and isolated thoughts or circulate in fringe publications, con- fidential epors, or esoteric journals Is clear indeed that no compilation made by an archivist, no matter how detailed and exhaustive; no discussion within partes, astociations, or trade ‘unions; 0 synthesis by a theorist can substitute forthe prod: uct of conffontation between all those researchers oriented toward action and all the choughtfil and experienced activists of ll che European countries. Only the ideal asembly ofall those who, be they researchers of activists, have something €2 contribute to the joint enterprise will be abe ta bul the for _midable collective edifice worthy, for once, of the overworked concept of scetal project. aris, November 2000, 16 Fora Scholarship with Commitment T would like, frst, to thank Bdvward Said for his invitation to participate inthis dobaee and for his kind words of introdue- tion. I regret that I could not be with you in Chicago on this day due toll health, Nonetheless, | hope that, thanks to tech niques of remote communication, | ean be among you in voice and spirit and that we wil be able to open a dialogue Given that Ido not have much time and that I would like my speech to be affective as possible, Iwill come directly tothe usston that I wish to ruse before you: Must intellectuals more precisely, research schoat, or to be more acearte stil, social scientiss—intervene in the political world, and if so, under what conditions can they interject themselves efi ‘ently? What role can they pla in che various social move~ rents active todiy atthe national level and expecially 2 the international level_dhat is, a che level where the fate of ind ‘duals and societies is incressingly being decided? Can they contribute to inventing a new manner of doing pois fit for the novel dilemma and ehreats of our age? + Keyet adi dtd by ioe the Moder Lange AaFirst of all, to avoid misunderstandings, one must porit clearly that a researcher, artist, or writer wh intervenes inthe political world does not become a politician because of that. ‘According toa model created by Emile Zola on the occasion of the Dreyfus afi, he becomes an intellectal of, a8 you sy in America, “public intellectual,” that i, someone wo en izes his specific authority and the values asociated with the exercise of his or her craft, such athe values of disinterested ness and truth, in 2 political struggle—in other words, some fone who enters the terrain of polities bu without forsaking hher exigencies and competencies as aresearcher* (This i to sy, in passing, chat the canonical opposition that ie made, specially inthe Anglo-American tradition, between “schol arhip” and “commiement” is devoid of foundation. The in- trusions of artists, writers, and scientist—Biastein, Russel, of Sakharov—in the public sphere find their principle and basis ina scientific "commaniy” defined by is commitment to ob- Jectvty, probity and a presumed independence from worldly interest.) By investing her artistic oF scientific competency in civic Aebates, the scholar risks disappointing (the term is too weak) orsbetter yet, shocking others. onthe one side, she will hock those in her own universe, the academy, who choose the vrta us “way out” by remsining enclosed in theit ivory tower and who see in commitment a violation of the famous “axologi- cal neutrality” cat is wrongly identified with scientific objec tiviey when iis in facta scientifically unimpeachable form of | staan, On the other side, she will shock those inthe polit cal and journalistic fields who see her as a threat to their mo- + ftann nt Se Pee Bote, “The Carat ofthe Unvra The [Role fale he Moses Wor” a fal 007 90470 18 opoly over public speech and, more general those who ate disturbed by her intervention in political if She will isk, jn word, avakening all the forms of ant-intellecculism that ‘were hitherto dormant here and there among the masters of today’s world, bankers, businessmen, and state managers, among journalists and. politicians (including those of the “lft")nealy all of whom are now holders of cultaral capital, and of course among intellectaas themselves But to indict anti-inellecmalism, which is almost aways based on resentinent, docs not exempt the intellectual from this critique to which every intellectual can and must submit himselforherselforin another language, ftom reli which {isthe absolute prerequisite to any politcal action by intellecta- als The intllectal world must engage in permanent critique ofall the abuses of power or authority committed in the name ofineelecrual authority or ifyou prefer,ina relentless critique ofthe we of intellectual authority 2a political weapon within the intellectual eld. Every scholar must also submit himself or herself tothe critique ofthe shoastic bas * whose most pet verse forms the propensity to kind of “paper revlutionisn devoid of gemiine target or effect, I believe indeed that the _generous but unrealistic