Economic c isis
and poli ical
decision:
wo ds and meaning
Vi gínia Hen iques Calado
Luís Cunha
4.
88 ci izenship in c isis
in oduc ion
The ela ionship be ween c isis and ci izenship is complex and ambiguous.
Objec i ely, a c isis, as deep as he one we expe ienced ecen ly almos
ine i ably implies a comp ession o ci izenship igh s, e en o hose ha we
conside ed unassailable. This is done by educing some o he ins i u ional
esponses usually p o ided by he S a e, he eby agg a a ing unemploymen
and insol ency. I is ue ha he idea o ci izenship was summoned om
posi ions o powe , namely wi h he call o collec i e commi men in
o e coming he c isis. Howe e , i was a mobiliza ion equi emen ha canno
be dissocia ed om he a ibu ion o esponsibili ies, which a e also collec i e,
as was he gene ic and abusi e claim ha people had li ed abo e possibili ies.
Awa e o he mul iplici y o app oaches o he ela ionship be ween c isis
and ci izenship, le us elucida e he pu pose o his ex : i is no an analysis
o how speci ic g oups o ci izens ha e o ganized o p o ide answe s o he
c isis. Wha we a e looking o is an iden i ica ion o pa icula mechanisms
– exp essed in he cons uc ion o na a i es and in he language used –
h ough which a con incing wo ld iew is c ea ed and he esponses o he
c isis a e sough o in luence he exe cise o ci izenship. I a c isis con ex
can be seen as leading o speci ic o ms o exe cising ci izenship, i should
also be emphasized ha discou ses and na a i es abou i con ibu e o he
de ini ion o speci ic o ms o ci izen o ganiza ion. I is he e o e impo an
ha we de o e pa icula a en ion o hem. The expe ience o he c isis
c ea es a ou able condi ions o he a i ma ion o models o decons uc ion
and deciphe ing ha may be ele an o a mo e enligh ened and commi ed
ci izenship. In some ways, i is in he deba e be ween a hegemonic na a i e,
which denies he ideological dimension on which i is based, and he e o o
unco e he mechanisms o i s cons uc ion, ha ou con ibu ion is si ua ed.
om c isis o c ises: segmen a ion and dissimula ion
This chap e is de ini ely no a p oposal o unde s and he c isis om he
Poli ical economy poin o iew, no can we place his inpu in he sphe e o
Poli ical philosophy o make i i in o he old o enewed deba es o Economic
sociology o Economic an h opology, e en hough i s au ho s a e ained
an h opologis s. The di icul y in accu a ely placing ou sel es a ises no only
economic c isis and poli ical decision 89
om he na u e o he objec o inqui y bu also om he in e sec ion o wo
epis emological ec o s: he a emp o obse e i om an e o o disciplina y
ans e sali y and he heu is ic alue ha we gi e o he in e s i ial spaces
wi hin he amewo k o he deba e we aim o ini ia e.
We will no add ess he discussion conce ning he i ues and possible
inadequacies o a model o o de ing and o ganizing knowledge wi h i s
co e on he s ic specializa ion and he ine i able agmen a ion ha comes
wi h i . As a eplacemen o his necessa ily long and ine i ably displaced
discussion, we emphasize ha he objec we p opose o add ess, a leas in
he way we concei e i , is pa icula ly dispe sed by a eas o knowledge which,
in some cases, a e no e en con iguous. F om ou poin o iew, he e o e, i
ecommends an in eg a ed gaze inspi ed by wha could be called a gene al
heo y o social sys ems. We do no , ob iously, in end o p opose some hing
ha esembles his, bu we s ill seek an app oach based mo e on dispe sion
han on specializa ion, engende ed mo e in a(n) (un)ce ain c oss- e iliza ion
o knowledge han on a na ow espec o disciplina y bounda ies.
I is no , o cou se, only a ma e o ying a ee exe cise o he e odoxy
be o e modes ly con ibu ing o a deba e which, by i s e y na u e and
implica ions, needs o be as b oad as possible. We unde s and ha disciplina y
bounda ies a e no limi ed o de ining knowledge only in a ou o a i uous
specializa ion, bu hey a e also decisi e in c ea ing he hie a chy o hese
ields o knowledge. On he o he hand, he dispu e conce ning legi ima e
ields o knowledge can ope a e, and does ope a e in he case o economics,
a disguise e ec , which limi s and es ains he p ac ical ac ion o agen s. To
pu i in ano he way, and ying o connec hese a gumen s, we conside
specializa ion no only as a consequence o an ope a i e a ionali y sus ained
by he i ues o labou di ision; i is also he p oduc o he symbolic igh s
ha mo e ac oss he ields o knowledge and, hus, c ea o o ep esen a ions
and concep ions o he wo ld ha guide social p ac ices.
