Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Klaus J. Bade (2003) ‘Chapter 4. Migration and Migration Policies in the Cold War’ in his book ‘Migration
in European History’
Which types of migration could you discern from the chapter? Give at least one example per
migration type.
Types: view class notes
Why is it difficult or even ‘superficial’ to discern those different migration types or identities?
There are overlapping migration forms, motivation and migrant identities there’s not a correct way to
find out what types of Migration the migrant belongs to. Moreover, they are forced to use certain
vocabulary and characteristics to fit into law.
North Africa (back in the day still under French administration) France
Spain, Portugal, Italy France (labour migration)
Italy, Turks, Greeks Germany
Ireland, Indians (former colonies) Britain
1
immigration restrictions for non-european citizens bc. Issues with colonial migrants (hard to justify bc.
Of colonial past euro-racism
What are the main countries of origin and destinations of these migration forms?
Kenya, India and Malaysia Britain; North Africa France and Italy; Congo Belgium Indonesia
Netherlands; Angola, Mozambique Portugal (only started in 1970) Portugal Issue of unemployment
(Bold countries affected the most of migration)
What were the main problems that the ‘colonial’ and ‘post-colonial’ migrants encounter in their
countries of destination?
Colonial: Racist thinking, were economically and socially disadvantage, Miserable conditions held
despite fighting for the ‘’mother land’’, Euro-racism afraid of losing their own heritage by too many
foreigners (Political Parties Focus on that Front National), Distinction between integrable (Christians)
and non-integrable (Muslims), Society was motivated against Migrants through politicians and their
policies / brutal riots against Migrants and Propaganda on streets
Post-colonial: course set by tradition contacts with former colonial metropolis given push through
conflicts and economic and social unrest in former colonies; wanted by ‘’mother’’ country because of
cheap labour; especially through chain migration tighter immigration restrictions for non-european
citizens bc. Issues with colonial migrants (hard to justify because Of colonial past euro-racism)
What are the main countries of origin and destinations of labour migration?
Labour migration: inner european movement: Migration determined by status tension: economic gap
between highly developed industrial destination areas and agrarian, pre-industrial regions of origin
Origin: Portugal, Spain, Italy, Yugoslavia, England, Sweden, Greece, Turkey
Destination: Germany, France
Mainly left their home country because of structural unemployment come from rural areas with little
work (emigration of natives made areas even poorer)
And what are the main differences between ‘central, western and northern Europe’ and ‘southern
Europe’ with respect to labour migration? What are the economic reasons for labour migration from
the perspective of the migrants, employers, the regions of origin, the countries of destination and
Europe?
Central Europe: Economic reasons for labour migration: came from rural areas
Migrants: Turks, Greeks Italians, Spanish, Portuguese
Employers: Interest in in-expensive semi- unskilled labour
Regions of origin: Underdeveloped regions, structural unemployment or underemployment
Countries of destination: France, Germany
Western Europe: Economic reasons for labour migration:
Migrants
Employers
Regions of origin: Ireland
Countries of destination: England
Northern Europe: Economic reasons for labour migration
Migrants: Finish; for better job opportunities in Sweden
Employers: Agriculture sector
Regions of origin: Finland; Southern Europe
Countries of destination: Sweden
Southern Europe (From sending to receiving): Economic reasons for labour migration
2
Migrants: Population growth in North Africa; Political asylum as access to Europe (barely any border
controls in Italy- cf. harsh controls in northern Europe); Euro- Mediterranean large informal sector
with broad spectrum of semi- and unskilled jobs; Chain- mechanism at work which encourage
migration flow
Employers: Former Guest-worker didn’t want to take on those low-paid job anymore; less
industrialized, economically underdeveloped regions of the; south that had high unemployment
Regions of origin: Third world countries, Mainly Euro-African Zone, Morocco, Tunisia, former colonies
(North Africa) came with visitor Visa and ‘’overstayed’’
Greek: Pontic Greeks from former Soviet Union, Albanians, Poland, Egypt Countries of destination:
Portugal, Spain(easy going work permit procedure), Italy, Greece (there was no legalisation process
for illegal immigrants
Why had the labour migration ban of the early 1970s usually only a short-term effect, and in the long
run even worked against its objectives? See class notes
Systematic restrictive measures protesting immigration – recruitment and immigration ban in 1970,
work permits were restricted nevertheless family reunification was omnipresent.
