responsibility for and action toward the realisation of her or his own happiness"

Emotional intelligence - Reflecting upon, controlling and apply one's emotions in order to achieve specific goals (usually job-centered) or managing one's emotions in regard to one's marriage and interpersonal life

Applying the theory of dispositif to this idea, the dispositif of life coaching disposes the individual to his or her own autonomy through the introduction of fixed and precise measures, benchmarks and goals - one is able to transform one's identity or way of life.

--> Example: "I choose to"
• "I choose to exercise consistently so that I have the energy and health and capacity to live the way I want"
• "I choose to wake up early every morning so that I have the capacity to be extra productive that day"

Conclusion
We are going to denounce our lazy ways (subjectification), we are going to be more pro-active (de-subjectification) and through the neoliberal psychological influence, we are going to make ourselves great again!

"Individuals are to become entrepreneurs of themselves, shaping their own lives through the choices they make among the forms of life available to them" - Nikolas Rose

Bibliography
Binkley, S. (2011) 'Psychological life as enterprise: social practice and the government of neo-liberal interiority', History of the Human Sciences
Foucault, M. (1977) 'The Confession of the Flesh (Interview)'

Are we really able to come to key decisions on social issues through economics?

“I was late and had to decide quickly whether to put the car in a parking lot or risk getting a ticket for parking illegally on the street”. Funnily enough the context of this scenario many of us go through on a day to day basis. This illustrates one segment of Becker’s break down of looking at life economically which he dissects in to four parts. Discrimination against the minorities, Crime and punishment, Human capital and Formation, dissolution and structure of families, Becker central approach was to use economics to analyse social issues, different to the Marxian approach, “the economic approach I refer to does not assume that individuals are motivated solely by selfishness or gain.”

The 1950’s view that criminals were helpless “victims”

Observing societies views on criminals during the 1950’s and 60’s period, mental illness was seen as the reason to why an individual becomes a criminal in many cases through committing an act against the law. However, Becker investigated theoretical and empirical implications of the assumptions that criminal behaviour is rational. An individual uses one’s ability to analyse the benefits from the crime they may commit weighed against the punishments, they could receive with the probability of being caught. As Becker clearly introduces in the beginning of the chapter of “Crime and Punishment” with his example of the parking ticket. He himself commits a rational crime through economic reasoning. Although I would come to a conclusion to disagree with this and crime being such a broad topic. Many types of crime don’t take in to consideration financial benefit and can sometimes rather be pleasure, for example rape, it brings so financial pleasure, therefore the economic benefit of it is zero, but then one can still go on to commit the crime. Although at the same time with Becker’s example of a parking ticket, I would agree with the rational crime made where one weighs up the risk of getting caught with being late to University.

                                

Becker points seem quite simple and practical what’s the harm?

Becker proposes many valid arguments to analyse social issues through economics, alternatively

there can be dangers presented in this. In Becker’s breakdown of Formation, dissolution and structure of families, we should look through a “Lens of utility-maximising forward looking behaviour”. Therefore, marriage and children can be seen as an investment so when parents get old children take care of them. This is seen as a negative outlook to hold to social problems such as this. This being a non-economic problem it can be seen to take the raw essence of parenting and childhood from its form. Making everything economic adds to the idea of globalisation, although this is evident in some cultures it can be the total opposite in others. However, by standardising this and looking at it economically some may lose their cultural approaches to these problems. Regardless if you find his view on looking at life in an economic way, Gary Becker provides various observations that allow one to at least imagine and contemplate living life making decisions in an economic way.

Bibliography

The Economic Way of Looking at Life - Gary Becker

http://im-an-economist.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/in-memoriam-gary-becker.html

Neoliberalism, is it still a misunderstood pejorative in modern politics?

Regardless of whether you define your political beliefs as a liberal, neoliberal, or libertarian. One element remains. A belief in individual liberty.

However, neoliberalism as a construct has become a synonym, often used as a derogatory term by the traditional left. And occasionally a descriptive term for policy on the traditional economic right. Part one of Dardot, Pierre and Laval’s book, “The New Way of the World: On Neoliberal Society”, translated in 2014, outlines the crisis of “Classical Liberalism” and the resulting birth of “Neoliberal” thought.

On the contrary to modern popular belief, neoliberalism is not simply the idea of “laisse faire” free market economics, small government, and personal freedom as prescribers to modern day libertarianism may lead you to believe…due to the interchangeable nature of the descriptors in contemporary political followings. But in fact, was birthed as the third way between social liberal and classically liberal politics. Resulting from, as Dardot, Pierre and Laval (2014: 27) state “the long crisis of liberalism that extended from the 1880s to the 1930s”

But why is this the case? The failures of neoliberalism (by its original definition) in eyes of social liberals in the Thatcherite years may be to blame. Personal economic freedom propagated by a strong central state regulator caused social and political upheaval in the UK during the 80s. The Guardian columnist, Seumas Milne illustrated this with his 2014 publication “During the miner’s strike, Thatcher’s secret state with the real enemy within”. Labelling the socially liberal left (trade unionists and Labour followers) as “enemies of democracy.” So, despite the Thatcher era arguably aiding the expansion and prosperity of the late 80s UK economy, the way in which the new domestic wealth didn’t “trickle down” throughout all socio-economic boundaries, made a large proportion of society perceive Thatcher’s alignments as classically liberal values, and the failure of these to “fairly” distribute income. Which conveniently challenges what Dardot, Pierre and Laval declare, “any distortion of competition betrays the illegitimate domination either of the state or of a group of private interests over the individual. It is comparable to tyranny and exploitation.” (2014; 100)

Therefore, labelling yourself as a neoliberal, likewise to Thatcher, perhaps became a declaration of being a libertarian and neoconservative by their modern definitions. However, if you look closely into the wording of many prominent neoconservative politicians up in till the turn of the century, declaring themselves as neoliberal was a rarity. Hopefully, this is because learned politicians would rather be correct in their description of their political alignment academically, than pertain to a populist presumption.

