Understanding English alcohol policy as a neoliberal condemnation of the carnivalesque

Abstract

Much academic work has argued that alcohol policy in England over the past 25 years can be characterised as neoliberal, particularly in regard to the night-time economy and attempts to address “binge” drinking. Understanding neoliberalism as a particular “mentality of government” that circumscribes the range of policy options considered appropriate and practical for a government to take, this article notes how the particular application of policy can vary by local context. This article argues that the approach of successive governments in relation to alcohol should be seen as based on a fear and condemnation of the carnivalesque, understood as a time when everyday norms and conventions are set aside, and the world is – for a limited period only – turned inside out. This analysis is contrasted with previous interpretations that have characterised government as condemning intoxication and particular forms of pleasure taken in drinking. Although these concepts are useful in such analysis, this article suggests that government concerns are broader and relate to wider cultures surrounding drunkenness. Moreover, there is an ambivalence to policy in relation to alcohol that is better conveyed by the concept of the carnivalesque than imagining simply a condemnation of pleasure or intoxication.

• Alcohol
• binge
• carnivalesque
• government
• intoxication
• pleasure
• policy

Acknowledgements

I am very grateful to the many attendees at the “Under Control” conference, who offered constructive comments on my ideas, especially Henry Yeomans and Ingrid Walker. Conversations at other times with James Nicholls and David Jarratt on the nature of the carnivalesque have been particularly helpful.

Declaration of interest

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors, though the PhD research that prompted this analysis was directly funded by Bournemouth University. A version of this paper was presented at the “Under Control” conference in London on 22 June 2013.

Notes

¹I am grateful to David Faulkner for this observation, offered at the 2009 NatCen conference “Informing Public Policy”, held at LSE.