What do the ‘exclusive’, ‘assimilatory’ and ‘multicultural’ models of Castles and Miller mean? And
apply these models on the cases of West-Germany, France and Sweden.
Exclusive Model: West Germany (ignored path from discontinuous to continuous integration policies)
exclusive citizenship rights nevertheless
3
foreigners were part of welfare-state benefits; Stepwise integration into the welfare
system that eventually opens the door for citizenship
Multicultural: Sweden
Citizenship also linked to political culture and the upholding of the value system BUT opens
for actions and socio-political options for developing multiculturalism
And what are the main differences between ‘central, western and northern Europe’ and ‘southern
Europe’ with respect to asylum and refugee migrations?
Western Europe: France, Britain, Belgium: Immigration of African, Asian asylum seeker following path
of establish migratory traditions
Northern Europe: Affected by continental east-west migration later by intercontinental south- north
4
migration of Asylum seekers / Sweden: Chile; Iranians and Kevabib
Southern Europe: Mostly intercontinental south – north migration; After Cold war Continental
migration
How was the ‘Fortress Europe’ systematically prepared during the period of the Cold War?
Example West- Germany: Because it was frontline of Cold war; How was it done? Tightening
migration law and deterring measures; Switzerland started to declare ‘’safe countries’’ refugees from
there no chance for asylum.
o east-West refugees were accepted but socialist refugees were excluded (Chile)
o Refugees from ‘’third world’’ were assumed to seek for asylum under false
presumptions – no political refugees but economic and social refugees
o Labour market instability in Europe aggravated social fears
o Change in definition of ‘’political’’ refugee
o Political anti-asylum motivation by spreading discourse of asylum- abuse (only reason
they come is economic attractiveness) lead to hostile atmosphere and arguments
became frozen in stereotypes
o Special border and asylum controls were installed
o Policy change to slow down refugee chain migration tightened restrictions
o Blocking entry from east Germany (visa); to amendment in asylum law
Douglas S. Massey, Joaquín Arango, Graeme Hugo, Ali Kouaouci, Adela Pellegrino and Edward J. Taylor
(1993) Theories of International Migration: A Review and Appraisal
Explain the main ideas of the following theories about the initiation of migration: the neoclassical
economics, the new economics of migration, the dual labour market theory and the world system
theory. What are the main differences between the theories?
5
Micro theory – model of individual choice
6
Set of policy prescriptions
Structural inflation:
Wages do not only depend upon demand& supply but also to a great extent on their position
in the social hierarchy – therefore it’s not easy to solely raise wages in low- paid job in case of
labour scarcity because it would disrupt the entire social system - easiest solution labour
migration who accept lower wages
Motivational problems:
People work not only for the sake of money but as well for accumulation and maintenance of
social status people at the bottom of social hierarchy solely work for money because
there’s no social status to require easiest solution labour migration why? A) don’t consider
themselves as part of our society B) wages in our country are often regarded as generous
compared to their homeland C) Working for the sake of money is ok because they work for
higher goal at home (school, building house etc.)
Economic dualism:
Economy is mainly divided in two sectors:
Capital- intensive sector: employer has to bear costs of unemployment used for basic
demand; skilled jobs with best equipment and tools; high-skilled employees become human-
capital
Labour- intensive sector: employee has to bear costs of unemployment reserved for
seasonal fluctuating demand; labour released once demand is low, no investment often
unstable and unskilled jobs natives are no willing to have that risk turn more to high-skilled
jobs in capital intensive work
(lack of labour compensated by migration)
7
The demographic labour supply:
In the past demand for worker for unpleasant work was covered by teenager and women
demographic change made this impossible therefore the need for external labour has
increased
o Rise in female labour participation in all fields women’s work transformed into
career representing social status
o Rise in divorce rates women transformed women’s job into source of primary income
support
o Decline of birth rate
o Extension of formal education teenagers stay out of labour market longer
(1) Labour migration imitated by employers in developed societies
(2) international wage differences are not sufficient reason for migration to occur
(3) wages don’t change if supply increases because of institutional mechanisms
(4) wages can nevertheless still fall in low-skilled jobs if increase in supply of
immigration work
(5) Lack of labour structurally implemented in modern society governments are
unlikely to make any structural changes
8
How is the network theory explaining the perpetuation of migration? Explain the concept of
‘cumulative causation’. Give a few examples of the perpetuation of migration from the European
migration history (see the book of Klaus Bade).
