Competitive Advantages, Micro-reformism and Imaginary Convenient
The integration of social movements in contemporary capitalism
This article aims to discuss the integration of social movements in contemporary capitalism [1] . Undoubtedly, social movements have always been integrated into capitalism and this is neither a novelty nor a contemporary phenomenon. However, at certain times, integration may be greater or lesser, more intense or less intense, and there may be stronger or weaker dissent. In addition, there are distinct forms of integration. One of the forms of integration was the one that existed during transnational oligopolistic capitalism, in which the integrationist state generated a modality of state policy corresponding to the current accumulation regime . The mode of integrationist state policy is replaced by the neoliberal modality. This new modality of state policy will generate a new form of integration of social movements in capitalist society and the concepts ofcompetitive advantages, micro-reformism and convenient imagery assume great importance to explain such integrative dynamics.
The social movements stood out in the late 1960s for their strengthening, for the radicalization of some of their sectors and for that reason they became targets of the new integrative politics of the capitalist State . But this process is only comprehensible by analyzing the mutations of capitalism from that moment on. Capitalism has mutations that we call accumulation regimes. We will not discuss here the succession of accumulation regimes but rather explain that each accumulation regime occurs a set of derived social changes [2] . Our focus here is the regime of integral accumulation and the new form of integration of social movements and so we will limit ourselves to dealing with this historical moment and in a synthetic way so as not to deviate from the central objective.
The regime of integral accumulation promoted a change in the valorization process, which manifests itself concretely in the organization of work, replacing Fordism with toyotism, a mutation in institutional politics, provoking a change in the state apparatus, which changes from integrationist to neoliberal, and a mutation in international exploitation, from transnational oligopolistic imperialism to a hyperimperialism (VIANA, 2009, VIANA, 2015 a , BRAGA, 2013 ).
These mutations will hit social movements in various ways. We will highlight here, however, only the mutations that hit the social movements most directly. Let us emphasize, therefore, the intensification of capitalist sociability (especially competition) , the new state form (neoliberalism) and the new hegemonic paradigm (subjectivism). The intensification of capitalist sociability is cumulative in capitalism. At each epoch of capitalism, that is, with each regime of accumulation, there is a new wave of commodification, bureaucratization, and social competition.Social waves are cumulative processes that intensify and amplify determinate social relations. As commercialization, the red tape and competition are essential elements of capitalist sociability, then each accumulation regime, become more intens the extent to s. The intensification and expansion of commodification generates an intensification and expansion of bureaucratization and competition.
In this context, hipermercantiliza ction of social relations in the full regime of accumulation will generate an intensification and expansion of bureaucratization and social competition. The intensification process of commodification is noticeable in the transformation of all merchandise and mercancia (VIANA, 2016), including, more strongly, in this historical moment, culture, technology, education, etc. Along with this process, there is a strengthening of bureaucratization and competition.
A concrete case can illustrate this. Education is increasingly marketed at all levels. State policies increasingly quantify educational processes and subordinate them to the process of commodification, prioritizing outcomes that benefit the interests of capital (decreasing state expenditures, achievement rates, workforce formation, partnerships with private firms, intellectual productivity, resource saving, etc.). This process can only occur with greater and more effective control, which means intensification of bureaucratization.
The process of bureaucratization, in turn, aims to manage the results, quantification, etc., and for this is created a mechanisms of inquiry that are mechanisms of control and that are manifested through elements reinforcing the competition, even because resources are scarce and there is a process of "selection of the fittest" (in accordance with the interests of capital and defined by the state apparatus) that intensifies social competition. Thus, rankings are created (word of English origin and relative to the classification, highest position, etc., whose predominant and original use occurs in the sports competitions) in diverse educational instances , of students, institutions, professionals. The creation, in Brazil, the lattes curriculum, Q ualis (magazines and books now), are elements of this process, along with countless others.
Thus, intensification of commodification and bureaucratization leads to an intensification of social competition. And social competition is fundamentally focused on wealth and money (direct link to commodification) and power and positions (direct link to bureaucratization), as well as secondary (and related) elements of social competition: fame, success , etc. These elements are introjected in the minds of individuals, generating a bourgeois, that is, mercantile, bureaucratic and competitive mentality (VIANA, 2008). However , this has always occurred in capitalism. The problem is that the intensification of these component elements of capitalist sociability leads to an intensification of the intellectual, sentimental, and value-for-money valuation and involvement of individuals, and defeat in social competition becomes increasingly unbearable for the defeated and the increasingly less satisfactory intermediate position and acceptable to those of "relative success". This process has psychic effects, such as the unrestrained ambition of some, the psychic imbalances of thousands, and disorders such as depression, anxiety exacerbated , psychosis, neurosis, expand enormously in contemporary society.
