Concluding remarks
When looking back at the Saint-Simonian moment in European history, seeking to understand it in relation to our own historical moment, what captures our attention? First of all, we must acknowledge that Saint-Simon was right when he declared that the new system he was foreseeing was no complete utopia.
In a way, with regard to the development of telecommunications technology, the present can be considered as Saint-Simonian. Musso’s work emphasises this point, leaping from Michel Chevalier’s 1832 text to “writings during the 1980s-90s on the control of communication networks”, which he dubs “from Saint-Simon to internet” (Musso 1997, 7). Indeed, the intensification of networks within networks in our world is making the Saint-Simonian dream come true. Saint-Simonians were convinced that the salvation of mankind depended on the unending development of communication. The interpenetration and reciprocal fertilisation of worldwide capacities was supposed to improve the means for an ever more efficient exploitation of nature. But Saint-Simonians did not see the dark side of this process: the disastrous consequences of considering nature as a submissive reserve of endless resources subjected to man’s will and unlimited use. The worldwide expansion of communication networks and the domination over nature through technology are one and the same process, which Musso refers to as the concept of “industrial technocracy” (Musso 2020, 86). The violent imprisonment of nature brought about by technology and the results of this unrestrained domination remain the Saint-Simonian “unthought”. Given the disasters created by an “industrial technocracy”, which for the Saint-Simonians consisted of mankind’s ultimate destination, we might wish their dream had nowadays not been as fully realised.The Saint-Simonian wish for a world where men would become mature enough and would no longer need to be ruled remains one of the most sublime political visions: to move beyond the exploitation of man by man.
But it is doubtful that the scientific and managerial approach of Saint-Simonians would solve the social issue and render public debate outdated. However, Saint-Simonians passionately supported non-dogmatic egalitarianism, admitting inequalities due to different abilities. From this point of view, it could be said that themes such as the “abolition of all privileges of birth” and “the social happiness of the poor” remind us of Rawls’ principles ofjustice (Rawls 1971).Picon emphasises the two sides of the Saint-Simonians, preparing for the advent of socialism as well as the establishment of the Second Empire’s authoritarian capitalism (Picon 2006, 69). The issue of organising European countries as one political entity was also of major concern for Saint-Simon and his followers. In 1814, together with his secretary Augustin Thierry, Saint-Simon published a text, De la reorganisation de la societe europeenne, ou de la necessite des moyens de rassembler des peuples de l'Europe en un seul corps politique, en conservant a chacun son independance nationale.[228] Before Proudhon, the Saint-Simonians strongly advocated a politically unified Europe. It is hardly necessary to highlight how clearly the Saint-Simonian commitment to the European issue reflects today’s concerns (see also Saint-Simon, Trois essais sur la revolution europeenne, 1823). Last but not least, Saint-Simonian revolutionary ideas about women contributed to the struggle for women’s emancipation. To conclude, let us quote this assessment by the philosopher Jacques Ranciere:
This poor carpenter, one will say, will let himself be lured by the words of love seeking to make him forget about fighting; behold, the other will say, such delusions are the price he pays for his entry to the disciplinary realm of the pioneers of the modern industrial order. But where do they get the idea that one cannot love the bourgeois and fight them at the same time, that one cannot abandon oneself to the Saint-Simonian love of the Father, of the Orient or of Woman, and at the same time shun the Saint-Simonian empire of the rail?
(Ranciere [1981] 2017, 33)