Network theory has six hypothesis which explain the perpetuation of migration. In a nutshell they
argue that the more people migrate the stronger the networks become which will in return lower the
risks and costs of migration which will further expand migration processes and therefore perpetuate it.
(1) International Migration tends to expand over time till network ties has expanded so vastly
that everyone who wished to migrate can do so without difficulty (after that migration
deccelarte)
(2) Dynamics of migration flow controlled by falling costs and risks of movement stemming
from the growth of migrant networks over time (the more people migrate the more people
have ties to foreign destinations)
(3) The more international migration becomes institutionalized the more independent it gets
from the factors which caused migration in the first place – be they structural or individual
because throughout mass migration the context in which people migrate alters significantly
(4) As networks expand (costs, and risks decline) flow of migration becomes less selective in
socioeconomic terms more open for entire society of sending countries
(5) Government faced with great difficulty to control migration flow because process of
network formation is outside their power realm
(6) Immigration policies such as reunification further strengthen network structures since
they reinforce migrant networks
Cumulative causation:
each act of migration alters social context within which movement is more likely (1)
distribution of income – bc. Of relative deprivation – workers constantly compare their
financial situation to the one of their peers in order to raise in social hierarchy they often
migrate to gain more money (2) distribution of land (3) organization of agriculture (4) culture
(5) regional distribution of human capital (6) social meaning of work
Hypothesis:
(1) International migration brings social, economic and political changes give people a
powerful momentum which is hard to control or to alter because feedback mechanism of
cumulative causation is outside reach of government
(2) Times of domestic unemployment it’s hard to win natives for stigmatized ‘’immigrants
jobs’’ (social label) need for more recruitment necessary to retain or recruit more
foreigners
(3) Social labelling of jobs as immigrant follows from concentration of immigrants in that field
once considerable number of immigrants have entered that field hard to take
stigmatization away
9
What are the policy implications of network theory and cumulative causation for the current
European debate about opening versus closing the borders for migration?
Institutional theory: because of border migration/increase likelihood of migration because of non-
governmental aid 1. Black aid institution 2. Non-governmental institution it becomes easier to migrate
Cumulative causation: by land as retirement source in home country – additional cause for migration
have lower economic opportunities; relative deprivation sending money back better of than other
local people
- Recruited labour migration (bilateral agreement between countries and its governments)
- Unofficial labour migration (first came as tourists and stayed there)
- Family formation (fall in love in foreign country- marry – move to country of origin)
- Family reunification (individuals work in country of destination – reunify their family)
(3) Asylum seekers and refugees (process from asylum seekers and refugees has changed over
decades)
(4) Euro-colonial, colonial and post-colonial migration (euro-colonial = had european roots; colonial=
worked for colonial regime; colonial= because of economic and social difficulties caused by colonial
disturbances)
(5) Environmental migration (people are forced to migrate because of political and environmental
changes)
(6) Ethnic migration (ethnic Germans were forced to move during second world to eastern Europe –
moved back after iron curtain felt- Jews)
Boundaries distinguishing the different immigrant groups and immigration forms were often fluid and
overlapping- Bade K. (2003)
“The recruitment and immigration ban of the early 1970s usually had only a short-term effect, and in
the long term sometimes even worked against its objectives.”- Bade K. (2003)
2. Causes of Migration
(1) There are always diverse reasons why people migrate – economic, social and political reasons are
often overlapping (cf. Foucault with Prenotions putting people in boxes form of categorizing people);
people are forced into categories for statistics
(2) Legal boundaries for certain group of foreigners (European vs. non-European foreigners) force
them to give false reasons for migration otherwise they wouldn’t have a chance to stay
Short-term labour migration ban effect in 1970s – long-term back firing objective
Doomed to fail because it ignores long-term effects and theories about migration
10
(1) Systematic restrictive measures to ban migration main event in 70s – recruitment and immigration
ban in 1970, work permits were restricted nevertheless family reunification was omnipresent
- Had to decide whether to go back and never will have the chance to return to western
Europe and go back to country of origin for holidays