Be o e we e en enuncia e he sc ip we in end o ollow, le us begin by
conside ing he na u e o he objec o sea ch, seeking o poin ou he way
in which i shows i sel as elusi e, assuming di e en images, econ igu ing
i sel , wi hou essen ial changing. I is impo an o highligh ha he c isis
we a e alking abou , and which we will discuss he e, has had di e en o ms
o exp ession, hemsel es associa ed wi h di e en na a i es, as i hey we e
di e en and disconnec ed phenomena (Teles 2017, 53-54). I was i s named
a c isis in inancial sys ems, hus e e ing o a global inancial c isis (2007-08)
90 ci izenship in c isis
ha esul ed om he implosion o he us inancial ma ke , which had
g own specula i ely due o he s ong low o o eign capi al o ha coun y
(Va ou akis 2015). Wha ollowed, clea ly om 2011 on, was he public deb
c isis in he Eu ozone, which was he e o e gi en a dis inc geog aphical scope
and also a di e en explana ion – ha o he imbalance be ween c edi o and
deb o coun ies, wi h he la e su e ing he mos penalizing consequences.1
F om 2013 on and as a esul o he e e sal o us mone a y policy and he
loss o ma ke alue o many commodi ies, a hi d side o he c isis became
clea , now a ec ing eme ging coun ies.2 Finally, oday: “we a e appa en ly
in he ou h ac o he c isis” (Teles 2017, 54). This c isis is cen ed in he
de eloped coun ies, which ha e plunged in o a long pe iod o low g ow h,
high unemploymen , and ha e come close o de la ion in a si ua ion o
appa en endless s agna ion.
The opinion o economis s conce ning his issue is no consensual, bu his is
no wha ma e s o us he e. The poin ha seems mos ele an o us is he one
conce ning he p ac ical e ec s o his p ocess o agmen a ion o a phenomenon
ha in many ways is seen as indi isible. We a gue ha his segmen a ion is
nei he neu al no jus i ied by s ic ly echnical c i e ia, bu i depends ins ead
on he adjus men o a - eaching poli ical na a i es. This adjus men has
decisi e implica ions om he poin o iew o he measu es applied o he
esolu ion o he c isis, since i signi ies a change o mo al judgmen on i s
causes.3 I should also be men ioned ha his segmen a ion o he c isis is
al eady a simpli ica ion, as i lea es ou he possibili y o hinking abou his
mu an c isis in a longe empo ali y, jus like o he dimensions ha only
seem o escape i . In he long un i is possible o ace back he cu en
1 A di ec ela ionship can be es ablished be ween hese wo ac s o c isis: “ he c isis has unde gone
a me amo phosis: wha was appa en ly a inancial c isis in 2007-2008 – he banking eeze and he
c edi c unch – became an explosi e poli ical c isis because s a es we e di ec ly in ol ed in sol ing he
inancial c isis, wi h he bu den being ans e ed o s a es and go e nmen s” (Thompson 2011, 38) [ou
ansla ion].
2 Equally insepa able om he 2007/8 c isis, especially i we see in he slowdown in g ow h o hese
coun ies as a consequence o he collapse o he inancial su plus ecycling mechanism, as p oposed by
Va ou akis (2015).
3 I he “c isis o he inancial sys ems” ha dly escapes a c i ical e alua ion o he pe o mance o banks
and he g eed o inancial agen s, i s ansmu a ion in o a “public deb c isis” places mo al judgmen
on he eckless beha iou o o dina y ci izens – “We li ed beyond ou means.” The “genesis amnesia”,
poin ed ou by Bou dieu (2000, 16), has a clea illus a ion he e.
economic c isis and poli ical decision 91
de elopmen s o he oil c isis (1973) and o he p o ound economic, poli ical,
and social ans o ma ions p omo ed by Ronald Reagan and Ma ga e
Tha che ’s go e nmen s (Jud 2010, 99). On he o he hand, and conce ning
a di e en issue, he e ugee c isis as a esul o he g ea e mig a o y wa e and
humani a ian c isis ha Eu ope has aced since Wo ld Wa ii, o he esu gence
o na ionalis mo emen s, bo h ha e e iden connec ions wi h global p ocesses
( inancial, poli ical, and o he s) ha explain economic c ises s ic o sensu.
In a globalized wo ld like he one we li e in – unequally globalized, we
al eady know i , bu which has p ecisely in he inancial sys em one o he
highes exponen s o globaliza ion (San os 2001) – i seems inapp op ia e
o spli o ci cumsc ibe inancial c ises acco ding o geog aphical o spa ial
c i e ia. The so e eign deb s o he sou he n Eu opean coun ies and he
s ong decele a ing o e en hal in he g ow h a e o he eme ging coun ies
canno be sepa a ed om a global mac oeconomic amewo k, which includes
phenomena such as he social di ision o labou , he di ec ion o lows in a
global economy, o he unequal powe o coun ies. We should no , howe e ,
educe he p oposals o segmen a ion o he c isis o an e o o e alua ion
o o a desi e o simpli y i , no o a delibe a e e o o con ol damages made
by hose who ha e an in e es in his same con ol. We a gue ha we should
see in hem no a s a egy bu a condi ion ha ends o be s uc u al: “We
a e segmen ed e e ywhe e and in all di ec ions. Man is a segmen al animal.