This intensification of commodification, bureaucratization and competition is a product of the regime of integral accumulation, since the process of valorization and accumulation of capital demands this, and the Neoliberal State is its agent outside the instance of capitalist production itself. The expansion of the capitalist production of technological and cultural goods as commodities, has as a reinforcement the state enlargement of the consummation of goods, as well as unproductive capital [3] . The neoliberal state aims to reproduce, regularize and reinforce this process, according to the interests of capital . That is why the concrete case of educational policies show that the neoliberal modality of state policy reinforces the process of commodification, bureaucratization and competition [4] .
Neoliberalism implements neoliberal mode of state policy, which has a set of characteristics, and put some before and we can not develop here and has already been addressed elsewhere (VIANA, 2009; VIANA, 2015). We will highlight here only the element of the neoliberal modality of state policy that reaches more directly the social movements, that is, the segmental policies. Segmental policies replace the universal policies of the integrationist State, returning to specific social segments (youth, blacks, women, homosexuals, etc.). It is the neoliberal modality of state policies that generates secretariats for specific groups (youth, women, racial "equality" secretariats, etc.) and implements so-called "affirmative actions", "quota policy", etc. (Viana 2017). This process is allied to the interests of capital and the creation of new market niches ( which meansexpansion of the consumer market for certain goods ), as well as party interests and the creation of new electoral niches, although in this case the results are very limited.
Another element that complements the picture and helps to explain the integration of social movements in contemporary capitalism is the subjectivist paradigm. After the radicalization of social movements (especially, but not only, the student) and the labor movement in the late 1960s and remains until the 1970s, it produces a preventive cultural counterrevolution (VIANA, 2009; VIANA, 2017 b ) that generates diverse ideologies, doctrines and conceptions that express the search for capital and state apparatus in maintaining bourgeois hegemony and renewing it to avoid repetition of new autonomous and self-managed struggles . It is from 1969 that the new ideologies begin to emerge and, especially, the new paradigm that will become hegemonic: subjectivism.
Subjectivism seeks to overcome both the previous (reproductive) paradigm and Marxism, but its focus is the latter and its revolutionary meaning [5] . The subjectivist paradigm brings together various aspects of bourgeois episteme emphasizing what it is opposed to Marxism (and to a lesser extent, the paradigm reproductivist), whose emphasis pa ssa to be the subject and subjectivity, generating voluntarism, neoindividualismo, hedonism, narcissism, etc. The "subject" that each specific ideology affiliated to the new paradigm elects may be different (the individual, social groups, a specific social group, etc.). Thus, the ideologies that emerge from the early 1970s, such as those of Foucault ( 1989 ) and Guattari ( 1981 ), which present the rejection of theory and totality , are the first manifestations of this cultural mutation . Subsequently, other ideologies emerge reproducing the refusal of wholeness and theory in various forms.
The new paradigm and new ideologies reinforce certain values, beliefs, etc., and at the same time fit perfectly into the new modality of state policies and in the process of intensification of commodification , bureaucratization and social competition. These changes form a coherent unity produced by the regime of integral accumulation. And they produce impacts on social movements and from now on we will present the links between these elements and the current predominant form of integration of these elements in capitalist society .
Intensification of Competition and Competitive Advantages
The intensification of commodification and bureaucratization reinforces the intensification of social competition. This process affects social movements in various forms. One is that individuals are increasingly involved, whether they like it or not, through competition and other processes (commodification and bureaucratization). These are the individuals of all social groups. This involvement occurs through concrete social relations, but also through the strength of the hegemonic paradigm, ideologies and values that are generalized in society. Commoditization ( and the mercantile calculation that accompanies it ) is transforming individuals into increasingly cold and calculating human beings and reproducing elements typical of capitalist enterprises. The linguistic renewal that accompanies the emergence of hegemonic renewal reinforces this process and can be seen in terms that come from business relationships and are used in personal relationships and sectors of social movements such as "social capital", " entrepreneurship " "Empowerment" [6] , etc.
