The legacy of Erik Olin Wright: Emancipating Aotearoa

This blog post introduces an article that appeared in the latest issue of the journal Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work. In that article, I offer an overview of the legacy of Erik Olin Wright (1947–2019), who was, until his untimely death in 2019, a professor of sociology and an analytical Marxist based at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the USA. Wright developed a framework for what he called emancipatory social science. In this blog post, I explore one dimension of that framework – his five strategic logics for change – and consider its relevance for Aotearoa today.

During the first two decades of his career, from the 1970s to the 1980s, Erik Olin Wright focused on reconstructing Marxism, particularly its framework for class analysis. Later, from the 1990s onwards, he turned his attention to the theme of creating real utopias and the practice of emancipatory social science.

By conjoining the words real and utopias, Wright signalled the core purpose of his project, described on its website in the following way:

The Real Utopias Project embraces a tension between dreams and practice. It is founded on the belief that what is pragmatically possible is not fixed independently of our imaginations, but is itself shaped by our visions. The fulfillment of such a belief involves “real utopias” – utopian ideals that are grounded in the real potentials for redesigning social institutions. (The Real Utopias Project)

The defining characteristic of Wright’s vision was that it was not focused on some remote hope of revolutionary change tomorrow, but on how to design and develop real, radical, democratic socialist change today.

Although critical and radical social work theory includes a rich seam of anti-oppressive perspectives, Erik Olin Wright’s work is little-known. My article argues for the relevance of Wright’s concept of emancipatory social science for anti-oppressive social work practice. It is based on a close reading of two of his key texts: Envisioning Real Utopias and How to Be an Anticapitalist in the Twenty-First Century.

Wright defined emancipatory social science in the following way:

The word emancipatory identifies a central moral purpose in the production of knowledge – the elimination of oppression and the creation of the conditions for human flourishing. And the word social implies the belief that human emancipation depends upon the transformation of the social world, not just the inner life of persons. (Wright, 2010, p. 10)

He articulated the framework of emancipatory social science by describing its three key tasks, three clusters of values, three key domains of social interaction and five strategic logics for change. In this blog post, I focus on the latter (although all of these aspects are described in the journal article to follow).

Wright described the change process slightly differently in Envisioning Real Utopias (written with an academic audience in mind) than he does in How to Be an Anticapitalist (written with an activist audience in mind). In this post, I focus on the newer, activist version.

Within the broad left tradition, there have always been different approaches to tackling the social harms associated with the capitalist system. Wright classified these into five different strategic logics for anticapitalist struggle. The five strategic logics are smashing capitalism, dismantling capitalism, taming capitalism, resisting capitalism and escaping capitalism. Although they may overlap in practice, each has, historically, offered a different orientation towards responding to the harms of capitalism. Let’s consider each one in turn.

Smashing capitalism: This is the strategic logic of ruptural transformation or the revolutionary overthrow of the capitalist system. Given its contradictions and recurrent crises, Wright argued that radical rupture was not impossible in high-income, overdeveloped, liberal democracies but believed it to be an unlikely prospect in the 21st century. Also, if it did occur, he considered it vulnerable to takeover by anti-democratic forces in ways that could lead to state-based authoritarian solutions (of the left or right) rather than democratic socialist forms of social empowerment.

Dismantling capitalism: This strategic logic, and the following one, are both examples of top-down strategies, as used by social democratic parties before the rise of neoliberalism. Dismantling capitalism involves state-directed reforms that progressively replace capitalist structures with more democratic socialist ones. The aim is to change the rules of the capitalist game, open up space for emancipatory alternatives and lay the foundations for a transition towards socialism. Historically, attempts included the selective nationalisation of key industries and infrastructure. More recently, the encouragement of municipal socialism and support for workers’ cooperatives are good examples. See, for example, the Alternative Models of Ownership promoted by the British Labour Party under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn.

Taming capitalism: This strategic logic seeks to minimise the harms of capitalism by implementing regulations, measures of redistribution and reforms that mitigate its negative impacts without undermining its existence, making life more tolerable within the capitalist framework. Actions might include progressive taxation policies, labour market regulations, health and safety legislation, support for trade union rights and collective bargaining, rent controls, public sector housing, welfare benefits, providing comprehensive state-funded health and social services and so on. In essence, the post-war welfare state was built on the premise of taming capitalism without replacing it. As Wright (2019) put it, “The idea of taming capitalism does not eliminate the underlying tendency for capitalism to cause harm; it simply counteracts that effect” (p. 45).

