Critical Thought as Solvent of Doxa

Loïc Wacquant

What is critical thought for you?

One can give two senses to the notion of critique: a sense one could call Kantian,
in the lineage of the philosopher of Königsberg, which refers to the evaluative
examination of categories and forms of knowledge in order to determine their
cognitive validity and value; and a Marxian sense, which trains the weapons of
reason at socio-historical reality and sets itself the task of bringing to light the
hidden forms of domination and exploitation which shape it so as to reveal by
contrast the alternatives they thwart and exclude (recall Horkheimer’s definition
of “critical theory” as theory that is at the same time explanatory, normative,
practical, and reflexive). It seems to me that the most fruitful critical thought is
that which situates itself at the confluence of these two traditions and thus weds
epistemological and social critique by questioning, in a continuous, active, and
radical manner, both established forms of thought and established forms of
collective life – “common sense” or doxa (including the doxa of the critical trad-
ition) along with the social and political relations that obtain at a particular
moment in a particular society.
Better yet, there can and must exist a synergy between these two forms of
critique, such that the questioning of intellectual critique – the history of concepts,
the logical dissection of terms, theses, and problematics, the social genealogy of
discourses, the archeology of their cultural underpinnings (everything the early
Foucault put under the notion of épistémè) – nourishes and enhances the force of
institutional critique. Knowledge of the social determinants of thought is indis-
pensable to liberating thought, if only slightly, from the determinisms that weigh
on it (as on all social practice) and thus to putting us in a position to project ourselves
mentally outside of the world as it is given to us in order to invent, concretely,
futures other than the one inscribed in the order of things. In short, critical thought
is that which gives us the means to think the world as it is and as it could be.

What is the influence of critical thought at the moment?

I would say, at the risk of seeming to contradict myself, that it is at one and the
same time extremely strong and terribly weak. Strong in the sense, first of all, that
never have our theoretical and empirical capacities to understand the social world
been so great, as witnessed by the extraordinary accumulation of knowledge and

Constellations Volume 11, No 1, 2004. © Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK
and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
98 Constellations Volume 11, Number 1, 2004

techniques of observation in the most varied domains, from geography to history

by way of anthropology and the cognitive sciences, not to mention the blooming
of the so-called humanities, philosophy, literature, law, etc. In all these domains,
with the deeply regrettable exceptions of economics and political science, which
remain for the most part consigned to the sad role of techniques for the legitim-
ation of the powers that be, one observes that the will to critical questioning is
everywhere present and fertile. It is no accident that Foucault and Bourdieu are
the world’s two most cited and utilized authors in the social sciences today: both
are critical thinkers and thinkers of power. And that feminism, an intellectual
movement and critical politics by its very principle, has renewed research in the
most varied realms, from aesthetics to archeology to criminology, by connecting
them to a concrete project of social and cultural transformation.
Read the analyses of the murderous drift of rationality produced by Zygmunt
Bauman in Modernity and the Holocaust; the literary experimentations (I use this
oxymoron by design) with which José Saramago deconstructs the social order in
Blindness; the theories of equity and economic development, fusing scientific
rigor and moral commitment, of the recent Nobel Prize laureate Amartya Sen in
Development as Freedom; Nancy Scheper-Hughes’s account of the contradictions
of maternal love in the shantytowns of Brazil in Death Without Weeping or the
gripping portrait of the twentieth century drawn by Eric Hobsbawm in The Age of
Extremes; the epic journey of the notion of freedom springing from the shadow of
slavery as recounted by Orlando Patterson in Slavery and Social Death and Freedom
in the Making of Western Culture; or, again, Pierre Bourdieu’s anatomy of the
mechanisms of legitimation of technocratic rule and class power in The State
Nobility – and you will be quickly convinced that critical thought is very much alive,
productive, in full swing, and moving forward. And, moreover, that it is not limited
only to those intellectuals who march self-consciously under its banner: many
researchers, artists, and writers help to sustain it independently of and sometimes
even despite their personal political engagements (or lack thereof) inasmuch as
they reveal oblique social possibilities that have been pushed aside, shoved back,
or repressed but are still present, in outline or in gestation, in our present.
Add to this the fact that there have never been so many social scientists and
intellectuals in the broad sense as today, that the general level of education in the
population is continually increasing, that sociologists (to take only them) have
never been so influential in the public sphere (judged by the number of books
they sell, their presence in media, their direct or indirect participation in political
debate), and you are tempted to conclude that reason has never had a better
chance to triumph over historical arbitrariness in human affairs. The growing suc-
cess in France of the “Raisons d’agir” [Reasons to act] imprint, created by Pierre
Bourdieu in the wake of the 1995 social upheavals in France, which produces
rigorous but short books, written by leading researchers in accessible language on
subjects of vital civic interest, from television journalism to educational reform to
the new ideologies serving to naturalize the deregulation of the labor market,