Capitalist sociability generates a bourgeois mentality that becomes dominant in capitalist society and from the new regime of accumulation and its characteristics already presented, this becomes even more widespread and intense. The competitive mentality is exacerbated in contemporaneity. This will be presented explicitly by some who are not afraid to reveal their central concern with competitiveness , entrepreneurship, winning competition, success, wealth, fame, power, etc. This is revealed in explicit discourses and even in places not seen before (see "the theology of prosperity"). The competitive mentality, in most cases, can be camouflaged, either in a conscious way or in the form of reasonableness. When the camouflage is conscious, these are opportunistic individuals who want to hide their real motivations. When camouflage is through reasonableness [7] the individual is convinced that what he does is by something more "noble" than mere social competition. We shall return to this when we are dealing with the proper imagery.
Thus the individuals of capitalist society are competitive, with rare exceptions, and generally varying in the degree and intensity in which the competitive mentality manifests itself. Now, individuals who work in social movements, as well as in parties, churches, unions, universities, schools, etc., are therefore competitive. The competitive mentality tends to be minimized in certain cases and contexts, either because of other beliefs or doctrines (religious, political, etc.) or contradictory values, or even a degree of awareness, all of which may be present in specific individual cases . Minimizing does not mean abolishing, for it, even to a minimal degree, affects all individuals in modern society. In explicit cases there are no great dilemmas for competitive individuals, but in camouflaged cases there may be (for camouflage may be due to value contradictions, etc., but it can also be in order to win the competition, just as a professional politician can not reveal that his objective is power and money and therefore he must invent that what he wants is the "good of the population") and in cases of reasoning the contradiction is stronger.
These individuals are part of the grassroots social groups and are their agents. Many minimize this, but many are opportunists and use the social movement for their own benefit, as well as others are contradictory, but their motivation is much more the personal interest than the collective.Besides these, there are those in which the competitive mentality is reduced and controlled by other values, feelings and conceptions, being the most honest and radical militants of social movements. Individuals who work in social movements may Search r competitive advantage through his social activism, which is the case for most. Many make their social activism a profession, create or adhere to organizations that will bring them benefits and seek to increase jobs (which means broadening bureaucratization), money (a boost to commodification), and competitiveness (meaning personal return through individual competitive advantages). Some do this intentionally, others without greater intentionality or even awareness of this process.
Thus, individual competitive advantages are increasingly exploited by individuals under the various forms already noted. This is stronger and more common in the case of individuals linked to bureaucratic organizations, especially political parties, in which interests and opportunism have fertile ground for development. The quest for individual competitive advantages is generated by competitive mentality and personal interests and aimed at overcoming social competition and gaining power, money, etc. In contemporary capitalism, this process is intensified and becomes hegemonic in social movements. These personal and immediate interests promote not the refusal, criticism or overcoming of capitalism, but the search for competitive advantages in the capitalist market and society .
The commodification of social movements , in turn, creates a set of new interests, not only of those who are autochthonous, but also of those who are alien. Autochthonous individuals are those who form part of the basic social group of a social movement, and non-native individuals are not members of this group, being their "sympathizers," "supporters," "financiers," etc. Female subjects, for example, are autochthonous when they participate in the women's movement, and male individuals, who are sympathizers or support the female cause, are alien (VIANA, 2016 b ) . The commodification of social movements occurs with the formation of mobilizing organizations and other processes that make financial resources and other elements common in the mobilizations effected by them. This can attain and generate interests of alien individuals. For example, the homosexual movement can produce a stop in a large city and for this purpose mobilize various resources (state, private, etc.) for this and this creates an opportunity to trade during such an event and thus ends up making its even as it can profit from it.
This is why there is a certain allochthonous investment in certain events and sectors of social movements as they are lucrative. The creation of " identities " , " lifestyles " , institutionalization of relationships and events, etc. are important to certain sectors of society by creating new consumer market niches (examples can multiply: vegetarians, homosexuals, animal advocates, etc. ). The days of women, which is born linked to the struggles of working women, is increasingly uncharacterized and transformed into a mercantile event . Spectacular fights ( DEBORD , 1997 ) also become 'commodified struggles'. The state apparatus and capitalist enterprises, as well as adjacencies, are increasingly investing in the actions of certain sectors of the social movements for their own benefit, although the speech, of course, is another.
