Overzicht

SocProf

81 Artikelen
Achtergrond: Jay Huang (cc)
Foto: Sargasso achtergrond wereldbol

De belastingbetaler als mythische held

, door

(Via) This post from Richard Seymour is something I have been thinking about for a while regarding the importance of language as issue-framing:

“The point is how “the taxpayer” is invoked here as a relevant political category. You’ll notice that, implicit in this is a suggestion that there are people who aren’t taxpayers. But public sector workers pay taxes, not only on their income but on consumption. In fact, there is no one who doesn’t pay taxes. The unemployed pay tax. Children pay tax. Prisoners pay tax. Even the homeless pay tax. To speak of “the taxpayer” is in this sense meaningless, since it includes everyone. And self-evidently, not everyone shares the political attitudes expressed by “the taxpayer” above. The question of what “the taxpayer” is willing to pay for is a political question, depending on who the taxpayer is, and what other social categories and classes s/he identifies as. But implicit in this is the idea that the taxpayer is supporting a public sector which is purely parasitic. Public sector workers are “subsidised” by “the taxpayer”; as if, in addition to not paying taxes, they add no value to the economy. “The taxpayer” is thus, by definition, always over-taxed (even if there are quite a few who are under-taxed). The subject-position expressed in this figure of “the taxpayer” is that of a lower middle class trader, shopkeeper or white van man, anxious to hold on to his wad and not pay for anything he isn’t getting.”

Foto: Sargasso achtergrond wereldbol

Een sociologie van verkrachting

, door

I know I am behind on this but if you read French, you should read Laurent Mucchielli’s post on the sociological aspects of rape (and the book the post is based on).

As Mucchielli notes, when rape is discussed in the media or the larger society, it is often in the context of sensational cases either involving celebrities (DSK, athletes, etc.) or “spectacular” cases where rapists become household names (think Dutroux or Fourniret). At the other hand of the spectrum, there seems to be a publishing niche for testimonial books whose reading is unbearable. In combination, these trends construct rape as one of the most abhorrent crimes deserving of maximal social sanction.

But for Mucchielli, the everyday reality of rape is different (which is not to negate the above) when one uses the sociological method to explore what rape, in contemporary society really involves beyond media coverage and publishing trends. The book linked to above is the result of this work. What does this show?

First, rape is a crime of proximity despite the medieval persistence of the “stranger danger” stereotype, or the image of  the woman walking alone at night, chased by her aggressor, then raped and sometimes killed. That stereotype is common in various fictional media and widely used by politicians, often with pro-patriarchal motives (women are safer home, shouldn’t be out late at night, working or going out, etc.). The book’s studies show that in 85% of rape, offender and victim know each other.

Foto: Sargasso achtergrond wereldbol

Welfare Queens 2.0

, door

During the campaign for the last French presidential election, the theme (happily promoted by the media) was “the – mostly young – brown people are ruining the country”. This has gotten a bit old (and besides, we’re supposed to support the Arab Spring, after all). So, this time around, we got our marching orders for the upcoming election: let’s hate the poor! And so, it is apparently open season on benefit recipients.

Not recipients of universal benefits (like health care or family allowances), mind you, because everyone gets those. No, the stigmatization applies only to the recipients of means-tested benefits, mainly the working poor. And here again, the conservative media will find it easy to push straw men and stereotypes while the conservative parliamentary majority steps up with indentured servitude bills of one kind or another… and while the opposition is out to lunch.

See for instance, this blog post by sociologist Camille Peugny where he notes that the latest iteration of this idea is the conservative bill proposal stating that recipients of the RSA benefit (a very modest income support for the lowest income classes) should sign a “social utility contract” whereby, in order to receive benefits, recipients would have to work a few hours a week for public institutions or other structures of “reinsertion”, whatever that means.

Foto: Sargasso achtergrond wereldbol

Opleiding is niet scholing voor werk

, door

I profoundly disagree with this:

“There’s a lot of higher education that won’t get you a job – arts, philosophy, and do so forth. Unless an institution is engaged in fraud, there’s little reason to pick specifically on for-profit institutions. We should really be asking tough questions about higher education finances in general. Maybe we should have rules barring financial aid for degrees that have horrible job prospects (see here). My goal isn’t to discourage able and committed people from college. Instead, I would like to see some sort of cost-benefit analysis added to the way that we charge people for education.”

Education is not job training. If one agrees with the idea that it is, then, we only need vocational programs and the heck with general education. Let’s have students who leave college with technical skills in various fields, but no education.

There is value in programs with “horrible job prospects”. There is value in philosophy, the arts, general science for people not considering science careers. Sure, if “value” only means values = job, then, ok, these programs have very limited value. If, on the other hand, one considers value = education for citizenry, one recognizes that programs with horrible job prospects matter.

Foto: Sargasso achtergrond wereldbol

Just give money to the poor

, door

If you are a public policy wonk interested in development, Just Give Money to the Poor: The Development Revolution from the Global South by Joseph Hanlon, Armando Barrientos and David Hulme, is for you.

This book argues for the value and effectiveness of cash transfer programs in order to alleviate poverty in the Global South as opposed to programs based on the faulty and yet still used modernization theory and as opposed to the complicated and short-sighted programs offered by the multitude of NGOs based more on donors priorities than actual need.

The book is strongly data-driven and reviews in details the different programs that have been piloted or implemented in various countries of the global South but they all lead to four conclusions:

“These programs are affordable, recipients use the money well and do not waste it, cash grants are an efficient way to directly reduce current poverty, and they have the potential to prevent future poverty by facilitating economic growth and promoting human development.” (2)

That being said, reviews of these programs (especially in Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Indonesia, India and Zambia, among others) reveal two problematic areas: targeting (who gets the cash payments) and conditions (should there be any? What kind?)