© 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

 Critical Thought as Solvent of Doxa: Loïc Wacquant 99

testifies to the fact that there is a broad social demand for critical thought and that
social science is perfectly capable of responding to it.
And, even so, this same critical thought is terribly weak: on the one hand
because it too often allows itself to be enclosed in and suffocated by the academic
microcosm (this is particularly conspicuous in the United States, where social
critique runs uselessly in circles and ends up biting its own tail, like a dog that has
been driven mad after being locked in a closet); and on the other hand because
today it finds itself at the foot of a veritable symbolic Great Wall formed by
neoliberal discourse and its manifold by-products, which have invaded all spheres
of cultural and social life, while in addition to that it must face the competition of
a false critical thought which, under cover of apparently progressive tropes
celebrating the “subject,” “identity,” “multiculturalism,” “diversity,” and
“globalization,” invites us to submit to the prevailing forces of the world, and in
particular to market forces. Just when the class structure is being rigidified and
polarized, when the hypermobility of capital gives the transnational bourgeoisie
an unprecedented capacity for domination, when the governing elites of all the
great powers dismantle in concert the social safety nets set up in the course of a
century of labor struggles, and when forms of poverty reminiscent of the nine-
teenth century resurge and spread, they converse on the “fragmented society,”
“ethnicity,” “conviviality,” and “difference.” Where one would need an unflinch-
ing historical and materialist analysis, they offer us a soft culturalism wholly
absorbed by the narcissistic preoccupations of the moment. In fact, false thinking
and false science have never been so prolix and so omnipresent.

What are the main forms that this false thinking takes?
In the United States, it is “policy research” that plays the lead role as a cover and
shield against critical thought by acting in the manner of a “buffer” isolating the
political field from any research that is independent and radical in its conception
as in its implications for public policy. All researchers who want to address state
officials are obliged to pass through this mongrel field, this “decontamination
chamber,” and agree to submit to severe censorship by reformulating their work
according to technocratic categories that ensure that this work will have neither
purchase nor any effect on reality (over the entrance gates of public policy
schools is written in invisible letters: “thou shallt not ask thy own questions”). In
point of fact, American politicians never invoke social research except when it
supports the direction they want to go in anyway for reasons of political expedi-
ency; in all other cases, they trample it shamelessly, as President Clinton did
when he signed his welfare “reform” in 1996 (a misnomer since this legislation
abolished the right to public assistance for the most destitute to replace it with
mandatory precarious wage work via “workfare”) despite truckloads of studies
showing that this amounts to a social regression bound to seriously harm the most
disadvantaged when economic conditions are no longer favorable.