Thus, the competitive process becomes more and more intense in social movements (which occurs in society as a whole, but in this case it is emblematic, since originally they would be challenging sectors of the existing social relations). Competitive individuals, competitive relations, etc., expand and hinder the unification of the social movement itself. There are competitive sectors , composed of diverse organizations and interests , generating different discourses and the dichotomy between declared objective and real objective [8] . This internal competition between social movements or within a specific social movement ends up being reinforced by Politician fight with the non-competitive sectors (the revolutionary tendencies within the social movements) as well as by the competition "spontaneous" of individuals, derived from your personal interests .
The search for competitive advantages, in turn, bring the need for discourses, ideologies, doctrines, political proposals, etc., that can justify and legitimize it. This ends up generating both microregionism and convenient imagery , aspects that we will address from now on.
Segmental Policies and Micro-reformism
The micro rreformism emerges from the constitution of certain ideologies affiliated to the subjectivist paradigm and next to the implantation of segmental policies of the neoliberal state. It comes to replace social-democratic reformism and the integrationist modality of state policies.Thus, micro-reformism has two sources as a political proposal: the state source, with its segmental policies and cultural apparatus , and the civilian source, made up of sectors of social movements, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), intellectuals financed by the state apparatus and private foundations, etc. The quest for competitive advantage fits like a glove into micro-reformism and is one of its supporters.
The ideological basis of micro-reformism is the subjectivist paradigm and diverse ideologies, such as post-structuralism, the ideology of identity, the ideology of gender, and so on. The claims focus on issues that concern only certain groups, aiming at an advantageous integration in bourgeois society. Their influence in the social movements and civil society groups reveals a position that can be described as "progressive neoliberal", which is the way contemporâne the liberalism-democratic, since it is a complement to neoliberal policies. The policies of affirmative action, of quotas, of legislative changes, are the scope of action of the adepts of micro-reformism.
Another strong point of action of the micro-reformists is the search for financial resources to defend such proposals, creating academic groups , NGOs and others that act to serve their own interests and speaking on behalf of a particular social group . Thus, micro- reformism manifests itself through academic groups and NGOs, which create their own interests and reproduce government policy, including co-opting individuals from oppressed groups or gaining their adherence to their microrreformist cause and that serves the interests of a minority and does not proposes social transformation or even a situational transformation of the group as a whole.
Here there is a complement to the segmental state policies and interests of sectors linked to social movements and speak on behalf of grassroots social groups to maintain their own interests. This is true even for intellectuals at universities who speak about "blackness," "identity," "gender," to satisfy their personal interests in research funding and academic recognition. Here, state co-op policies provide a complement. From the neoliberal ideology , the segmentary policies are palliative that serve segmental and non-universal interests and are less onerous . It is a policy of co-optation via the State, companies, academia. The ideology of gender, affirmative action , quota policies, etc. are promoted by the state apparatus itself, which disseminates ideologies, doctrines, political proposals of a microrreformist character, at the same time as it finances academic groups and intellectual productions to legitimize, justify and reinforce micro-reformism.
This process occurs with the support of international foundations, as can be seen in its edicts and financing of the same. Bourdieu expresses this clearly :
The Rockefeller Foundation funds a program on 'Race and ethnicity ' at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, as well as the Center for Afro-Asian Studies (and Afro-Asian Studies magazine) at Cândido Mendes University, in order to promote the exchange of researchers and students. To obtain its sponsorship, theFoundation imposes as a condition that the research teams meet the criteria of affirmative action in the American way, the q ue raises thorny problems since, as it turned out , the white / n dichotomy and gro is APPLICATION will at least risky in Brazilian society "(Bourdieu, 2001, p. 25).
This is just one example, as this case could be multiplied (the Ford Foundation is more present than Rockfeller in this type of "venture"). The big question is that academic groups, funded and co-opted sectors, NGOs, etc., exert an influence on the whole social movement and create hegemony within it. This hegemony of micro-reformism within a social movement reinforces its adherence not only to certain governments [9] but also to the state apparatus and capitalism. This process has an effect that is the constitution of the convenient imaginary, another fundamental element to explain the current form of integration of social movements in neoliberal capitalism.
Subjectivism and the Imaginary Convenient
Convenient imagery is not a new phenomenon. However, it gains a new form in contemporary times, especially when it is linked to social movements. Before explaining its novelty and carrying out its analysis, it is necessary to define this concept. The term "imaginary" has several meanings, but here it has a precise meaning: illusory everyday representations (VIANA, 201 5 b , VIANA , 2013 ) [10] . However, there are other forms of illusion, such as ideology. Therefore it is necessary to understand that the imaginary is a form of everyday representations (what has already been called "common sense", "social representations", "popular knowledge", "everyday knowledge", etc.) and, therefore, it is a systematic thought as is ideology (scientific, philosophical, etc.) , as well as that it is possible to exist true everyday representations, although in modern society they are rare and marginalized.