Segmen a i y belongs o all he s a a ha compose us” (Deleuze and Gua a i
1972, 268). Howe e , he classical opposi ion be ween he segmen a y and he
cen alized is no ele an in his case:
The mode n poli ical sys em is a global, uni ied and uni ying whole, bu [ his is so]
because i implies a se o jux aposed, o e lapping, o de ly subsys ems in such a way ha
he analysis o decisions e eals all so s o sepa a ions and pa ial p ocesses ha a e no
main ained om one o he nex wi hou imbalances o displacemen s. (Deleuze and
Gua a i 1972, 269)
We can see in his desc ip ion o he mode n model o powe a design ha
i s he way in which he dominan economic heo y – le us call i Theo y o
Ra ional Ac ion – manages i s e i o y. C ossing he di e en axes in which
powe is cen ed and hei b anches (poli ical, inancial, legal, and e en media
cen es) a e loca ed wi h an ins umen al segmen a ion o he e en , which
is also language con ainmen , a closing e ec is achie ed ha allows o bo h

92 ci izenship in c isis
go e n he eading o he pas and o p edic he u u e.4 Closing means, in his
case, a molecula expansion o uni ied signs, a meaning-p oducing machine,
which cu ails he coun e poin , p e en ing, in he limi , dissen . This closu e
can be bo h mani es and some imes sub le in ou e e yday expe ience –
ob ious, o ins ance, in he ecogni ion as u h o he s a emen “The e Is No
Al e na i e” condensed in o he ac onym ina; mo e sub le when a neu al
judgmen is a ibu ed o inancial a ing agencies, as i his neu ali y we e
de i ed om he unc ion hey pe o m, and canno be ain ed by he links
o ac ual b anches o he inancial sys em. One can see in hese examples
he molecula expansion o a u h ha does no allow any discussion and
in ol es complex de ices, which ha e a o mal sedimen a ion – o ins ance
in he legal sphe e – bu also in o mal, clea in he poli ical discou se o in he
media space. F om his comes, hus, an enclosing o public sphe e (Habe mas
1962) and he educ ion o he exe cise o ci izenship o innocuous i ual
p ocedu es.
Re u ning o he idea o c isis, we unde s and ha we mus see in i
simul aneously a singula momen and also he ma e ializa ion o a cyclical
e en ha is an in eg al pa o how economy wo ks in mode n socie ies. In
he i s sense, he idea o c isis ( e)assumes a meaning ha seems o ha e been
los . Unde s ood as a “decisi e momen ” (Leone 2016, 11), i would signal a
u ning poin , an end o cycle in i s
minimalis exp ession, o , in i s maximalis
exp ession, he e olu iona y end o an e a.5 The second sense we p oposed is
no con adic o y when compa ed o his one, i jus implies ano he ocus.
Ins ead o seeing he c isis as a decisi e momen , i is a ma e o seeing i as
an ine i able consequence o he dynamics o a sys em ha needs he c isis
o egene a e i sel . I is no a ques ion o decla ing he exis ence o a de ini e
in en ionali y, le alone ying any conspi acy heo y (Thompson 2011, 43),
bu he me e eplacemen o he belie in he i uous balance gene a ed by
4 The homogeniza ion o a na a i e b ings us, o cou se, be o e he ques ion o agency: o which
ins ance should be a ibu ed he g ea e esponsibili y in he p oduc ion o his na a i e? Whe e
should we pu he line ha sepa a es his p oduc ion om i s homogeniza ion, in o de o pe cei e he
dynamics o p ocesses and hei agen s? Rehea sing an answe o hese issues is ou side he scope o his
wo k, bu he e is i s signage.
5 In his sense, Cas ells’ eading (2013, 10) seems o indica e he minimalis op ion: “ he a e ma h
[o he c isis] is undamen ally he a e ma h o he end o a pa icula model o specula i e capi alism.”
In he maximalis e sion we would, o cou se, be aced wi h he i eco e able collapse o he capi alis
model.
economic c isis and poli ical decision 93
he ma ke by he idea ha successi e imbalances a e sys emic and he esul o
s uc u al inequali ies be ween indi idual agen s and collec i e en i ies, such
as coun ies. I we pu deb a he hea o he capi alis economy (Thompson
2011, 33), we can see he c isis as he ex eme mani es a ion o he s uc u al
imbalance be ween deb o and c edi o (Va ou akis 2015), b inging o li e he
ma ke , le elling and egali a ian, as an essen ial an asy o he heal h o he
capi alis sys em.6 Seen h ough hese lenses, he c isis, any c isis, bu also his
one in which we s ill li e, acqui es ano he exp ession, losing neu ali y o
assume a de ini e poli ical sense: ha o managing inequali ies, na u alizing
hem, and emp ying hem o hei a bi a y con en s. The success o his e ec
depends, as we shall see la e , on he e ec i eness o he na a i es ha he
model i sel demands. Aspec s such as pe suasion, disguise, and e en he use
o o ms o ex e nal in e en ion (T oika) a e consis en wi h his na a i e,
sus aining and ein o cing i . G an (2012), discussing he legi imacy o he
use o incen i es, such as im loans, a gues p ecisely ha hese, like pe suasion
o coe cion, a e o ms o exe cising powe ha allow he manipula ion o
indi iduals h ough poli ical games.
I is o his exe cise o making sense ha we should epo he heo e ical
and p ac ical wo k o segmen ing he c isis. Whe he conside ed a he le el
o diagnosis o he apy, his segmen a ion, like any o he , can be epo ed in
an appa en ly neu al way o he complex exe cise o d awing bounda ies
and ope a ing dis inc ions, ha is, o an ac o o de ing ha is simul aneously
indispensable and a bi a y (Cunha 2007). Ine i abili y s ems om he need o
gi e a ecognizable meaning o wha would o he wise be a chao ic succession
o e en s. A bi a iness a ises om he de ini ion o he c i e ia o o de ing, o
he place whe e he on ie is placed and legi imized, ha is, o he di ision o
he wo ld ha is inhe en o he ac o d awing bounda ies (Bou dieu 1989).