Foto: Sargasso achtergrond wereldbol

Leidt internationaal kapitalisme tot fascisme?

, door

I have been a big fan of William I. Robinson ever since I read his – ever-so dense but profound – A Theory of Global Capitalism (a book you should all read) – and in this Al-Jazeera column, he pursues a familiar line of thinking: that global capitalism leads to 21st century fascism:

“I want to discuss here the crisis of global capitalism and the notion of distinct political responses to the crisis, with a focus on the far-right response and the danger of what I refer to as 21st century fascism, particularly in the United States.”

I write “familiar” because this is something he has spoken about before. In Robinson’s view, globalization is characterized by three major and dominating entities: transnational capital, the transnational capitalist class (TCC) and the transnational state. These three components are well integrated and embedded, hence their thorough dominance, which, with the current recession, is now plain to see and deeply entrenched:

“By the late 1990s, the system entered into chronic crisis. Sharp social polarisation and escalating inequality helped generate a deep crisis of over-accumulation. The extreme concentration of the planet’s wealth in the hands of the few and the accelerated impoverishment, and dispossession of the majority, even forced participants in the 2011 World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos to acknowledge that the gap between the rich and the poor worldwide is “the most serious challenge in the world” and is “raising the spectre of worldwide instability and civil wars.”

Foto: Sargasso achtergrond wereldbol

Iedereen een winnaar?

, door

Joel Best’s Everyone’s A Winner – Life in our Congratulatory Culture sounded interesting but turned out to be a disappointment. I have already blogged on the topic of prize proliferation. This book is an expanded version of the same idea: the multiplication of awards in current American culture.

I was hoping for some sociological insights in this subject but the entire book revolves around a couple of ideas: (1) status is a resource as scarce and as valuable as other forms of capital (wealth and power) but, according to Best, one that has been neglected by sociology’s focus on income and wealth stratification based on class or race (I disagree). (2) The multiplication of social worlds creates the multiplication for recognition within the group, but also outside the group.

What causes such multiplication of social world? For Best, a diversification of society along with the recognition of past discrimination and exclusions: as once-marginalized group see their exclusion somewhat lessened, they create their own social worlds (groups and organizations) and forms of recognition that had long been denied them. Within these social worlds, awards and prizes are granted as forms of acquiring status. And, as Best claims, this is something easier done than changing the inequalities of wealth and power.

Foto: Sargasso achtergrond wereldbol

The Night Cleaner

, door

Florence Aubenas’s The Night Cleaner reads like Nickel And Dimed 2.0. The idea is simple: the Libération journalist went undercover and got herself on the labor market during the recession, wanting to experience what the cohorts of precarized workers experience, first hand. She would stay undercover until she found a full-time job.

Her cover story was that, at 48, she had just been dumped by the man who “kept” her and she was now looking for a job, with no experience or qualifications. The book is the tale of her journey in the world of the precarized. What she uncovers, and what is often invisible (by design) is what neoliberalism is really like for the people who have to live it.

Welcome to the Precariat, meet its members: the men and women of all ages who have to jump through the hoops that the Sarkozy administration throws in their way, for fear of losing unemployment benefits, the nonsensical (and often ridiculous) bureaucratic nightmares that are the French Pôles Emploi (unemployment centers where the unemployed are required to go, attend workshops on how to draft a resume, present oneself to potential employers, etc. in order to receive benefits, counseling and access to job listings), and waste hours and hours in transportation for a few hours of cleaning work.

Foto: Sargasso achtergrond wereldbol

The mother daughter power failure

, door

I had the privilege of attending a speech by über-feminist Susan Faludi of Backlash and The Terror Dream fame (if you haven’t read these books, then, what are you waiting for?). So, here is what I got from her speech.

Faludi started with the assertion that everyone acknowledges that feminism is successful. Liberals would state that we’ve come a long way while conservatives commonly state that all the ills of society are due to feminism. However, through her work, Faludi has met many women who consider feminism to have been both beneficial and a disappointment, what she calls the “yes, but…” problem that has several dimensions:

1. Yes, women are not 50% of the workforce but they occupy the same positions and professions as before. Women are still underrepresented in the media. The wage gap is still there and whatever reduction there has been there has been because of declining men’s wages. So, disillusionment is widespread as essential hurdles never really got lifted. It seems that the possibilities of remaking society have eluded us.

2. There is, of course, the [well-funded] relentless barrage of antifeminist commentary, what Faludi calls the Bozo The Clown Punchbag syndrome: every bad in society is because of feminism. You name it, feminism did it! And, of course, there is still, obviously, the abortion rights issue that is especially central now.

Foto: Sargasso achtergrond wereldbol

Iedereen dezelfde BigMac, of toch niet?

, door

Via Kerim Friedman, a list of items found on specific McDonald’s menus in different parts of the world. For instance:

Korokke Burger in Japan

McRice Burger in Malaysia

McPaneer Wrap in India

As Kerim notes, it is a good example of cultural globalization. Actually, as I wrote on my website, it is a good illustration of one aspect of what Roland Robertson called glocalization: particularization of the universal:

“Ironically, McDonald’s has extensively glocalized its product line as it established franchises worldwide, especially in cultures where eating beef, or meat generally, is not as routine as it is in the United States. For instance, in India, outlets offer mutton burgers whereas in France, some outlets offer burgers with foie gras (a French delicacy made of duck or goose liver). Similarly, McDonald’s offers vegetarian burgers on the West Coast, but not in the Midwest. The way individual outlets are run may be similar around the world (according to the principles of McDonaldization), but McDonald’s outlets have had to adapt themselves to local cultures.

Vorige Volgende