impolsethatled many European intel- Ieetuals of my generation to submit tothe dictates of the Com- _nunist Party sl inspires too offen today what I eal “campus radicalism,” thie typically academic propensity to "confuse the things of logic forthe logic of thing." according tothe pitiless formula of Marx,or closer to our current predicament, to mis {ake revolutions inthe onder of words or texts for evolutions + [ths elec Boie “The Sete Bolt of Vie” Cat “oly 3 Net 95 3-5, nd Pasian Mabon (Cie ‘ty Pen 300 (1997), ge nd. 19in the orderof things, verbal sparring a conferences for “inter- ventions" in the afr ofthe poli. Having posed these preliminary and apparently negative notions I can stent chat intllectaale (by which I mean artist, ‘writers, and scientists who engage in political action) are in Aispensabe to social struggles, especially nowadays given the quite novel forms that domination asumnes. A number of ro- cent historical works have revealed the pivotal role played by “think tanks” inthe production and imposition of the neo liberal ideology that rules the world todiy To the productions of these reactionary think tanks, which support and broadeast the views of experts appointed by the powerfil, we muse op= pose the productions of critical networks that bring together “specific intellectuals” (in Foucault’ sense ofthe term) into & veritable cllaive inelleanal capable of defining by itself the topics and ends ofits reflection and action—in short, an ae ‘tonomous collective intellect ‘This collective intellectual can and mst, inthe fis place, Sufi negative fitions: it mast work to produce and dssemi- hate instruments of defense against symbolic domination that relies increasingly on the authority of science (real or faked). Buruessed by the specific competericy and authority of the collective thus formed, it can submit dominant discourse to-a ‘meriles logical critique aimed not only a its lexicon (glob- alization,” “lexility” “employability” ete) but alo at its mode of reasoning and in particular atthe use of metapaors (4, the anthropomorphization of the matket). It can fur thermore subject this discourse to a sociological critique aimed at uncovering the socal determinants that beat on the producers of dominant discourse (sting with journalists pecially economic journalists) and on their products. Las i 2 can counter the psewdoscientific authority of authorized ex- pers (chief among them economic expert and advisor) with 4 genuinely seientifc critique of the hidden assumptions and often faulty reasoning that underpin ther pronouncement, ‘But che collective intellectual can ako full a positive func tion by contributing tothe collective work of political inven ‘ion, The collapse of Soviet-ype regimes and the weakening ‘of communist patties in most European and Latin American countries has feed critical thought. But neoliberal doxa has filed the vacuum thus created and critique has recreated into the “small world” of scademe, where it enchant itsalf with it- self without ever being in a position to really dhresten anyone about anything. The whole edifice of critical thought is in need of reconsiruction, And this work of reconstruction cat not be effected, as some have thought in the past, by a single great intellectual, a master thinker endowed with the sole resources ofhis singular thought, or by the authorized spokes- ‘person for a group oF an iastituion presumed to speak in the name of those without voice. ‘This is where th collective intellectual can play is unique role, by helping to create the socal conditions for the collec= tive production of realitic utopias Tecan onganize ot orches- trate joint research on novel forms of political action, on new ‘manners of mobilizing and of making mobilized people work together, on new ways of elaborating project and bringing them to fruition together Itcan play the role of midwife by 25- sisting the dynamics of working groups in thie effort to ex pres and thereby discover, what they are and what they could or should be, and by helping with the eappropration and ac- ‘cumulation ofthe immense soca stock of knowledge on the social world with which the social woud is pregnant It could 1Scicancamctbtrties mest ely ive ever snd epics ecb hoe ho ogame ma Sioa oe ae ieee ta Blac, Schrier, nd Jospin, have had to effec veritable sym i aetna Siacmeweren nr Scenes Saar Se ene ee {Mane a Pee ose ea, Te fhe nemo oy Cage ay Pes 8, ee 2 most precious democratic conquest inthe areas oflabor legis lation, health socal protection, and education. To fight such a progresive-retrogresive policy is to risk appearing conserva~ tive even as one defends the most progresive achievements of the past This situation sal ehe more paradoxical in that one is Jed to defend programs or institutions that one wishes in any case to change, sch as public services and the national state, ‘which no one could rightly want to preserve as is,or unions oF even public