The a bi a y na u e o he di ision is dissimula ed; om he e y beginning
hanks o he auc o i as o who di ides, which e e s o he enuncia ion and
o he ac s ha c ea e meaning and go e n he legi ima e o de o he wo ld.
I we conside speci ically he economic o de , which has, as we shall see, he
ambi ion o becoming a global o de , we will ealize ha he p ocedu es added
o his de ice a e mul iple, complex, and widesp ead. Fo ou pa , al hough
wi hou he ambi ion o being exhaus i e, we will ocus ou analysis on he
6 The cen ali y o deb is discussed by Caillé (2002, 248) in an e en mo e undamen al sense, which is
he hypo hesis o deb being cons i u i e o he subjec and gua an o o social pe enniali y.
94 ci izenship in c isis
mechanisms ha p oduce a con incing na a i e, summoning, as an example,
he poli ical discou se, speci ically by analysing he speeches o he p ime
minis e s in he amewo k o he Deba es on he S a e o he Na ion o e en
yea s (2008-17).
The idea o na a i e is unde s ood he e as a s a emen composed by
exp essi e con en , ha is, “A me hod o ecapi ula ing pas expe ience ha
consis s in ma ching a sequence o e en s (supposedly eal) o an iden ical
sequence o e bal p oposi ions” (Labo 1978, 295). The discou se seems a
se o s a emen s ha canno be sepa a ed om i s se ing o p oduc ion (Reis
and Lopes 2002, 110). Thus, he meaning ha de i es om discou se and is
exp essed in wo ds, exp essions, and p eposi ions, is insepa able om socio-
his o ical p ocesses and om he ideological placemen o agen s.
The oadmap o wha emains o his pape can now be d awn. We ha e
a gued ha he p ocess o segmen a ion o he c isis in o sec o al c ises is
no able o be educed o a possible echnical jus i ica ion, implying, on he
con a y, he managemen o a na a i e ha no only o de s empo ali y bu
also a ec s he meaning o pas ac ions and he s a egy o u u e ac ions. In
he nex s eps o his wo k we will y o open he analysis beyond he echnical
and also symbolic p ocess o c isis segmen a ion. We will ocus on he sphe e
o language, summoning, a i s , some o he cen al na a i es o o malis
economic heo y, and hen ocusing on he con empo a y modali ies o wo d
managemen h ough he use o an almos newspeak in he O wellian sense
o he e m. Finally, we will conclude by add essing p ocesses o enuncia ion
eco ded in poli ical discou se, choosing, in his case, an analysis ha we ha e
aken as illus a i e, since i ocuses on a singula momen – Deba es on he
S a e o he Na ion – and on he exp ession o a single oice, ha o he ac ing
P ime Minis e .
We conside ha poli ical discou se does, in i s own way, wha science does
as well: i classi ies and o de s, i in e sec s hings and wo ds in o de o c ea e
he o ical e ec s ha can become gene a o s o meaning and u h, gi ing
exp ession o a wo ld iew acco ding o speci ic knowledge and belie s.7 We
will conside poli ical discou se di ec ly in i s exp ession o powe , a powe
o make see and make belie e (Bou dieu 1989), which gene a es a meaning
o he wo ld, which, when elabo a ed in a compe en way (widely ecognized
as legi ima e) can co espond o a ision o eali y ha seems objec i e and
7 On he pe spec i e adop ed he e conce ning he powe o discou se, see Foucaul (1971).
economic c isis and poli ical decision 95
i e u able. I he high echnici y o Poli ical Economy is a ield o expe s only,
he possibili y o applying a - eaching measu es o he economy belongs o
he S a e and o hose who ule i . Two o de s o meaning a e hus a icula ed,
in o which we will look. On he one hand, one de i ing om he compe ence
ecognized in he economics expe s; on he o he hand, ano he one ha
is based on he way in which poli ical discou se leans upon and ein o ces
ideologies (Mannheim 1960) ha a e widesp ead in social space.
old ables and new ales:
pe sis ence and enewal o na a i es
In a wo k whose g ea es aim was dissemina ion, Vi o Ben o summons mo als
o help explain economics:
Economics, as a s udy o eali y o , mo e accu a ely, o human beha iou ela ed o
economic ac i i y, is a posi i e science and, as such, a science (p ac ically) independen o
mo al conside a ions. Bu economy, as a human ac i i y, always wo ks in mo al con ex s.
(Ben o 2011, 10)
The dis inc ion poin ed ou by Vi o Ben o is almos educed o i ele ance
i we belie e ha all human ac i i y is economic, ha is, i we educe socie y o
he ma ke . The ambi ion o be a posi i e science and he ine i abili y o being
a social science could lead Poli ical Economy o an unmanageable ield, which,
as we know, does no happen. On he con a y, economis s mo e on clea ly
de ined, moni o ed, a ionalized, and p edic able g ounds. How do you ge his
e ec ? I is o en done by placing mo ali y a he se ice o economics, ha is,
by making i he basis o posi i e science, by es ablishing a connec ion be ween
human na u e and economic beha iou . Fables and me apho s ha e se ed his
pu pose, so i is wo hwhile conside ing he e, e en b ie ly, some hing ha can
be seen as belonging o he ma ix na a i es o Poli ical Economics.
