What do you think?
Rate this book
Precariado: Una carta de derechos
En su libro El precariado. Una nueva clase social, Guy Standing introducía el concepto de «precariado» como una clase masiva emergente a la que se le han negado derechos políticos, civiles, sociales y económicos, y caracterizada por una creciente desigualdad e inseguridad. De una naturaleza cada vez más global, el precariado se ha convertido en un fenómeno social, reivindicado por movimientos como Occupy Wall Street o el 15M. Pero esta masa no es una simple víctima, es también un agente dinámico de cambio social. El autor nos habla de la importancia de redefinir nuestro contrato social alrededor de las nociones de libertad asociacional, agencia y comunes.
Un texto indispensable, no solo porque pone al día el marco teórico desarrollado en su libro anterior, sino porque ofrece un detallado programa político para acabar con las desigualdades extremas que la globalización neoliberal ha generado. Su concepto y sus conclusiones han sido admiradas extensamente por pensadores de la talla de Noam Chomsky o Zygmunt Bauman, y por muchas destacadas figuras del activismo político. Esta carta de derechos es un regalo para aquellos que aspiran a forjar una nueva sociedad, en la que el trabajo humano tenga significado y los derechos de los trabajadores sean totalmente respetados.
Un texto indispensable, no solo porque pone al día el marco teórico desarrollado en su libro anterior, sino porque ofrece un detallado programa político para acabar con las desigualdades extremas que la globalización neoliberal ha generado. Su concepto y sus conclusiones han sido admiradas extensamente por pensadores de la talla de Noam Chomsky o Zygmunt Bauman, y por muchas destacadas figuras del activismo político. Esta carta de derechos es un regalo para aquellos que aspiran a forjar una nueva sociedad, en la que el trabajo humano tenga significado y los derechos de los trabajadores sean totalmente respetados.
400 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2014
8 people are currently reading
290 people want to read
About the author
Guy Standing
55 books173 followersGuy Standing is a British professor of Development Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London, and co-founder of the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN).
Standing has written widely in the areas of labour economics, labour market policy, unemployment, labour market flexibility, structural adjustment policies and social protection. His recent work has concerned the emerging precariat class and the need to move towards unconditional basic income and deliberative democracy.
Standing has written widely in the areas of labour economics, labour market policy, unemployment, labour market flexibility, structural adjustment policies and social protection. His recent work has concerned the emerging precariat class and the need to move towards unconditional basic income and deliberative democracy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
July 10, 2015
Terrific. A full read, about lots of things that our western societies could think about doing differently, so that those who are excluded, and their numbers seems to be ever increasing, could again be part of the included. Not saying that I agreed with every word or every idea, but he makes you think, makes you look at things in other ways. Which is always good!
October 11, 2016
Guy Standing is a man on a mission. This book is a battle cry rather than an academic treatise. Standing wants to rally the "precariat" (whom he hopes will discover itself as an active political collective force) against the evil horde of "neoliberals," "utilitarians" and other demons.
He is known as one of the biggest champions of the unconditional basic income, but the most of the book deals with other proposals, ranging from the commonplace (keeping libraries and hospitals accessible to low-income communities) to the utopian (dismissing all growth-based economics, getting rid of subsidies, reinventing occupational guilds as hubs of democracy and social solidarity).
Many of his proposals make a lot of economic sense; many others are dubious. (Deciding which ones fall into which category admittedly depends on the prejudices of the reader.) I found his arguments for basic income, sovereign wealth funds, ending paternalism, slashing subsidies and cutting down bureaucracy convincing; but even here, he unfortunately he betrays his own principles. While railing against neoliberal intrusiveness, he demands more (supposedly non-neoliberal and thus better) social, political and ecological committees to be set. While arguing well against too rigid regulation of labour markets, he demands more social oversight of markets, and more decision-making power to be granted to syndicalist monopolies and deliberative democratic organizations. In many other ways, it is not clear that the imagined "precariat-run" state would not be at least as intrusive, bureaucratic and oppressive as the so-called neoliberal, utilitarian state.
In style, the book is a mixed bag. As a manifesto, it is lacking in analytical appeal. Many of his proposals, and the crucial arguments for them, are not fully developed; only posited as necessary or obvious - often with an emotional appeal to justice. The rhetoric, too, is often pungently odious.