schooling, which must be continually subjected to the most merciless critique. Thus I am sometimes suspected of| conversion ot accused of contradiction when I defend a pub- Tie school system of which I have shown time and again that t falls a function of social conservation, Tt seems to me that scholars have 2 decisive role to play in the struggle against the new neoliberal doxa and the purely formal cosmopolitaniam of those obsessed with words such as “globalization” or “global competitiveness” This fake univer- salsm serves in reality the interest ofthe dominant in the ab sence ofa world state and a world bank financed by taxation of the international circulation of speculative capital, t serves to condemn as 2“ polically incorrect” regression toward nation alism the recourse to the only foree, che national state, presently capable of protecting emergent countries such a8 South Korea or Malaysia from the stranglehold of multina- tional corporations. Tis fake universalism allows one to tig- smatize, under demonizing labels sch 2 "Islamism" the efforts of.sch a Third World county to assext or restore is pobitical autonomy, based on state power. To this verbal universalism, {which also plagues eelations between the sexes and which Iaves citizens isolated and disarmed in the face of the over- Whelming power of transnational corporations, committed 23scholars can oppose 2 naw intemationaiom, capable of tacking with trly international force not only issues such as environ ‘mental problems (ar pollution, che ozone layer, nonrenevable fuels, oF atomic fallout) chat ate truly “global” because they know no boundaries between nations or between social lasses, but aso more strictly economic issues such a the for- ign debe of emergent countries, or cultural issues such a the ‘ueston of the hegemony of financial capital in the field of cultural production and diffsion (attested to by the growing concentration of publishing or movie production and dist bution). All these can unite intellectuals who ate resolutely ‘univers that intent upon universalizing the conditions of access to the univers, beyond the boundaries that separate nations, especially those of the North and South “To do so, writers, artists, and especially researchers (who, by trade, are already more inclined and more able than any other occupation to overcome national borders) must breach the 5a- ‘ed boundary inscribed in their minds—more or less deeply depending on their national tradikion—between scholarship and commitment in order to break out ofthe academic mero ‘osm and to enter resolutely into sustained exchange with the ‘outside world chat is, especally with unions, grasroots organ izations, and issue-oriented activist groups) instead of being content with waging the “political” batdes, at once intimate and ulsimate, and alwaysa bit unreal, ofthe scholastic universe Today’ researchers must innovate an improbable but indie Pensable combination: scholaship sith commitment, that is, a collective politics of intervention inthe political fel that fol- lows, at much 2s possible, the rules that govern the scientific field Given the mix of urgency and confision that usually char- 4 acerizes the world of political action, this is truly and fally posible only by and for an organization capable of coondinat ing the collective work of an international nerwork of re- searchers and artis. In this jine enterprise scientists are no doubt the ones who have t9 shoulder the primary role at a time when the powers that be ceaelesly invoke the authority of seience—and the science of economics in particular. But ‘writers and above all aris also have their contribution to ‘make (among them, thinkin particular of Hans Haacke, who tus already invested his talents in critical ates). “True ideas bear no intrinsi force’ sid Spinoza, and the sociologist isnot ‘one to dispute him on thi But she can suggest the unique and irreplaceable role that writers and artss can play in the new division of political labor oto be more precise, the new man- ner of doing politics that needs tobe invented: o give symtoli fore, by way of attic form, to critical ideas and analyses. They can for instance, give a visible and sensible form tothe in isle but sienifially preditahle consequences of political mea- sures inspirod by neoliberal ideology. 1 would like, by way of conclusion, to recall what happened last month in Seat. believe tha, without overestimating its importance, we ean see inthis event a fist and exemplary ex- periment that needs to be analyzed up close in order to un cover the principles of what could be the means and end of a new form of international political action able to transform the achievements of research into successful political demon- strations; what could be, more generally che strategies of poit- ical serugele of a new nongovernmental organization defined by total commitment to internationalism and fall adherence toscholarhip,