The philosopher and specialist in neoliberalism Barbara Stiegler has recently focused her research on the limitlessness of work that neoliberalism brings. According to her, the idleness of retirement becomes an archaism for an economic system “in which each individual is summoned to be efficient and competitive” for longer and longer, ideally until his death.
Unfortunately, apart from the wealthy champions of neoliberalism, the reality of work is often held in boredom and pain. In France, a quarter of the poorest workers die before the age of 62; in Quebec, 58% of employees will develop chronic pain. As we live in the most prosperous and wealthy times ever, it is indecent to sing the praises of raising the retirement age.
Some will tell us that life expectancy is increasing, that retirement is more and more expensive, and therefore that we must adapt this new objective reality to this state of affairs, without obviously questioning the exponential enrichment of the most rich in our society. Without even raising the problem of the distribution of wealth, it is to forget that life expectancy in good health has not increased by the same ratio.
Also, while the multiple ongoing ecological disasters — not just global warming, but also soil depletion, poisoning of natural spaces, proliferation of plastics, etc. — invite us to reduce production in order to lower the ecological impact of humanity on the environment which is necessary for it to ensure its subsistence, we are rather talked about, inconsequently, of increasing paid working time.
Global load
It is no coincidence that we link the situation in Quebec to that in France. As Stiegler tries to show, the burden is global, it carries an ethos whose sole rationality lies in the blind belief in an economic dogma. We will no doubt soon see the harsh social gains on the right to retirement obtained in Europe being attacked, in order to convince ourselves that our own situation is not so bad, even that the situation in Quebec is “abnormal”, compared to the Canada, versus the United States, versus the French state’s attacks on workers’ conditions. This will mainly be done by individuals who have never worked hard, or whose hard work is far behind them.
We will surely be told that some do not have the means to retire so early: isn’t that precisely the problem? We will also be told that some want to continue working: on the one hand, shouldn’t we just question the fact that some see in paid work the only fulfillment they see for themselves? Isn’t there enough to do to live a life without wage labor? Isn’t it abnormal that after the experience of a lifetime, some of our fellow citizens are bored as soon as retirement begins?
On the other hand, if work is a noble thing—building furniture, sewing clothes, caring for grandchildren, painting patios, making beers, helping in a popular kitchen—why isn’t it what is the wage system that is sold to us as a noble horizon? Lowering the retirement age, wouldn’t that be a great project?