A particular failure - and a surprising one - is the choice of enemy. Iniquitously, Standing rails against "utilitarians", who he claims are behind the attempts to take power away from minorities, seemingly without being aware of the complex philosophical underpinnings and debates of the movement that began with Jeremy Bentham, James Mill and John Stuart Mill. It is simply not true that "utilitarianism" is the cause of the contemporary "neoliberal" control state. It is true that many utilitarians have proposed outrageous things; and it is true that Jeremy Bentham was in favour of various "discipline and punish" regimes; but e.g. John Stuart Mill, who is often considered the father of utilitarianism, was a fierce anti-paternalist, champion of minority rights, and one of the most outspoken defenders of the inviolable liberty of individuals against state interference. This seems to be a case of the author not really knowing what he is talking about; or not caring.
The book feels sloppily written, although well-researched. The scarcity of well-argued solutions is a shame, since the issues discussed are very important, and few people have analyzed the "precarious" condition of contemporary low-income people - whom he names denizens, stripped of many of the cherished rights of citizens - as passionately as the author. He has pinpointed a real problem - the lack of citizens' rights, the lack of liberty, the lack of social solidarity, the lack of economic security - but only a half of his solutions are workable. A few are golden. Some need development. The rest are different varieties of bad, disappointing, sour, sickly and nightmareish.
As a storage room of half-developed, half-brilliant ideas, and as an exposé of a real problem, the book is worth reading. But the remedy could be worse than the disease. Not all of the wild ideas of the book should be implemented. Some of his literally dozens of proposals are undoubtedly useful, for particular people and particular circumstances, but they should be analyzed critically before rallying up the new class for another class war - especially one against an enemy as mysterious and phantasmagorical as "utilitarians" and "neoliberals." While the pain of the present condition, for many people, is all too real, the pleasure of a misguided revolution would be short-lived. It is better to opt for reforms. The dystopian hues of the utopian paradise are never far from the surface.
Call me dull, but perhaps we need less of class-analysis, less fiery rhetoric and less scapegoating, and more calm rational analysis. Champions of the precariat need to proceed from the recognition that even the utilitarians, the neoliberals and the social democrats have a point. They are not evil, only mistaken. From that shared recognition, the discussion can proceed, people can debate, and we can posit the needed changes towards basic income and other forms of justice for the 21st century.
He is known as one of the biggest champions of the unconditional basic income, but the most of the book deals with other proposals, ranging from the commonplace (keeping libraries and hospitals accessible to low-income communities) to the utopian (dismissing all growth-based economics, getting rid of subsidies, reinventing occupational guilds as hubs of democracy and social solidarity).
Many of his proposals make a lot of economic sense; many others are dubious. (Deciding which ones fall into which category admittedly depends on the prejudices of the reader.) I found his arguments for basic income, sovereign wealth funds, ending paternalism, slashing subsidies and cutting down bureaucracy convincing; but even here, he unfortunately he betrays his own principles. While railing against neoliberal intrusiveness, he demands more (supposedly non-neoliberal and thus better) social, political and ecological committees to be set. While arguing well against too rigid regulation of labour markets, he demands more social oversight of markets, and more decision-making power to be granted to syndicalist monopolies and deliberative democratic organizations. In many other ways, it is not clear that the imagined "precariat-run" state would not be at least as intrusive, bureaucratic and oppressive as the so-called neoliberal, utilitarian state.
In style, the book is a mixed bag. As a manifesto, it is lacking in analytical appeal. Many of his proposals, and the crucial arguments for them, are not fully developed; only posited as necessary or obvious - often with an emotional appeal to justice. The rhetoric, too, is often pungently odious.
A particular failure - and a surprising one - is the choice of enemy. Iniquitously, Standing rails against "utilitarians", who he claims are behind the attempts to take power away from minorities, seemingly without being aware of the complex philosophical underpinnings and debates of the movement that began with Jeremy Bentham, James Mill and John Stuart Mill. It is simply not true that "utilitarianism" is the cause of the contemporary "neoliberal" control state. It is true that many utilitarians have proposed outrageous things; and it is true that Jeremy Bentham was in favour of various "discipline and punish" regimes; but e.g. John Stuart Mill, who is often considered the father of utilitarianism, was a fierce anti-paternalist, champion of minority rights, and one of the most outspoken defenders of the inviolable liberty of individuals against state interference. This seems to be a case of the author not really knowing what he is talking about; or not caring.