Resisting capitalism: Resisting capitalism, and the next strategy of escaping capitalism, are both bottom-up, civil society strategic logics. Resisting capitalism involves civil society, social movements and activists using direct action and mobilisations, such as protests and occupations, to highlight, confront and block the depredations of capitalism and pro-capitalist governments. The labour movement and other social movements are usually the driving force for civil society actions to resist capitalism. These forms of resistance are intended to highlight matters that political elites would rather ignore; they politicise issues by making them public. They are often concerned with fair pay, working conditions, social and economic justice, environmental justice, human rights, Indigenous rights, democracy and other forms of fairness. Social movements are not solely anticapitalist but mobilise on a wide range of related intersectional issues campaigning for Indigenous rights, redistribution, status recognition and against all forms of oppression.

Escaping capitalism: This final strategic logic, often associated with the anarchist tradition, focuses on creating alternative spaces of economic activity and relations within – but outside – the capitalist system, such as workers’ cooperatives, peer-to-peer production and promoting the social and solidarity economy. These initiatives can serve as practical examples of viable alternatives to capitalism, demonstrating that other ways of organising economic and social life are possible. Forms of mutual aid have always been part of the labour movement, as have cooperatives, and, although far from mainstream, there are some stunning modern success stories, such as the Mondragon Corporation in Spain, which operates workers’ owned cooperative companies, including a cooperative university. Escaping capitalism has sometimes been associated with dropping out, getting off the grid or disengaging from the system. Wright argues for a strategic logic of escaping capitalism that is not about individual lifestyle choices but genuine experiments in anticapitalist workplace organisational forms that prefigure alternative ways of arranging economic activity and providing services, including cooperative care services.

The most significant – and perhaps most controversial – aspect of Wright’s rendition of the five strategic logics is his argument that we should not view them – as they have been viewed historically – as competing, mutually exclusive forms of political strategy; but as component parts of an integrated programme to erode capitalism over time. In particular, he argues that the last four strategic logics – both the top-down and bottom-up – can be combined to achieve, in the longer term, transcendence from capitalism.

Underlying Wright’s vision of eroding capitalism is the idea that no society is entirely capitalist or socialist in nature, that each one is a hybrid ecosystem of capitalist, noncapitalist and anticapitalist elements and that:

One way to challenge capitalism is to build more democratic, egalitarian, participatory economic relations where possible in the spaces and cracks within this complex system. The idea of eroding capitalism imagines that these alternatives have the potential, in the long run, to become sufficiently prominent in the lives of individuals and communities that capitalism could eventually be displaced from its dominant role in the system. (Wright, 2019)

The hybrid ecosystem of Aotearoa

In Wright’s view every society at different historical conjunctures has a unique hybrid ecosystem shaped by its local history of social and economic struggle, influenced by its particular political and ideological battles. The balance between the forces of economic, state and social power varies between nation states, and Aotearoa has its own unique context. The present historical conjuncture in Aotearoa is deeply influenced by our ongoing history of settler colonialism and anti-colonial struggle (see Danielle Webb’s adaptation of Wright’s theory for Māori socialism).

In many Western countries a post-war commitment to class compromise led social democratic parties to adopt – to varying degrees – policies aimed at dismantling capitalism (through limited industry and infrastructure nationalisation) and taming capitalism (through regulation, redistribution and health and social services). In Aotearoa that social democratic moment began in the 1930s at the time of the Great Depression and the election of the First Labour government committed to socially progressive reforms and Keynesian economic policy.

Fifty years later, that commitment was undermined by the neoliberal revolution of the 1980s, commenced in Aotearoa by the Fourth Labour government and continued by other governments since then. This revolution rolled back state welfare and shifted economic power towards capitalist companies and market forces.

In Aotearoa, the rise of neoliberalism stopped short of abandoning all state-owned enterprises and government continued to regulate some aspects of the economy and to maintain public health, education, and social services. In terms of Wright’s theory, some aspects of state socialist attempts to tame and dismantle capitalism persist within social institutions in Aoteaora.

However, it is important to note the pervasive impact of neoliberalism as a political rationality on the culture and structure of public sector organisations – colonised by the regime of New Public Management – and on the subjectivity of workers and citizens nudged to see themselves as human capital and entrepreneurs of the self.

In Aoteaoroa today, our right-wing coalition government is determined to take the neoliberal revolution to the next level. Considering Wright’s strategic logics of dismantling and taming capitalism it is clear that these are both active sites of struggle as the coalition seeks to undermine the remaining state-owned enterprises, slash the public sector workforce, reduce regulation and unleash rather than tame the forces of capitalism.

Thinking with Erik Olin Wright

Erik Olin Wright did not intend his framework to be used as a blueprint or dogma. On the contrary, it was an intervention intended to offer anticapitalist movements a way to think, a common ground, a tūrangawaewae or place to stand to build together a noncapitalist future united by our commitment to the values of equality, democracy and solidarity.

In his view, that required strong coalitions of political actors and social movements – from above and below – willing to work together to transform social institutions in Aotearoa today.

I believe we can see glimpses of those alliances in contemporary movements to protect te Tiriti, to advance reproductive rights, to defend local democracy, to build public infrastructure, and to uphold the human rights of all, calling for an end to Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

There are progressive policies in the programmes of political parties in Aotearoa today. Te Pāti Māori is asserting mana motuhake and committed to prison abolition by 2040. The Green Party is planning to introduce an income guarantee (a form of universal income benefit supported by Wright as a non-reformist reform). The Labour Party is finally considering some measures of progressive taxation. Democratic socialists want all of these measures from above – not just some – and more, so much more.

Thinking with emancipatory social science means recognising the need to engage with, but not depend on single-party politics. We want state actors that support mana motuhake for Māori. We need greater accountability from all political actors. We want workplace democracy in industry, education, and the health and social care sectors. We need state actors – in central government and the local state – to provide funding and infrastructure that deepens democracy (using, for example, participatory budgeting and citizen assemblies) and engages in deliberative, prefigurative politics, experimenting with new participatory forms of social and economic institutions.

This struggle demands decolonisation and democratisation, for sure, but it also requires new forms of social and political imagination. It is a profoundly ideological struggle, one that involves changing how we think and feel about our work, our selves and each other.

Margaret Thatcher understood this when, as a political leader of the neoliberal revolution in the UK, she said “Economics are the method; the object is to change the heart and soul”. She was right and recognised that neoliberalism isn’t just an economic intervention but an ideological one. Thinking about the kind of human being neoliberalism generates, Wendy Brown suggested that it:

…literally converts workers into human capital, not just by generating a gig economy, but also by disseminating the idea that your task is to enhance your own value, keep it from depreciating, and do this at every level, from your social media profile to your résumé, to the particular things you volunteer for, to your particular networks. (Brown, 2020)

Our struggle is ideological because we need to win the battle for hearts and minds, for the soul of Aotearoa. Of course, we want to defend previous efforts to dismantle and tame capitalism, to maintain our public sector, infrastructure, transport, education, health and social welfare services. But we do not want or need Western, neoliberal, managerial public services. We do not want or need its many layers of management, quasi-markets, and performance metrics. We do not need league tables, or perpetual restructures to know how to create organisations that are convivial, productive, empowering, decolonised and anti-racist.

We must refuse to participate in the game of human monopoly that incentivises us to see ourselves as individual stocks of human capital seeking to attract investment in ourselves. We may need an accountable state to regulate, coordinate and resource, but we do not always need it to operate our industry, services or communities.

Planning a new world and making it possible requires broad coalitions of allies from above and below, with a deep commitment to understanding the potential and constraints of our present historical conjuncture and seizing every opportunity, however limited, to press forward. We must experiment with real utopias that build social housing rather than prisons, hospitals instead of oil fields, and seed solidarity, not social division.

Audre Lorde warned, “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house”. Perhaps Erik Olin Wright’s legacy is to bequeath us with a democratic socialist tool kit, one we can use collectively, in combination with other tools, to fashion a new house, to build an emancipated Aotearoa. Where shall we start?

References

Ballantyne, N. (2024). Emancipatory social work: An anticapitalist perspective. Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work, 36(4), 31–45. https://doi.org/10.11157/anzswj-vol36iss4id1203

Wright, E. O. (2010). Envisioning real utopias. Verso.

Wright, E. O. (2019). How to be an anticapitalist in the twenty-first century. Verso.