© 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

100 Constellations Volume 11, Number 1, 2004

In Europe, this role is played by sociological journalism, a hybrid genre

practiced by those who are nominally academics but in reality spend their time
writing slapdash columns, editorials, and minute-maid features, appearing on
radio and television, and who are everywhere to discuss all the hot topics, even
and especially those for which they have no specific competency. They jump
from “social problem” to “social problem,” at the whim of media and political
demand, without ever asking how it is that such and such a phenomenon, say,
“youth violence” or “illegal immigration,” is constituted as a subject of collective
concern and public intervention, by whom and for what purpose. They occupy
nearly all of the small space journalists concede to researchers because they flatter
the vanity of journalist by effacing the distinction between the media worldview
and the scientific worldview: their analyses, which in the best cases rely on super-
ficial studies (and where would they find the time to undertake serious ones,
given all the time they spend in the media, on official commissions, and in the
corridors of power?), are so close as to be mistaken for journalistic accounts – so
one can readily understand that journalists appreciate and celebrate them!
But the main obstacle to critical thought today is something else: it is the formation
of a true neoliberal international, anchored by a network of think-tanks centered
on the east coast of the United States and relayed by the great international
institutions, the World Bank, the European Commission, the OECD, the WTO,
etc., which diffuse the products of false science at an exponential speed in order
to better legitimate the socially reactionary policies implemented everywhere in
the era of the triumphant market. I tried to show this in Prisons of Poverty for the
police tactics of “zero tolerance,” which were “globalized” in less than a decade
under the impulse of the Manhattan Institute in New York and its epigones and
active or passive “collaborators” abroad, and in Urban Outcasts with regard to
the pseudo-concept of the “underclass,” which serves in all the countries where it
is used to “blame the victim” by attributing the new forms of urban poverty to the
alleged emergence of a new group of dissolute and disorganized poor.1 In “The
Cunning of Imperialist Reason,”2 Pierre Bourdieu and I tried to lay out the linea-
ments of a critical analysis of the deployment and of the real and symbolic effects
of this new planetary vulgate, which presents the world made by the multinational
corporations as the final stage of history and the commodification of everything
existing as the highest achievement of humanity. One finds this vulgate now on
everyone’s lips, including those of governments and intellectuals who claim to be
“on the left” and think themselves (sometimes sincerely) progressive.

What can be the role of critical thought in the face of the obscenity of the
stupendous inequalities produced by the new global capitalism?
Its essential role is to constitute a breakwater of resistance to the crushing of every-
thing by the Moloch of the market, starting with the crushing of thought and all
the forms of cultural expression now threatened with violent death by the profit

© 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

 Critical Thought as Solvent of Doxa: Loïc Wacquant 101

imperative and the unbridled pursuit of marketing success: consider that Mrs. Hillary
Clinton received a seven million dollar advance and the CEO of General Electric
Jack Welsh got nine million for two execrable books that will be written by ghost
writers in which the one will recount her life as First Lady and the other his experi-
ences as a high-flying corporate tycoon, and that Amazon.com will sell barges of
them before they are even printed, while talented writers, poets, and young
researchers are unable to find houses willing to publish them for the sole reason
that all editors must now raise their annual profit rates in line with those of the
television and movie industries within which they have been integrated by the
large cultural conglomerates.
Critical thought must, with zeal and rigor, take apart the false commonplaces,
reveal the subterfuges, unmask the lies, and point out the logical and practical
contradictions of the discourse of King Market and triumphant capitalism, which
is spreading everywhere by the force of its own self-evidence, in the wake of the
brutal collapse of the bipolar structure of the world since 1989 and the suffocation
of the socialist project (and its adulteration by supposedly leftwing governments
de facto converted to neoliberal ideology). Critical thought must tirelessly pose
the question of the social costs and benefits of the policies of economic deregu-
lation and social dismantling which are now presented as the assured road to
eternal prosperity and supreme happiness under the aegis of “individual respons-
ibility” – which is another name for collective irresponsibility and mercantile
egoism. In his famous “Letter to Arnold Ruge,” published in the Rheiniche
Zeitung in 1844, Karl Marx pronounced himself in favor of a “ruthless critique of
everything existing.” It seems to me that this program is timelier than ever. We
thus return to the primary historical mission of critical thought, which is to serve
as a solvent of doxa, to perpetually question the obviousness and the very frames
of civic debate so as to give ourselves a chance to think the world, rather than
being thought by it, to take apart and understand its mechanisms, and thus to
reappropriate it intellectually and materially.

(Translated by James Ingram with the author)

NOTES

This is the translation of a text written in response to questions submitted by the Argentine
Philosophical Association and published as “El pensamiento crítico como disolvente de la doxa,”
Adef: Revista de Filosofía (Buenos Aires) 26, no. 1 (May 2001): 129–34.
1. Wacquant, Prisons of Poverty (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002) and
Urban Outcasts: Toward a Sociology of Advanced Marginality (Cambridge: Polity, 2003).
2. Pierre Bourdieu and Loïc Wacquant, “The Cunning of Imperialist Reason,” Theory,
Culture, and Society 16, no. 1 (February 1999): 41–57 (see the responses to this piece by
Couze Venn, John D. French, Jan Nederveen Pieterse, Jonathan Friedman, Pnina Werbner, and
Saskia Sassen, Theory, Culture and Society 17, no. 1 (Feb. 2000)) and “Neoliberal Newspeak,”
Radical Philosophy 105 (January 2001): 2–5.

© 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.