- Qualification acquired in new home wouldn’t be recognized in home country Decided to
stay Chain migration
- Special social benefits in destination countries
- Countries of European Community had freedom of movement on the labour market and
made recruitment ban ineffective
- Liberal Paradox: liberal states not allowed to stop migration processes otherwise they violate
basic humanitarian principles (right to reunify family)
- Change from Work stays to immigration situations was accompanied (became long-term
migration)
11
Difference in Migration between North and South Europe
(1) North
- Receiving countries - after WWII labour migration after ban mostly family reunification
- Debate was about: Asylum, Refugees, Family reunification
Non-European immigration were countered with a series of defensive measures that has been
described as the ‘racialization’ of European migration polices
(1) Distinction between good and bad migrants – good migrants (european migration) bad migrants
(non-european migration)
- Racialization of Migrations
- Assimilation to european culture but what is european culture
12
(1) Racialisation – European vs. Non-Europe
(2) Colonial terms were still used; makes connection from national(British) issue to european issue
Fortress Europe
(5) European cultural defining process; comes along with racialization – starting after WWII Germany
was different from rest/ then Eastern Europe was outsider during Cold war/ 2000 what is European
culture? Convention
Initiation of migration – Main difference between theories no one of them explain international
migration in its entirety
13
o Government control immigration through policies which affect earning in sending or
receiving country (lower likelihood of unemployment) increasing cost of migration
both psychological and material/ lower wages for migrants)
- Send one member of the household to foreign country because labour environment is more
profitable in foreign country
- Cf. developed (minimized financial risks through insurance, state etc.) vs. developing
countries (depend on diversify financial risks through migration)
o If you depend on instable business send someone abroad to ensure income
o Future markets – build business in foreign developed country to profit from stable
markets and fixed price regulations
o Unemployment insurances – move abroad to profit from insurances in developed
countries which will save you in challenging times
o Capital markets – send person to developed countries in order to accumulate money
or send capital back (make use of banking institutions in developed countries) which
you can invest in your own business (since banking system is often poorly developed
in developing countries)
o Source of income matters – families are willing to invest family resources in activities
and projects to get access to new income sources
o Not only about absolute income (how much more money you get) but also about
relative (how much more money you have than your reference group)
- Set of policy prescriptions
o Families, household’s units of production are units of migration research not the
individual
o Migration happens without wage difference between countries; cause by differences
in other markets
o International migration and local employment are not exclusive possibilities strong
incentivise that households engage in both
o Government can influence migration rates through policies tha influence labour
markets but also by sharing insurance markets, capital markets and future markets
o Government policies and economic changes that shape income distribution will
change relative deprivation alter incentives for migration
o Government policies and economic changes that will effect distribution of income will
influence international migration independent of their effects on mean income –
Policies might reduce migration (from own country) if relatively rich households do
not share in the income gain (because people who have less money are less inclined
to leave)
(3) The dual labour market theory: bifurcation of the labour market
Focus on macro-level processes- on forces of higher level of aggregation. Immigration linked to
structural requirements of modern industrial economies in west
- Why Migration – because of the intrinsic labour demand of modern industrial societies
14
o Structural inflation:
Wages do not only depend upon demand& supply but also to a great extent on their
position in the social hierarchy – therefore it’s not easy to solely raise wages in low-
paid job in case of labour scarcity because it would disrupt the entire social system -
easiest solution labour migration who accept lower wages
o Motivational problems:
People work not only for the sake of money but as well for accumulation and
maintenance of social status people at the bottom of social hierarchy solely work
for money because there’s no social status to require easiest solution labour
migration why? A) don’t consider themselves as part of our society B) wages in our
country are often regarded as generous compared to their homeland C) Working for
the sake of money is ok because they work for higher goal at home (school, building
house etc.)