The book feels sloppily written, although well-researched. The scarcity of well-argued solutions is a shame, since the issues discussed are very important, and few people have analyzed the "precarious" condition of contemporary low-income people - whom he names denizens, stripped of many of the cherished rights of citizens - as passionately as the author. He has pinpointed a real problem - the lack of citizens' rights, the lack of liberty, the lack of social solidarity, the lack of economic security - but only a half of his solutions are workable. A few are golden. Some need development. The rest are different varieties of bad, disappointing, sour, sickly and nightmareish.
As a storage room of half-developed, half-brilliant ideas, and as an exposé of a real problem, the book is worth reading. But the remedy could be worse than the disease. Not all of the wild ideas of the book should be implemented. Some of his literally dozens of proposals are undoubtedly useful, for particular people and particular circumstances, but they should be analyzed critically before rallying up the new class for another class war - especially one against an enemy as mysterious and phantasmagorical as "utilitarians" and "neoliberals." While the pain of the present condition, for many people, is all too real, the pleasure of a misguided revolution would be short-lived. It is better to opt for reforms. The dystopian hues of the utopian paradise are never far from the surface.
Call me dull, but perhaps we need less of class-analysis, less fiery rhetoric and less scapegoating, and more calm rational analysis. Champions of the precariat need to proceed from the recognition that even the utilitarians, the neoliberals and the social democrats have a point. They are not evil, only mistaken. From that shared recognition, the discussion can proceed, people can debate, and we can posit the needed changes towards basic income and other forms of justice for the 21st century.
November 30, 2017
Standing’in Prekarya: Yeni Tehlikeli Sınıf kitabı ile birlikte ortaya çıkan Prekarya’nın yeni bir sınıf mı yoksa sadece 'Prekerleşmek' durumu mu olduğu tartışmaları uzunca bir süredir benim de gündemimde. Standing bu kitabında Prekarya'nın eğitim, örgütlenme ve adil yargı gibi çoğu sosyal haklara sahip olamadığını söyleyerek bu talepleri elde edebilmek adına 21 Maddelik bir bildirge ile mücadeleye çağırıyor ve soruyor. Buna güç verecek öznellik nerede?
December 6, 2024
Okay. Interesting analysis of the modern labour conditions of the working class and the unique features of its exploitation. It won’t be fixed with UBI though- idealistic solutions that will never happen. Mass movements in the global south get massacred for demanding 30 cent per day wage increases- it’s a fantasy to think we’ll ever achieve UBI willingly especially through non-violently acquired wealth redistribution of the wealthy.
June 13, 2019
pretty straightforward doo-dad. Worth your time if you think you're interested. I wouldn't recommend it to people who already have a decent understanding though. It would only be useful for some catchphrases and well organized arguments. Otherwise, you'll be a bored baby.
May 31, 2024
„Karta prekariatu” Guya Standinga to przenikliwa analiza współczesnej klasy pracowniczej, która zmaga się z brakiem stabilności zatrudnienia i niepewnością finansową. Standing pokazuje, jak neoliberalny system gospodarczy tworzy warunki niepewności, dotykające miliony ludzi na całym świecie.
Standing analizuje brak stabilności pracy, dostępu do świadczeń socjalnych i reprezentacji interesów pracowników. Podkreśla, że prekariat jest wynikiem celowego utrzymywania pracowników w stanie niepewności przez korporacje.
Książka wzywa do solidarności i organizowania się, wskazując, że jedynie wspólna walka może przynieść realne zmiany. „Karta prekariatu” to obowiązkowa lektura dla tych, którzy chcą zrozumieć mechanizmy współczesnego rynku pracy i szukać dróg wyjścia z niepewności i wyzysku.
Standing analizuje brak stabilności pracy, dostępu do świadczeń socjalnych i reprezentacji interesów pracowników. Podkreśla, że prekariat jest wynikiem celowego utrzymywania pracowników w stanie niepewności przez korporacje.
Książka wzywa do solidarności i organizowania się, wskazując, że jedynie wspólna walka może przynieść realne zmiany. „Karta prekariatu” to obowiązkowa lektura dla tych, którzy chcą zrozumieć mechanizmy współczesnego rynku pracy i szukać dróg wyjścia z niepewności i wyzysku.
October 6, 2014
Interesting and fairly accurate assessment of the issues facing us today. However, it's a bit thin on suggestions on how to resolve them.
May 12, 2015
review to follow
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews