Competition is a governmental objective requiring an indefinitely active policy, never naturally given

Evidence

Just as for Husserl a formal structure is only given to intuition under certa,in cQ!!ilitions, in the same way competition as an essential economic logic will only appear and-produce its effects under certain conditions which have to be carefully and artificially constructed. This means that pure competition is not a primitive given. It can only be the result of lengthy efforts and, in trrl:th, pure competition is never attained. Pure competition must and can only be an objective, an objective thus presupposing an indefinitely active policy. Competition is therefore an historical objective of governmental art and not a natural given that must be respected. In this kind of analysis we find, of course, both the influence of Husserl and, in a somewhat Weberian way, the possibility of connecting up history with the economy. — Michel Foucault, The Birth of Biopolitics, 689

Categorization

  • XREF: This reverses the classical state-market causal story and is the seed of the later ‘the state must intervene to create competition’ positions; central to understanding ordoliberalism as distinct from both laissez-faire and Keynesianism. — connects to: Competition is a discovery process requiring minimal rules, not an endpoint or structure. — Quinn Slobodian, Globalists: The End of Empire and the…, 705; Neoliberal competition is a constructed formal game, not a natural state. — Wendy Brown, Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s…, 110; Competition under capitalism is a functional necessity, not manufactured legitimation. — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 611 (+1 more)

Broader Connections