With regard to the convenient imagery and its relationship with social movements (and also with competitive advantages and micro-reformism), it is necessary to emphasize that there is a specificity in this form assumed by the illusory daily representations . The term "convenient" makes this specificity explicit. In any dictionary it is possible to see the definition of the word: convenient is what is appropriate and some add "by being appropriate, favorable or interesting". Basically, it is a simple and insufficient definition to understand what we are trying to analyze. The convenient imaginary is composed of illusory daily representations that are useful or serve the interests of those who manifest it. In the case of social movements, the convenient imaginary expresses personal interests and the immediate interests of certain social groups.
The easiest way to understand this concept is its comparison with the Nietzschean conception of "truth": useful fictions [11] . Thus, convenient imagery is a form of manifestation of illusory, false representations, that is, they are "useful fictions" produced by having utility or expressing interests and so are held as if they were true or believed to be true by their advocates. Convenient imagery is in many cases true for its creators or reproducers or, when they are aware of their falsity, are presented as if they were true. In the first case, individuals sincerely believe what they are saying. In the second case, they are aware of the falsehood of what they say. However, it is difficult to know who really believes or not , since they say the same thing and believe it .
The production of the convenient imaginary refers to the social process, that is, to capitalist sociability and its competitive character, which creates interest, social pressure, etc., to seek competitive advantages . It also refers to the world of ideas that reproduce and reinforce the conceptions, values, representations, etc. that legitimize and justify it. So we have since ideological production (born in universities, research centers, bureaucratic organizations, etc.) performed by creative and reproductive intellectuals [12] , through the doctrinal production (which is between academia and social group, being expressed more for reproductive intellectuals) and finally, the imaginary, illusory everyday representations produced and reproduced by the indigenous social group and some alien.
The subjectivist paradigm, placing the "subject" and the "subjectivity" as a central element, reinforces the production and reproduction of the appropriate imagery, including even native productions. This process can be perceived through some key terms that reproduce subjectivist conceptions and become popular in some sectors of social movements , such as "experience" and "place of speech". The ideologies reinforce this tendency and this ends up becoming one of the strong elements present in the social movements, generating the reinforcement of hegemonic ideologies and doctrines in certain sectors of the social movements. Another process that reinforces this is the currents of opinion generated or disseminated by oligopolistic means of communication, academic groups, activists of social movements, social networks of the internet, etc.
One of the most common procedures of this convenient imagery is to defend personal interests as if they were group interests. Thus, if a woman is disqualified in a public contest and a man is approved for the job, she may accuse the bank or the process of "macho", although there is no evidence to that effect. The process may have been unfair and marked by irregularity, but for the most common academic reasons in this case, that is, because there is a preference generated not by the sex of the individual but by links and / or academic interests. This assumes a collective form when it comes to "affirmative action" and "quota policies", which do not benefit or solve the problems that afflict social groups, but are individuals at the top of the social pyramid of such a group [13] . Once certain ideologies and doctrines spread throughout society, a growing group of individuals will tap into the imagery that is convenient to satisfy their interests.
Thus, some will appeal to the imaginary convenient to gain competitive advantages and personal benefits, whether or not aware of the falsity of the speech that uses . The first case is that of opportunistic individuals and the second is those who use reasonabilization . Opportunistic individuals are those who consciously want competitive advantages and know this and are usually those who are linked to groups, parties, etc. Honest but deceived individuals reproduce the mental process of reasonableness, which means making their discourse "reasonable" and abolishing the consciousness of their interests behind it.
A complementary element that is fundamental to highlight in the case of the appropriate imagery is its mobilizing character, as is the case with all forms of consciousness and cultural manifestations (VIANA, 201 5 b ). Convenient imagery is born of capitalist sociability and bourgeois hegemony, among other determinations, but once it exists, it becomes a mobilizer, causes people to act, both at the level of discourse reproduction and currents of opinion, and in the practice of politics and mobilization . That is why it is a complement to the other elements and expresses something problematic for social movements, which are increasingly moving away from the real interests of their grassroots social groups.