o Economic dualism:
Economy is mainly divided in two sectors:
Capital- intensive sector: employer has to bear costs of unemployment used for
basic demand; skilled jobs with best equipment and tools; high-skilled employees
become human-capital
Labour- intensive sector: employee has to bear costs of unemployment reserved
for seasonal fluctuating demand; labour released once demand is low, no investment
often unstable and unskilled jobs natives are no willing to have that risk turn more to
high-skilled jobs in capital intensive work
(lack of labour compensated by migration)
o The demographic labour supply:
In the past demand for worker for unpleasant work was covered by teenager and
women demographic change made this impossible therefore the need for external
labour has increased
Rise in female labour participation in all fields women’s work transformed
into career representing social status
Rise in divorce rates women transformed women’s job into source of primary
income support
Decline of birth rate
Extension of formal education teenagers stay out of labour market longer
o (1) Labour migration imitated by employers in developed societies
o (2) international wage differences are not sufficient reason for migration to occur
o (3) wages don’t change if supply increases because of institutional mechanism
o (4) wages can nevertheless still fall in low-skilled jobs if increase in supply of
immigration work
o (5) Lack of labour structurally implemented in modern society governments are
unlikely to make any structural changes
(4) World system theory: because of the structure of the labour market
Focus on macro-level processes – on forces of higher level of aggregation. Immigration as natural
consequence of economic globalization and market penetration across national boundaries
15
- International flow of labour follows international flow of goods and capital capital
investment creates uprooted society in developing countries; flows of good creates material
and cultural links with core countries leading to transnational movement
- Migration most likely between past colonial powers because of cultural resemblance leads
to formation of specific transnational markets and cultural systems
- International migration caused by globalization of markets: way for politics to interfere
controlling overseas investment and activities; controlling flow of capital and goods (unlikely to
happen because it will cause outrange in big multinational firms which can affect political
resources
- Political and military interventions by governments of capital countries to protect expansion
of global market if they fail refugee movements to particular core countries
- International migration cause by dynamics of market creation and the structure of global
economy not because of wages rates or employment differentials
16
Class 3: Racism, Ethnic Discrimination and the Intergroup Contact Theory
Lincoln Quillian (2006) ‘New Approaches to Understanding Racial Prejudice and Discrimination’
How can ‘prejudices’ and ‘discrimination’ be defined and what’s the difference between both
concepts?
Difference between Prejudice and discrimination is that prejudice is the attitude someone carries in
their head whereas discrimination is present in behaviour and reveal itself in unequal treatment
among racial groups.
Prejudice: Antipathy based on faulty or inflexible generalizations – consists of two elements (a)
negative emotion towards target group (antipathy)
(b) poorly founded belief about members of target group (stereotype)
Discrimination: Emphasis on unequal treatment among racial groups differ in scope of unequal
treatment
What’s the difference between direct and indirect (adverse impact) discrimination?
Direct: differential treatment on the basis of race that disadvantages a racial group
receiving different treatment than other groups because of race
Indirect: Treatment based on inadequately justified factors other than race that disadvantages a
racial group behaviour practice not caused by race but adverse impact on members of
disadvantaged racial group without a sufficiently compelling reason for its existence, consistent with
legal definition of disparate impact discrimination
What are the most commonly used methods to measure discrimination and what are their
problems?
17
Field audit studies
Racial dissimilar testers- equal in all other factors are conducting same action
after outcomes are observed provide real measurement of discrimination
auditors know purpose of research; alter their behaviour in order to prove racial discrimination
By having race as only differential characteristics between auditors (some researcher) claim that
it encourages further discrimination real life is not as black/white as research model implies
Why are audit studies (or situation/correspondence tests) superior to the other methods to measure
discrimination?
Because of its ability to control potentially confounding influences through experimental control and
randomized assignment experiments best way to assess for causality
(3) New-prejudice school often focuses on race-related policy issues, how it is handled in politics
little prove is given that the outcomes of that research imply to the same extent to everyday issues
like labour promotion/housing issues etc. often makes it difficult to discern a racial animus
component
(4) New-prejudice school conducts research between black/ white but outcomes most probably
differ if you compare a more diverse set of races
What are ‘implicit attitudes’ and what are the main ideas of the ‘implicit attitudes’-school?
Implicit attitude is an attitude that can be activated without conscious awareness and when so
triggered, influences judgments and actions. Primes have a distinct impact on our behaviour even on
people who usually score low on prejudice interview measures. Through a set of stereotypical
believes associated with racial category do exist in the mind and influence future judgments and
actions. Associations are activated automatically by presence or only mentioning the targeted group
Indirect techniques
Priming: You give a picture/term which is linked to racial prejudice and let afterwards judge action of
person, even when racial terms/ images below level of consciousness are revealed trigger action
BUT Does it only reproduce the known socially stereotypes?
18
Implicit Association Test Latency Theory (IAT): You let people structure and cluster terms; in the
end let them connect specific word constellation to black/unpleasant- pleasant and
white/unpleasant- pleasant; easier for people to connect terms which are not connected to race
with white pleasant and black unpleasant &&& find implicit association of black race with negative
characteristics even among subjects who, on explicit attitude measures, indicate no black-white
preference
What’s the main idea of the economic theory of statistical discrimination? Look up, on the internet,
its economic counterpart: the theory of taste-based discrimination.
