THE FRENCH MYTH OF MANAGING MODERNIZATION

In France as in the majority of European countries, a double-digit une mployment rate and its persistent growth have been dominating the econ omic and social scene since the 1980s. Thus, these facts almost natura lly characterize all the approaches aimed at creating the conditions t hat will lead society out of its current state of anomie. Although the ideologies on which they are based and the economic rationalities the y propose are diverse, they nevertheless all claim that this situation , described as a new phase in the transformation of industrial societi es, can be overcome successfully. Therefore, the introduction of massi ve flexibility of labour power combined with an intensive and permanen t effort to increase the level of training of the labour force are set out as necessary conditions for the success of this process. In this context, the successive government mechanisms and social accords are p resented as contributing to the creation of the conditions for managin g the employment crisis. Thus emerge the elements of a belief in the a bility of political, economic and social actors to arrive at a positiv e outcome to the drama of economic redundancies as long as workers agr ee to commit themselves to cooperating in the processes of redeploymen t offered. Rejecting the period of social struggles and bitter confron tations that characterized industrial restructuring during the last tw enty years, the discourse on this new belief declare the beginning of a more constructive period of management of occupational redeployment, a period in which the individual will be entitled to full recognition within the collective. Thus, the essential and constituent elements o f a new myth of modern times that expresses the ability of the elites to manage the modernization of our industrial societies are brought to gether. Although the myth is defined as a symbolic representation infl uencing social life, the author hypothesizes that in France, since 197 3 and especially since 1981, the elements of a powerful belief have em erged through a series of laws and public and private strategies. It s erves to drive a process that attempts to convince people of the possi bility of negotiating restructuring and redeployment calmly without so cial struggles, and of planning economic and social change through an equitable exchange for all actors. In practice, although the policies and measures proposed during the last twenty years have produced resul ts, it must be observed that on the whole they have done nothing to st op the almost continuous increase in unemployment. Today, despite thes e successive failures, many institutional and social actors still beli eve in and boast about these approaches in the hope that economic reco very can demonstrate their pertinence and effectiveness. Underlying th e strength of such a myth are two components: one suggests a represent ation of society in which the very forms of social confrontation and c ollective action can be dissolved and reified in a series of rational mechanisms; the other suggests convincing everyone that social adheren ce to the measures offered would be enough to see the declared fight a gainst continuing unemployment to a successful conclusion. The myth se t forth and its underlying beliefs thus assert that a new specific era in the life of industrial society is emerging, Therefore, to proceed to a critical analysis of the myth, our approach here is to consider i t as part of a process of putting a major social issue into perspectiv e: the planned, or negotiated, control of the volume of work and emplo yment. The issue is studied in reference to the more general context o f the sociology of social time. To define the study of this issue, thr ee social periods are analyzed. The first involves interpreting the de termining role of the state. The second carries out a contrasting inte rpretation in terms of the social confrontation of the historical peri od covered. The third provides a process-based interpretation of the e mergence of the myth and its constituent elements. Finally, the initia l hypothesis is validated. The myth of the management of modernization has in fact well and truly established itself. It has involved union actors in a process in which they appear partly responsible for choice s made with regard to redeployment, even when they fight against these decisions. In France this myth has functioned until now as a compleme nt to diversified practices opposed to the emergence of the union move ment as an economic factor with possible alternatives.