Final Considerations
The understanding of the process of integration of social movements in contemporary capitalism refers to the analysis of the regime of integral accumulation. Of course, it is not the integration of social movements as a whole, that is, of the social movement in its totality, but of sectors of the same, certain branches as organizations, individuals, etc. However, this process becomes hegemonic within the social movements, although the impact of this differentiates in each specific social movement . State co-optation worldwide has turned more to the women's movement and homosexual movement, while in some countries the attempt to co-opt youth movements, a black movement , among others, also occurred. Co-optation obviously works with sectors of these movements. At the cultural level, such co-opted sectors tend to become hegemonic.
Under each regime of accumulation there is a modality of state policy and, therefore, a principal form of co-optation. The explanation of the integration of social movements in contemporary capitalism thus refers to the understanding of the regime of integral accumulation and some of its characteristics that have a more direct impact on them.
The regime of integral accumulation brings in itself neoliberalism and generates the intensification of competition and the subjectivist paradigm . These aspects reach the social movements generating search for competitive advantages, microregionism and convenient imaginary. This social process is not immediately perceptible and in the world of the imaginary and certain ideologies, it appears as something originating from the population itself. There are process s mediation and in this sense the cultural policy of the capitalist state, capitalist enterprises, foundations, educational institutions, media oligopoly, it is essential to ensure the hegemony of the subjectivist paradigm, the strength of hegemonic affiliated ideologies and the formation of currents of opinion and the popularization of an imaginary corresponding to it. On the other hand, it also reinforces the belief in micro-reformism and this and the convenient imaginary reinforce each other.
The intensification of competition not only constrains individuals to a more competitive behavior, but also makes the competitive mentality even more powerful. And this also has processes of mediation, such as communicational capital, the diffusion of certain values, etc., as well as reinforced by other elements of capitalist sociability that intensifies, such as the intensification of bureaucratization and commodification of social relations, and by certain ideologies, doctrines, values, etc., such as hedonism, neoindividualism , narcissism, etc. Thus, some individuals use anything and everything to gain social competition and this has an impact on social movements, as it increases the number of people and opportunistic actions, ambition, etc., and therefore individuals wanting to make opportunistic use of such movements. In the same way, there is a general redirection of individual and collective actions for the conquest of positions, spaces, financial return, that is, benefits within the capitalist society, reinforcing the discourses and appropriate imagery in this respect.
The segmental policies of the neoliberal state, along with the incentive of the same in the sense of forming academic groups reinforcing the ideological and doctrinal bases of such policies, generate the primacy of micro-reformism within social movements. Mediations take place via academia, intellectual productions, ideologies, individual cooptation, etc. And these three elements (search for competitive advantages, micro-reformism and convenient imagery) reinforce each other.
In short, the neoliberal state generates a new form of integration of sectors of social movements in capitalist society and this becomes hegemonic in such movements. The result is that bureaucrats linked to such sectors are given jobs, resources, etc., and thus overcome social competition and apparently benefit the grassroots social groups of social movements, but ultimately retain most of the individual s autochthonous far from any benefit and also contributes to reproduce the social conditions that generate dissatisfaction (discrimination, oppression, lack of access to collective goods, etc.) of such social groups. In other words, a minority of such social groups are integrated into the state apparatus and other institutions (bureaucratic organizations) that reproduce capitalism and gain thereby, while the grassroots social groups of social movements continue to suffer from the ills produced by capitalism and many accept to rely on the speeches of the other members of their group, which serve for the process of reproduction and reinforcement of capitalist society and the problems that it generates.
References
BAGGIO, Adelar Francisco and BAGGIO, Daniel Knebel . Entrepreneurship: Concepts and Definitions. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Technology , 1 (1): 25-38, 2014. Available at: https://seer.imed.edu.br/index.php/revistasi/article/view/612/522 Accessed on: 01/01/2017.
BOURDIEU , Pierre. And scrit the E ducation . 3rd edition, Petrópolis: Vozes, 2001.
Page 2 The Theory of Integral Accumulation Regime. Revista Conflicto Social . Year 06, num. 10, Jul./Dec. 2013a.
CHESNAIS , François. The Theory of Financial Accumulation Regime : Content, scope and questions. Economics and Society , Campinas, v. 11, n. 1 (18), p. 1-44, jan./jun. 2002.
DEBORD, Guy. The Society of the Spectacle . Rio de Janeiro: Counterpoint, 1997.
ETZIONI , Amitai . The Modern Organizations. 5th edition, São Paulo: Pioneira, 1976.
Foucault, Michel. Microphysics of Power. 8ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Graal, 1989.