The main idea is that individual decision makers- apply on average correct information about the
characteristics of the target group to the decision at hand. Prejudice can best be described as
statistical discrimination which follows logical desire to apply group information to make the best
individual decision.
What are the main ideas of Philomena Essed’s concept ‘everyday racism’?
Everyday racism is about racist practice and as a common social behaviour. It is a process of smaller
and bigger day to day violations of the civil rights of ethnic minorities and of their humanity and their
dignity. Member of dominant group favour people of their own group over others because they
believe that they are more human, that they have superior culture and a higher form of civilization.
Everyday racism adapts to the culture, norms and values of a society as it operates through the
prevalent structures of power in society
How do ethnic minorities and the dominant group commonly react on everyday racism?
Ethnic minorities rather downplay everyday racism because they don’t want to believe that the
outcome is actually a consequence of their race
Dominant groups consider racism as problem of the past therefore most of them highly insensitive
in recognizing everyday racism
19
What are the health consequences of everyday racism?
Psychological distress due to racism on a day to day basis can have chronic adverse effects on mental
and physical health link between everyday racism and high blood pressure
Could you think about other examples/stories of ‘everyday racism’ in school, at work, through the
media, at a shopping mall or in the neighbourhood?
Black people are more likely to be accused to have committed a crime than white people – One black
person committed a crime all of a sudden, all black people could be target – where’s would never
happen with whit people
Class notes:
Prejudices:
Affection (emotions: anxiety etc.) and stereotypes (false cognitive stereotype)
you think or feel
Discrimination:
Behaviour how you act towards certain social groups
o Direct discrimination:
Exclude groups or individuals from certain advantages because of race or
ethnicity
o Indirect discrimination:
Unequal treatment of group or individuals because of apparent neutral
measures but with adverse impact; Blind person are not allowed to go into
hospital because dogs are not allowed inside
Racism:
Can be used for both prejudices and discrimination acts; has clear negative
connotations refers more to the intention behind you do your acts consciously
20
(3/4) Everyday Racism
Racist practices: (1) Smaller or bigger day -to day violations;(2) Little accumulations over
time of small comments Can effect health aspects and have severe consequences (3)
Reflect the belief of cultural superiority
Taste-based discrimination
You exclude candidates – economically irrational because you might don’t hire the
best person but the ones which pleases your taste
Statistical discrimination
You want to hire someone - you don’t want to make further tests, but you look at
group statistics and apply it on the individual on average African people are less
productive therefore you only invite Belgians – economically that’s rational
Implicit attitudes
Unconscious discrimination you don’t realize anymore that you are discriminating
2. Intergroup Contact Theory Based on Gordon Allport (1954) and Thomas Pettigrew (1998)
(1/4) Main idea: intergroup contacts result in less negative stereotyping less prejudices and
less discrimination – Pettigrew 1998
(2/4) Allport essential conditions for positive contact: not every contact is good contact
Friendship potential
Learning about the outgroup learn about the group you’ll start loving it
Behavioural changes cause attitudinal changes (it’s basically impossible to keep
stereotypes while in contact with other group you want to have emotions and
actions aligned psychological process)
Generating affective ties (empathy result)
Reshaping the views on the ingroup (opens your horizon, in-group bias is lower
you get to know other ways to do things broaden your own horizon)
21
(4/4) Problems: (Pettigrew 1998)
Reversed causality: People who dislike migrants strongly have less contact with
migrants; whereas a more positive attitude encourages contact with outgroups
Facilitating or essential conditions? Other conditions?
only works if economic conditions are given
Generalizations of effects
From individual to group Individual doesn’t have to represent the entire group; He’s nice
but that doesn’t mean that all people from that group are nice
From situation to situation Yes, the migrant might behave in school doesn’t mean he can
behave outside
From group to group Only because Peruvians are nice doesn’t mean Bolivians are nice
22
Class 4: Legacy for Colonialism for Self-Representation
Gloria Wekker (2016)
The introduction of her book ‘White Innocence. Paradoxes of Colonialism and Race’ (p. 1-29)
What does Edward Said’s concept of ‘cultural archive’ mean and how does Wekker apply it on the
imperial history of the Netherlands?