In 1714 Be na d de Mande ille published The Fable o he Bees, o : P i a e
Vices, Public Bene i s ha would become amous in he co e a gumen s
de eloped by Poli ical Economics. Abou hal a cen u y la e , Adam Smi h
published his mos amous wo k, An Inqui y in o he Na u e and Causes o
he Weal h o Na ions (1776), which is an exp essi e example o accoun o
na u al economic beha iou :
102 ci izenship in c isis
should be seen as complemen a y: i he i s e ec gi es ise o he idea o a
uni ied ield o all, which equalizes all playe s wi hin he ma ke , assuming
ha hey a e equally equipped o he compe i ion gene a ed he e, he second
e ec is ac i a ed whene e one goes o he le el o explana ion and de ini ion
o economic policies, gua an eeing a con ol o he p ocesses – also he e
disguising he pe o ma i i y o he decisions (de egula ion o labou , loss
o s a e powe , e c.) unde he co e o newspeak, as o mula ed by heo y.16
Poli ical discou se is undoub edly a pa o his complex mechanism ha
gene a es meaning, and we will add ess i o conclude his pape .
he poli ical discou se: me apho s and e lec ions
The deba es on he S a e o he Na ion happen in he middle o he calenda
yea (July), p eceding he aca ion pe iod and consequen slowing down o
poli ical ac i i y. They cons i u e an oppo uni y o e ospec i e, which
he Go e nmen uses o jus i y i s ac ion and p esen new measu es, and
which he Opposi ion uses o c ea e poli ical di icul ies o he Go e nmen ,
denouncing ailu es o sho comings. The e a e a lo o games, s aging, and
dissimula ion, highligh ing he posi i e o nega i e colou s o poli ical ac s and
s a is ical indica o s, highligh ing o de aluing ex e nal ac o s, e c. Al hough
i is an impo an momen om he poin o iew o poli ical con on a ion,
we op ed, on his occasion, o s ick o he P ime Minis e ’s speech. This is
a deba able op ion, bu wi h i we sough o highligh he poli ical ac as a
combina ion be ween discou se and powe o apply measu es.17 Conside ed
in a ela i ely long ime, we can see hese discou ses as an illus a ion o
he possibili y o a di e en ia ed eading o he c isis, bu abo e all o he
s a egies o he o ical cons uc ion o a gumen s ha jus i y eal poli ical
ac ions, including manipula i e s a egies, which bo h announce measu es
o up u e as con inuous and, in opposi ion, claim o be di e en , changing
no hing conce ning he pas ou comes o con es a ion. Taking in o accoun he
16 The a ailabili y in he cu en banking ma ke o complex inancial p oduc s, and hei acquisi ion
wi hou adequa e knowledge o hei cha ac e is ics, gene a ed inancial losses o many housands o
Po uguese ci izens, who a gued wi h hei banking ins i u ions, in a ou o hei pa as sa e s and
no in es o s.
17 Fo an analysis ha also d aws on P ime Minis e s’ speeches and in e iews wi h membe s o he
Go e nmen s in o ice du ing he T oika pe iod, see Mou y and S and ing (2017).

economic c isis and poli ical decision 103
objec i es o his wo k, we conside he pe iod in which he c isis is s a ed, he
pe iod ma ked by ex e nal in e en ion and he cu en pe iod. A en yea span
(2008-2017) is hus de ined, which includes h ee legisla u es and h ee p ime
minis e s – h ee speeches by José Sóc a es (2008/2009/2010), ou by Passos
Coelho (2012/2013/2014/2015), and wo by An ónio Cos a (2016/2017).
Co esponding o expec a ions, he c isis is clea ly p esen in he nine
discou ses we analysed.18 I begins by being conside ed in a limi ed and es ic ed
way by Sóc a es who, in 2008, summons i o explain Po ugal’s di icul ies in he
o eign ma ke ( he inc ease in he p ice o oil and ise o alue o he eu o), and
hen becomes cen al in his las speech as p ime minis e , and in all he speeches
o Passos Coelho, and ela i ely sub le in discou ses by An ónio Cos a. Lea ing
aside he explana ion o he c isis o now, all discou ses con e ge in o he idea
ha “ he wo s is now o e ”, ha is, hey all announce u ning poin s as a esul
o he policies hey a e using. Somehow we can see he e a cen al aspec o he
na a i e s a egy o discou ses: he sys ema ic ecu ence o a se o simple
bina y opposi ions, in his case be ween c isis and o e coming, bu which has
o he exp essions – go e nmen /opposi ion; ac i e/passi e; change/pe manence,
i esponsible in es men /budge discipline, e c. These opposi ions a e s uc u al
in he sense ha hey de ine signi ica ions in an exp essi e way, signalling wha
mus be done in opposi ion o wha o he s wan : doing di e en ly o p e en ing
wha is necessa y. In some cases, he he o ic used seems o depend less on
ideological ac o s han on he ac o being in go e nmen o in opposi ion.
This is wha happens wi h he accusa ion o being oo passi e in he ace o he
c isis o o a ou ing he pe manence a he expense o he necessa y change.
