Search results

My response to the thoughtful and insightful critical discussions of my book, The End of Progress, offered by Reha Kadakal, George Steinmetz, Karen Ng, and Kevin Olson, restates its motivation and rationale to defend my interpretive claims regarding Adorno, Foucault, Habermas, Honneth, and Forst by applying standards drawn from the first two theorists that are consonant with postcolonial critical theory to the perspectives, claims, and theoretical contributions of the latter three theorists. Habermas, Honneth, and Forst presume a historical present that has shaped the second, third, and fourth generations of the Frankfurt School they represent – a present that appears to be characterized by relative social and political stability – a stability that only applies in the context of Europe and the United States. Elsewhere, anti-colonial struggles, proxy wars, and even genocides were related to the persistent legacies of European colonialism and consequences of American imperialism. Yet, critical theory must expand its angle of vision and acknowledge how its own critical perspective is situated within the postcolonial present. The essays of Kadakal and Ng express concerns about my metanormative contextualism and the question of whether Adorno’s work can be deployed to support it. Steinmetz challenges my “process of elimination” argument for metanormative contextualism and asks why I assume that constructivism, reconstructivism, and problematizing genealogy exhaust the available options for grounding normativity. Olson calls for a methodological decolonization to complement the epistemic decolonization I recommend. Critical theory should produce critical theories of actually existing societies, rather than being preoccupied with meta-theory or disputes over clashing paradigms.

This chapter offers a review of Amy Allen’s The End of Progress: Decolonizing the Normative Foundations of Critical Theory (2016) and presents the book as having both a negative and positive aim. Its negative aim is to offer a critique of the Eurocentric narratives of historical progress that serves the function of normative grounding in the critical theories of Jürgen Habermas and Axel Honneth. Its positive aim is to provide a new approach to the normative grounding of critical theory that eschews Eurocentric narratives of progress through the idea of metanormative contextualism. For Allen, metanormative contextualism is developed through an engagement with the works of Adorno and Foucault. This chapter raises some critical questions concerning the position of metanormative contextualism, arguing that there are significant differences between Adorno and Foucault that render the position unstable. Specifically, Adorno’s normative conception of truth, alongside his critical naturalism presented through the notion of natural history, makes him ill-suited as a representative of Allen’s metanormative contextualism and complicates the contributions of Foucault’s genealogical analyses. The chapter concludes that a careful consideration of Adorno’s views reveals him to be opposed to the two central tenets of metanormative contextualism as defined by Allen.

The burden social theorists must be willing to accept, respond to, and act upon pertains to the difficulties that predictably accompany all efforts to convey to nontheorists the unwelcome fact of heteronomy – that as actors, we are not as autonomous as we were told and prefer to assume – and to spell out what heteronomy in the form in which it has been shaping the developmental trajectory of modern societies means for professional theorists. I introduce the concept of “vitacide,” designed to capture that termination of life is a potential vanishing point of the heteronomous processes that have been shaping modern societies continuing to accelerate and intensify in ways that prefigure our future, but not on our human or social terms. Heteronomy pointing toward vitacide should compel us as social theorists to consider critically both the constructive and destructive trajectory that social change appears to have been following for more than two centuries, irrespective of whether the resulting prospect is to our liking or not. In this context, the classical critical theorists of the early Frankfurt School, especially Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno, pursued what turned out to be an evolving interest in rackets, the authoritarian personality, and the administered society – concepts that served as foils for delineating the kind of theoretical stance that is becoming more and more important as we are moving into an increasingly uncertain future.

In an increasingly budget-constrained environment, the Department of Defense (DoD) must maximize the value of fiscal resources obligated on service contracts. Over half of DoD procurement spending between 2008 and 2012 was obligated on service contracts (GAO, 2013). Many services are common across the enterprise and recurring in nature; however, they are treated as unique and procured individually at the base level, year after year, rather than collectively in accordance with a larger, enterprise-wide category management strategy. The purpose of this paper is to focus on creating a methodology that treats common, recurring service requirements in a more strategic manner.

The authors develop a standardized, repeatable methodology that uses relevant cost drivers to analyze service requirements to identify more efficient procurement strategies. Furthermore, they create a clustering continuum to organize services based on proximity between the customer-supplier bases. This paper uses a commercial business mapping software to analyze cost driver data, produce visualizations and illustrate strategic opportunities for category management initiatives. DoD requirements for Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) within the Los Angeles area are evaluated using the software and methodology to demonstrate a model for practical application.

The authors find that commercial software can be used to cluster requiring activities needing common, recurring services. This standardized, repeatable method can be applied to any category of services with any number of cost drivers. By identifying optimal requiring activity clusters, procurement agencies can more effectively implement category management strategies for service requirements.

The initial approach of this paper was to develop a macro-level, one-size-fits-all model to centralize procurement. The authors found this approach inadequate as they tried to group service requirements of wildly differing characteristics. They experienced other significant limiting factors related to data availability and data collection.

Clustering common and recurring DoD service requirements would result in standardized levels of service at all installations. The demand savings from clustering would promote the implementation of best practices for that service requirement across the DoD, which would eliminate non-value-added activities currently performed at some installations, or gold-plating of requirements, which is also likely occurring.

This paper is the first to use an analytics-based methodology to cluster common, recurring public services. It is the first method that offers a standardized, repeatable approach to implementing category management of service requirements to achieve cost savings.