Yet, the late 90s brought about a new wave of traditional neoliberalist politicians and movements. “New Labour” springs to mind with Blairite doctrine of socially liberal values but also fundamental economic individual liberty founded once again in financial regulatory balance. Liam Halligan, in the telegraph wrote, the Blair premiership brought the UK “kicking and screaming, into the modern world” economically. It can be argued then that globalisation may have legitimatised the implementation of neoliberal ideas once again.

But still, those of the traditionally liberal persuasion still to this day look at the emergence of neoliberal ideas once again as an onslaught of traditional conservative politics penetration the party lines. “Old Labour” prescribers illustrate this using the Blair premiership as a prime example. The lack of “renationalisation” of public services and the “deregulation” of the financial markets paint the visual picture.

To conclude, among the “learned” politicians the definition of neoliberalism is not unfounded, however in my opinion, it is used as an effective propaganda buzzword by the traditional political left to allow social liberals to recoil when regulation that promotes economic individual liberty (and consequently self-accountability) tries to be implemented.

By Jack Caine

References:

Milne, Seumas. "During The Miners’ Strike, Thatcher’S Secret State Was The Real Enemy Within". The Guardian 2014: A single page. Web. 8 Nov. 2016. Found at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/03/miners-strike-thatcher-real-enemy-within-extremism

Halligan, Liam. "How Did Tony Blair Leave The British Economy?". Telegraph.co.uk. N.p., 2014. Web. 8 Nov. 2016.  Found at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10992792/How-did-Tony-Blair-leave-the-British-economy.html

Dardot, Pierre and Christian Laval translated by Gregory Elliot. The New Way Of The World. London Verso Books, 2014. Print.

"The "New Labour Are Left Wing" Myth". Anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk. N.p., 2014. Web. 8 Nov. 2016. Found at: http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/new-labour-left-wing-myth.html

The Limits of a President: Obama and the Neoliberalism

The Limits of a President: Obama and the Neoliberalism

To talk about Neoliberalism we first have to define the word “Liberty”, it commonly means to be free from certain restrictions on behaviour or opinion imposed by an authority, therefore it is considered a privilege, a right of a human being, liberty is what we trade in the law. In the Enlightenment, philosophers theorised that the Law is a social contract between men. We don’t have to forget the influence of culture on the rules of our society. Neoliberalism is the concept that from the past shapes our preset. 

The South Korean economist Ha-Joon Chang briefly explains in his book that Neoliberalism “has been the dominant economic view since the 1980s” and it derives from the older concept of Liberalism, where individual’s freedom had the priority over the power of the government that is reduced to a condition of “minimal state”.* Neoliberalism is also known with the name of Washington Consensus because supported by three most powerful economic organisations based in the capital city of the U.S. That’s where we are going to focus since the 240-year-old nation is one of the main influencers of the global economic attitude and trend.

Economics is a powerful tool to understand how the world works. As you may be aware, we are in an financial crisis, called also Great Recession, related to the burst of the housing bubble in 2007. It was caused principally by Wall Street’s careless behaviour dealing with the subprime mortgage. To put it ignorantly simple, they created a separate market where to sell what can be considered basically financial garbage, for example the risk attached to a certain investment, in order to make the transaction safer for banks. (Money, Power and Wall Street - Frontline Documentary)

In 2009 Barack Obama assumed the office of 44th President of the United States facing this huge chaotic economic situation, at the same time his campaign and his victory were a symbol of hope and change. There were a lot of expectations especially after the dire governments of Clinton and Bush Jr., it is peculiar how one of Obama's political defining quality during the campaign was the elusive character of his economic agenda. He surrounded himself with economic advisors who defined themselves as market-friendly pragmatists. Obama wanted to protect the workers but at the same time he shared Hayek's conception of market as best system to allocate resources and produce profits. In this view freedom in the market is strictly linked to the general sense of freedom. 

Obama economic politics is also defined by Jamie Peck as Nudge-ocracy in a way it “synthesises the New Democratic faith in the utility of markets with the Old Democratic emphasis of reducing inequality.” Obama realised that the smartest thing to do wasn’t trying to force the market to his wishes but to shape their views in a way to lead them to believe that their interests were the same as the government’s one. His actions were a mixture of activist government and market rationality “in which smart interventions are deployed to various nudge incrementally in the direction of a more egalitarian and sustainable trajectory.” °

The question that we can ask ourself on the day of the new general elections is not whether Obama changed things, generally cool competence after disastrous decisions helps alone, but if without his policies things will be worse. How a man elected President in a country where individual independence in a free-market is a fundamental value could have had the power to change drastically the declining economic situation without intervening aggressively. 

Thank you for reading! 

Giulia Gambardella

Bibliography: 
* Economics: The User’s Guide, Ha-Joon Chang, 2014, A Pelican Introduction (p.69-70)
° Constructions of Neoliberal Reason, Jamie Peck, 2012, Chapter 6

Further reading:
President Obama Weighs His Economic Legacy - The New York Times