E en ideologically ac u ing hemes, such as public in es men , admi some
ambigui y, depending on he li ed momen . Thus, a he beginning o he
c isis, in 2008, José Sóc a es poin ed ou o he opposi ion, s a ing: “We ha e
all el , in p ac ice, he deeply nega i e e ec s o he heo y ha he coun y
would no supposedly ha e money o any hing and would ha e o gi e up any
in es men in i s u u e”. This “ heo y”, which he la e s a es as “ne a ious”, is
no p ope ly con i med by Passos Coelho, who chooses o associa e he isks
inhe en in he iscal consolida ion plan wi h a s a e-held es ain ole: “ he
expenses o he public adminis a ion sec o and o s a e’s business sec o , a e
being educed a a conside able pace”. In he speech o 2016, An ónio Cos a
p oposes o “ u n he page o aus e i y”, eassigning impo ance o public
18 In 2011 he e was no such deba e due o he dissolu ion o Pa liamen .
104 ci izenship in c isis
in es men , h ough he announcemen o new P og ammes – Na ional Fund
o U ban Rehabili a ion and Blue Fund, dedica ed o he economy o he sea
– and p omising o aise limi a ions o municipal in es men .
Beyond c isis, he e is ano he impo an ea u e uni ying speeches, he idea
o e o m. We ha e seen how his wo d has become cen al o he economis s’
ocabula y, and we ind he e an e iden app oxima ion be ween hese wo
uni e ses. I is, howe e , a he o ical cen ali y, since i is oo imp ecise and ague
wha he p oclaimed e o mism e e s o. In Sóc a es, e o m is insepa able om
mode niza ion and i epo s, especially in 2008, o echnological de elopmen
– enewable ene gies o he Technological Plan o Educa ion. In he ollowing
yea s, he ga e in wi h he accen ua ion o he c isis, speaking o a “ e o mis
agenda” applied o Social Secu i y (2009), wi hou e e ailing o say ha he
ad oca es a “ alue-o ien ed e o m” (2010). Passos Coelho gi es ano he
meaning o e o m: his pu pose is o “build a new economy: mo e compe i i e,
mo e open, mo e democ a ic” (2013). We a e, in his case, close o wha
can be called he libe al agenda, wi h e o mism eme ging as an ins umen
o s uc u al ans o ma ion o he economy. I Sóc a es placed he S a e a
he cen e o he e o mis ac ion, Coelho sees e o m in he e ea o he
s a e. As o Cos a, he p oposes (2016) a Na ional Re o m P og amme wi h six
undamen al pilla s, highligh ing educa ion, inno a ion, and mode niza ion o
he S a e. We can see he eco e y o quali ica ion and echnology ha Sóc a es
insis ed upon, bu i seems mo e i al o us he eplacemen o a mac oeconomic
e o mism by a mo e nuanced and con e gen solu ion ha bea s he idea o
“ u ning he page o aus e i y” (2016).
The ideas o mode niza ion and p og ess a e also ecu en , hus sugges ing
a s uc u al unc ion, exac ly ha o poin ing ou , once again, he coun e poin
be ween wha exis s, and is seen as an unwan ed inhe i ance o hose who ha e
abandoned powe , and wha hey p omise o achie e, in he condi ion ha i is
always o a ain consensus, o a leas a esponsible opposi ion, which does no
ollow a “bo om-up cul u e” – a e m used by Sóc a es in 2008. Mode niza ion
is always seen as indispensable o good go e nance, signalling a necessa y
pa h o he desi ed app oach o some o ou Eu opean pa ne s. He e, oo,
con e gence is somewha misleading, since a leas wo di e en di ec ions
a e de ined a ound he same wo d. On he one hand, mode niza ion h ough
quali ica ion, which implies be ing on educa ion and on he main enance
o a s ong Social S a e; on he o he hand, mode niza ion as a design o he
economy, which e e s o he demand o g ea e libe aliza ion and educ ion
economic c isis and poli ical decision 105
o he weigh o he S a e. Sóc a es is in he i s case and Coelho in he
second, o cou se, al hough his dis inc ion is no clea ly shown, since bo h
eso , pe haps in a he o ical way, o solu ions o he han hose hey seem o
p io i ize: Sóc a es p omises “budge consolida ion” (2010) and Coelho “ he
eal quali ica ion o e e y Po uguese pe son” (2012).
The use o s ongly con e gen na a i e s a egies makes i di icul o ind
in hese discou ses clea poin s o ideological ac u e. Ne e heless, while in
he discou ses o Sóc a es and Cos a one pe cei es a poli ical posi ion wi hin
he social-democ a ic adi ion, in Coelho’s discou ses he emphasis is always
placed on he alse/ ue dicho omy, being ideology a pa o he i s e m and
eali y a consequence o he second. The heme o his i s speech (2012) seems
o be a “cla i ying momen ”, which means ha he c isis has led he coun y
o a si ua ion ha esul s om gi ing in o ideologies and i is necessa y o
edisco e he pa h by li ing acco ding o eali y. This unde s anding suppo s
he p oclama ion ha he e is no al e na i e, and he e is he e o e only one
pa h which, because i is he only one, e eals i sel o be s ipped o ideology
– “ideology” is a “bookle ”, a “dis ac ion”, as he s a es in he 2015 deba e. In
Passos Coelho’s speeches, he idea o u h opposes no only wha is alse, bu
also wha is illuso y and un easonable. This is why Passos Coelho opposes
policies ha de end he hope in “mo e o less mi aculous e en s” (2012),
excluding “magical solu ions” (2013). In his same discou se he makes his e y
s uc u ing dis inc ion o his hough e y clea : “I is he du y o all poli ical
agen s no o con use he eali y o he coun y wi h he s ic wo ld o poli ics
and he media agenda. I is mainly wi h Cos a ha his ine i abili y ( ina)
is decons uc ed h ough discou se. In his speech o 2017 he decla es: “Yes,
he e was an al e na i e!”, and his al e na i e, i no ideologically assumed,
is a leas poli ically alued because i ansla es i sel in o a “clima e o social
peace and ins i u ional no mali y.” Looking a he ques ion om he poin
o iew o economic heo y, he clea es con on a ion is be ween Sóc a es
and Coelho. The discussion abou wha igge ed he c isis helps us o ealize
he di e ences be ween hem. While ecognizing ex e nal ac o s, Coelho
emphasizes he guil o hose who uled be o e him, yielding o an easy way ou
and dis ega ding igou . Thus, he ge s close o a neolibe al ision, appa en in
he de ence o an open economy, in he o ien a ion o educa ion o espond o
he ma ke o in he p oposals o e o m o he S a e, cen ed in he educ ion
o public expense. Sóc a es ocuses his 2009 speech on he idea ha he c isis
has an ex e nal o igin, exemp ing he coun y om di ec esponsibili ies and
106 ci izenship in c isis
also he poli ical/ideological cou se ha had been ollowed: “i was no he
in e en ion o he S a e, no was i he social s a e ha p o oked he c isis!”