FRASER, Nancy. The Election of Donald Trump and the End of Progressive Neoliberalism. Available at: http://informecritica.blogspot.com.br/2008/01/a-eleicao-de-donald-trump-eo-fim-do.html accessed on 01/01/2018.
GUATTARI, Félix. Molecular Revolution: Political Beats of Desire . São Paulo: Brasiliense, 1981.
HARVEY, David. Postmodern Condition . São Paulo: Editions Loyola, 1992.
LIPIETZ , Alan. Audacity: An Alternative for the 21st Century . São Paulo: Nobel, 1991.
MARX , Karl and ENGELS , Friedrich. The German Ideology (Feuerbach ). 3rd Edition, São Paulo: Humanities, 1982.
McCarthy , J. and ZALD. M. Mobilization of Resources and Social Movements: A Partial Theory. Social Movements , Vol. 01, Num. 02, 2017. Available at: http://redelp.net/revistas/index.php/rms/article/view/692/pdf_10 accessed: 10/14/2017.
Nietzsche , Friedrich. Power Will . Vol. 2, São Paulo: Scale, 2004.
ORIO, Matthew. The Capitalist Development in the Succession of Accumulation Regimes. Human Sciences . Revista do Faculdade Estácio de Sá. Goiânia. Vol. 02, no. 09, Jan. 2014.
PORTES, Alejandro. Social Capital: Origins and Applications in Sociology. Sociology, Problems and Practices . n. 33 September 2000 .
RUCK, Richard. Reasonability: A Psychic Defense Mechanism. Sociology in Network, 06 (06), 2016.
TARDIEU, Serge. Critique of Specifism. Marxism and Self-management , 01 (02), 2014.
VASCONCELOS, Eduardo Mourão. The power that springs from pain and oppression : empowerment, its history, theories and strategies. São Paulo: Paulus ; 2003
VIANA, Nildo. The Counterrevolutionary Essence of Post-Structuralism. Marxism and Self-Management Magazine, vol. 04, num. 07, jan./jun. 2017b.
VIANA, Nildo. The Commodification of Social Relations . Mode of Capitalist Production and Bourgeois Social Forms. Rio de Janeiro, Ar Editora, 2016 a .
VIANA, Nildo. The Research in Daily Representations . Lisbon: Chiado, 2015 b .
VIANA, Nildo. State and Social Movements: Side Effects and Relational Dynamics. Coffee Magazine with Sociology. V. 6, N. 3, Aug./Dec. 2017. Available at: https://revistacafecomsociologia.com/revista/index.php/revista/article/view/902/pdf accessed on 12/31/2017.
VIANA, Nildo. State, Democracy and Citizenship . The Dynamics of Institutional Politics in Capitalism. 2nd edition, Rio de Janeiro: Rizoma, 2015a.
VIANA, Nildo. Imaginary and Ideology - The Illusions in Daily Representations and Complex Thought. Revista Livre Livre , year 5, num. 15, 2013.
VIANA, Nildo. Nietzsche: Will of Power and Irrationalism. Fragments of Culture , v. 20, n. 9/10, set./out. 2010
VIANA, Nildo. Capitalism in the Age of Integral Accumulation. São Paulo: Ideas and Letters, 2009.
VIANA, Nildo. The Social Movements . Curitiba: Prismas Publisher, 2016b.
VIANA, Nildo. The Objectives of Social Movements. Social Movements . Vol. 01, Num. 01, jul./dez. 2016.
VIANA , Nildo. Psychic Universe and Reproduction of Capital . Freudo -Marxist Essays . São Paulo: Listen, 2008.
1
[*] Professor of the Faculty of Social Sciences and the Postgraduate Program in Sociology of the Federal University of Goiás; PhD in Sociology from UnB and Post-Doctor at USP.
[1] We must warn that the social movement as a whole is never integrated or co-opted. They are sectors of the social movements that are integrated and co-opted, although they are generally hegemonic and majority quantitatively. Thus, when we put "integration" of social movements into capitalism, it is understood that we are dealing with hegemonic sectors within them, although in some passages, in order to maintain greater accuracy, we will make it clear that they are sectors and not the whole of the movement.
[2] On accumulation regimes in general there is a specific bibliographical production (VIANA, 2015a, VIANA, 2009, ÓRIO, 2014) and on integrated accumulation regime as well (VIANA, 2015a; VIANA, 2009; BRAGA, 2013). There are other conceptions of accumulation regimes and the current regime of accumulation ( HARVEY, 1992; LIPIETZ , 1991; CHESNAIS , 2002 ), but we consider the conception presented here to be more adequate and to explain better the contemporary reality.