(2010). The aul lies wi hin he de egula ion o inancial ma ke s and, in he
same speech, he also a gues ha “po e y and inequali y a e no ough wi h
any kind o ‘in isible hand’”.
Sóc a es’ censo ship o he belie in an in isible hand ha go e ns he
economy in allibly p o ides p ope comple ion o his pape because we see
in i he s eng h o he ounda ional na a i e o Poli ical Economy, oo o
wo ds and belie s ha a e ew i en and pe sis , hus guiding collec i e ac ion
and he decisions o hose who go e n. Bu he in isible hand is also a good
me apho o ha which hinde s a mo e ac i e pa icipa ion o ci izens in
he polis. We know ha his is mo e implici han explici in ou w i ing, bu
e using o ci cumsc ibe he unde s anding o he c isis o he es ic ed ci cle
o au ho ized specialis s, who educe i o a echnici y ha ul ima ely e e s o
he ungo e nable mechanics o an in isible hand, is o diminish democ acy
and open he way o dange ous mo i a ions.
conclusion
We ha e e oked he complexi y inhe en in he pe sis ence o a ounda ional
na a i e as well as he di e en analy ical le els and a icula ions ha need
o be used o deepen he deba es ha we ha e only ouched on in his ex .
This was e y much o look o he signs and language esou ces ha allow
he poli ical game and he pe manence o ce ain ideas. We began by s essing
how he segmen a ion o he c isis (c isis in inancial sys ems, public deb c isis
in he Eu ozone, c isis in eme ging coun ies, c isis o low g ow h in de eloped
coun ies) is a o m o dissocia ion ha does no encou age an in eg a ed look
a he c isis, as a complex phenomenon esul ing om he connec ion o hese
di e en segmen s. F agmen a ion, simpli ica ion, and ecu ence in oduce
an e ec o banaliza ion o he c isis, hus making i possible o be adjus ed
and manipula ed by di e en poli ical na a i es. Second, we emphasized
he impo ance o Poli ical Economy and o he Ra ional ac ion heo y
( a ional choice, indi idualism, i uous balance o he compe i i e ma ke …)
in cons uc ing he a gumen s o explaining he c isis. I was possible o
highligh ha a he same ime sophis ica ion in he ools o calcula ion
and analysis was p oduced om he Economy, wi h closing e ec s o he
economic c isis and poli ical decision 107
non-expe s, a newspeak and a simpli ica ion o language was in oduced in
o de o allow he wo ds ha ga e sense o social p ocesses. The c isis could
hus become a p e ex o managing social inequali ies. Finally, we sough o
illus a e h ough poli ical speeches how na a i es o poli ical a i ma ion
we e cons uc ed, highligh ing how he no ions o c isis and e o m bu also
o adjus men , ideology, and eali y we e mobilized o p oduce decisi e e ec s
in he sense ha is a ibu ed o p ac ices and ep esen a ions ha go e n he
wo ld. The discu si e dynamics allowed us o obse e he a iable ole o a
mo e ideological hough , which is a i med o aded acco ding o he momen
o he poli ical cycle, ha is, as i is in he opposi ion o in he go e nmen .
We ha e ollowed some na a i e h eads o a complex plo and, al hough we
le ou many o he s, we ealize he impo ance o wha is said, wha is eigned
o be said and, mos ly, wha is no u e ed. I is by linking hese ies, paying
a en ion o wo ds and silence, ha he communi y and ci izen’s pa icipa ion
may be s eng hened.
acknowledgemen s
This chap e was ansla ed wi h he inancial suppo o c h ough he s a egic p ojec
uid/soc/50013/2013.
Vi gínia Hen iques Calado wishes o acknowledge unding ecei ed om he Po uguese
Founda ion o Science and Technology ( c ), wi hin he amewo k o a pos -doc o al
p ojec ( c /s h/bpd/97532/2013.
____________________________________
i gínia hen iques calado
Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, Uni e sidade de Lisboa
A . P o . Aníbal Be encou 9 — 1600-036 Lisboa, Po ugal
[email p o ec ed]a.p
o cid.o g/0000-0002-5292-2440
____________________________________
luís cunha
c ia, Uni e sidade do Minho
[email p o ec ed].p
o cid.o g/0000-0002-9940-9265
____________________________________

108 ci izenship in c isis
e e ences
ab eu, A. 2017. “His ó ias do nosso u u o”. In aa Economia com Todos. Lisbon: Relógio
d’Água, 223-236.
assembleia da epública. 2008 o 2017. “Discu sos do Es ado da Nação”. Diá io da
Assembleia da República, i sé ie.
ben o, V. 2011. Economia, Mo al e Polí ica. Lisbon: Fundação Manuel dos San os.
bo doni, C., Z. Bauman. 2016. Es ado de C ise. Lisbon: Relógio d’Água.
bou dieu, P. 1982. Ce que pa le eu di e. L’ économie des échanges linguis iques. Pa is:
Faya d.
bou dieu, P. 1989. “A iden idade e a ep esen ação. Elemen os pa a uma e lexão c í ica
sob e a ideia de egião”. In O Pode Simbólico. Lisbon: Di el, 107-132.
bou dieu, P. 2000. Les s uc u es sociales de l’ économie. Pa is: Seuil.
b i o, A. 2014. “Be na d Mande ille e as escolas de ca idade”. É: Re is a É ica e Filoso ia
Polí ica, x ii (1): 24-33.
caillé, A. 2002. “Quelle de e de ie?”. L’ H omme , 162 (2): 243-254.
cas ells, M. 2011. “A c ise global não global e as cul u as económicas al e na i as”. In
A e ma h. As Cul u as Económicas da C ise em Deba e, eds. G. Ca doso, e al. Lisbon:
Mundos Sociais, 5-27.
ca doso, G. 2011. “A alência do in e esse p óp io e o pode da pe ença”. In A e ma h. As
Cul u as Económicas da C ise em Deba e, eds. G. Ca doso, e al. Lisbon: Mundos Sociais,
47-67.
cunha, L. 2007. “F on e a”. In Dicciona io de Relaciones In e cul u ales. Di e sidad y
Globalización, o gs. G. Ba añano, e al. Mad id: Edi o ial Complu ense, 147-157.
deleuze, G., F. Gua a i. 1972. Mil Planal os. Capi alismo e Esquizo enia 2. Lisbon: Assí io
& Al im.
des osiè es, A. 2000. “L’ his oi e de la s a is ique comme gen e: s yle d’ éc i u e e usages
sociaux”. Genèses, 39 (2): 121-137.
aye, J. P. 1973. La c i ique du langage e son économie. Pa is: Édi ions Galilée.
oucaul , M. 1971. L’ o d e du discou s. Pa is: Gallima d.
g an , R. 2012. S ings A ached: Un angling he E hics o Incen i es. P ince on and Ox o d:
P ince on Uni e si y P ess.
habe mas, J. 1962. Mudança Es u u al da Es e a Pública. Rio de Janei o: Tempo Uni e si á io.
jud , T. 2010. Um T a ado Sob e os Nossos A uais Descon en amen os. Lisbon: Edições 70.
labo , W. 1978. Le pa le o dinai e. La langue dans les ghe os noi es des é a s-unis, ol. 1.
Pa is: Edi ions de Minui .
leone, C. 2016. C ise e C ises em Po ugal. Lisbon: Fundação Manuel dos San os.
mannheim, K. 1960. Ideology and U opia. An In oduc ion o he Sociology o Knowledge.
London: Hou ledge & Kegan Paul.
mou y, C., A. S and ing. 2017.“ ‘Going beyond he T oika’: powe and discou se in Po uguese
aus e i y poli ics”. Eu opean Jou nal o Poli ical Resea ch, 56 (3): 660-679.
pike y, T. 2014. O Capi al no Século xxi. Lisbon: Temas & Deba es.
eis, C., A. C. Lopes. 2002. Dicioná io de Na a ologia. Coimb a: Almedina.
san os, B. S. 2001. “Os p ocessos de globalização”. In Globalização. Fa alidade ou U opia?,
o g. B. S. San os. Po o: A on amen o, 31-106.
smi h, A. 1759. La eo ía de los sen imien os mo ales. Mad id: Alianza Edi o ial.
economic c isis and poli ical decision 109
smi h, A. 1776. Inqué i o Sob e a Na u eza e a Causa da Riqueza das Nações, ol. 1. Lisbon:
Fundação Calous e Gulbenkian.
swedbe g, R. 1994. Une his oi e de la sociologie économique. Pa is: Desclée de B ouwe .
eles, N. 2017. “Es agnação e inancei ização”. In Economia Com Todos. Lisbon: Relógio
d’Água, 53-69.
hompson, J. 2013. “A me amo ose de uma c ise inancei a, polí ica e social”. In A e ma h.
As Cul u as Económicas da C ise em Deba e, eds. G. Ca doso, e al. Lisbon: Mundos
Sociais, 29-45.
a ou akis, Y. 2015. O Mino au o Global. Lisbon: Be and Edi o a.
webe , F. 2002. “P á icas económicas e o mas de cálculo”, Mana, 8 (2): 151-182.
ci e his chap e as:
calado, V. H., L. Cunha. 2018. “Economic c isis and poli ical decision: wo ds and meaning”. In
Changing Socie ies: Legacies and Challenges. Vol. ii. Ci izenship in C isis, eds. M. C. Lobo, F. C. da Sil a
and J. P. Zúque e. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais, 87-109.
h ps://doi.o g/10.31447/ics9789726715047.04