[3] Unproductive capital is the sector of capital that extracts not more value but more money through the transfer of more value or income from productive capital or other sectors of society, including the state apparatus itself (VIANA, 2016a ).
[4] And it's still funny to note that own professors, including the neo-liberal critics are wordy to propose more bureaucracy, more control, more competition, even without using such words and realize its applicability in its proposals.
[5] This is noticeable in the name of some ideologies, such as post-structuralism, which apparently is a refusal of structuralism, and, in fact, its most frontal and critical attack is to Marxism (VIANA, 2009; VIANA , 2017b).
[6] The term "social capital" was pioneered by Bourdieu, with his customary improper transposition of terms from economic science to social relations, but was developed and gained other meanings with other authors such as Loury , Coleman, Baker (PORTES, 2000) and points to a utilitarian perception of networks of institutional friendships and contacts. The idea of entrepreneurship emerges in economic science and then comes to psychology and sociology, gaining space from the regime of integral accumulation, as can be noted in certain texts on the subject (BAGGIO and BAGGIO, 2014). The term "empowerment" emerges in 1950, but it is more often used since 1990 (VASCONCELOS, 2003), linked to subjectivism and neoliberalism, including by the left. The term is understood in different forms (in a more individualistic or more collective way, more related to the idea of self-help, market or supposed "emancipation" depending on the case), but its etymological root reveals its limits and deeper bonds,because it is a question of "power", something in itself problematic. Nancy Fraser (2017) shows how such a term is related to "progressive neoliberalism" and linked with other related constructs.
[7] Reasonability is a term that replaces the psychoanalytic term "rationalization" (RUCK, 2016) and means trying to make "reasonable", ie acceptable, rational, etc., behaviors reprehensible and viewed negatively, by the individual himself generates reasonableness.
[8] Competition occurs between sectors of social movements among themselves whether by space or resources and the greater the mobilizing organization, the greater its competitiveness and competitive character. This has already been worked out by McCarthy and Zald (2017). This generates the discrepancy between the actual objective and the declared objective of the organization, which has already been approached by several authors (VIANA, 201 ..) from the organizational analysis of Etzioni (1976).
[9] The social divisions within a social movement, as well as those existing in the basic social group of the same, generate fights, competition, etc., internally, generating different tendencies, organizations, etc. Micro-reformism being hegemonic, it marginalizes revolutionary and other tendencies that may oppose it, but is also affected by internal divisions. And so it is possible to identify a micro-reformism allied to the old Social-Democratic reformism (especially some sectors linked to political parties), a "spontaneous" micro-reformism that emerges from the existing hegemony and without links with the state apparatus and institutions. Only in-depth research could identify the set of manifestations derived from micro-reformism and its specificities.Our focus here is hegemonic microrreformism in social movements and therefore we will not approach these derived forms. It is in this context that the hegemony of specifism emerges within social movements (TARDIEU, 2014).
[10] The source of this conception lies in Marx, who distinguished between true and illusory representations (MARX and ENGELS, 1982). In the unfolding of the theory of everyday representations, the imaginary term ends up being a more abridged form of explaining the illusory daily representations.
[11] This does not mean agreeing with the Nietzschean conception (NIETZSCHE, 2004), which understands truth itself as "useful fiction", but rather that in certain cases, with regard to some illusory everyday representations, they assume this character. The Nietzschean conception is ideological and we have already challenged it elsewhere (VIANA, 2010).
[12] Marx distinguishes between active ideologues (ideology producers) and liabilities (breeding ideologies produced by earlier) and that is what we distinguish between productive and reproductive intellectuals (Marx and Engels 1982).
[13] The politics of racial quotas in universities, for example, do not reach black individuals illiterate, semi-literate, who did not finish high school, etc. and who are the overwhelming majority of the black population. They reach those who are already at the top of the social pyramid of the black population and this can benefit individuals, but it does not change the group situation or abolish injustices against such a population, as well as gaining adhesion and co-opting individuals from the group to support the society it generates this situation and governments that reproduces it. Since certain individuals in the group argue and this appears to be beneficial to the group as a whole, others, even if they are not in the least condition to enjoy such a "privilege," can unconditionally support such a policy, and therefore governments, groups , parties, etc.without realizing that this does not solve the issue and strengthens those who are the guarantors of the conditions of non-resolution of the problem.