Cultural archive foregrounds the centrality of imperialism to western culture. The cultural archive can e
seen as a storehouse of a knowledge and structures of attitude and reference. Said referring to is racial
grammar a deep structure of inequality in thought and affect based on race, was installed in
nineteenth-century european imperial populations and that it is from this deep reservoir the cultural
archive that among other things a sense of self- has been formed and fabricated.
Wekker: describes the dominant way in which the think about themselves as small, but just ethical
nation, colour blind, thus free of racism as being inherently on the moral and ethical high ground thus
a guiding light to other folks and nations.
Her objects of study pertain to dominant white self-representation, to policies, principles and practices
and to feelings; she reads imperial continuities back into a variety of popular cultural and
organizational phenomenon
To which extent do you think this type of white self-representation is similar in other ‘metropolitan’
countries with an imperial history?
In my opinion the white self-representation is omnipresent in most of the metropolitan countries, like
France, Great Britain and Portugal. The historical narrative mostly only portrays the occurrences on
the european continent and no nation accepts that the history wasn’t as colour blind as one would
23
sometimes wish.
There is an association of innocence with being small: small nation, small child. Being small one might
easily can be overlooked, not able to play a game-changing role. Because the Netherlands are so small
they need to be protected and protect themselves against all kinds of evil, inside and outside the
nation.
Actions were called ‘’police actions’’ for two wars speak volumes about a self-image that embraces
innocence, being a small but just and ethical guiding nation, internationally.
Despite the Dutch extensive colonial past they neglect any notion of memories. In school classes the
given hours on the colonial past are not fixed; subsidies for organisations implemented for memorials
are cut the Netherlands still doesn’t take their postcolonial citizen seriously, not their past of
slavery nor their present presence in the country !!!
Intersectionality is a theory and methodology, which not only addresses identarian issues. As in
commonly thought but also a host of other social and psychological phenomena. It is a way of looking
at the world that takes as a principled stance that it is not enough merely to take gender as the main
analytical tool of a phenomenon but that gender as an important social and symbolic axis difference is
simultaneously operative with other like race, class, sexuality and gender. – The grammars of race,
sexuality, gender co-construct each other.
How is Wekker applying an intersectional perspective in her work (give a few examples)?
How race is applied in Dutch polices – How Race divides women into allochthonous and third world
women; same division can also be found in labour within and between disciplines; how white women
define themselves in contrast to other black women and men, the connection between Homophobe
nationalist and
24
How is Wekker conceptualizing ‘race’?
She considers race a fundamental organizing grammar in the Dutch society, as it is in societies
structured by racial dominance. She views race as socially constructed rather than inherently
meaningful, one related to relations of power and processes of struggle and one whose meaning
changes over time
Race presents a more complicated case in Dutch context, this term is not commonly utilized since
WWII except to indicate varieties of animals and potatoes.
Race and ethnicity as two sides of the same coin subsuming and merging a more neutral, biological
understanding of race with a more culture view.
Ethnicity is the term more often being used indicated the social system that gives meaning to ethnic
differences between people to differences based on origin, appearance, history, culture, language,
and religion Ethnicity is however, only the other. Ethnic cuisine, ethnic music etc. never describes
whiteness as it is considered as the norm
To which extent is ‘race’ or ‘ethnic origin’ differently perceived in Europe and the United States?
Concept of race finds its origin in Europe and has been one of its main export products, still its is
general the case that race is declared an alien body of thought to Europe. European narrative frames
the continent as space free of ‘’race’’. Its is moreover not only the self-perception but as well the
global acceptance.
Why are ‘race’ and ‘ethnicity’ unilaterally invoked for ‘they’ and what are the parallels with gender and
sexuality?
You can find parallels between ethnicity and gender stereotyping as both terms have a ‘’neutral’’ and
normal basis from which the opposing part is deviating. In the case of ethnicity whiteness is
considered as the norm and everything deviating is seen as ‘’ethnic’’ whereas in gender studies the
deviating women are most of the time studied.
25
How is ‘race’ related to the Dutch words of ‘allochtonen’ and ‘autochtonen’
The binary terms set racializing processes in motion, everyone know that they reference whites and
people of colours respectively. The Netherlands tried to move from race to ethnicity nevertheless
behind the terms are still racial ideas since they indicate to white and non-whites.
Allochtonen means: those who came from a foreign place
people with dark skin can’t manage to be considered as Dutch as their skin colour ‘’obviously’’
reveals their foreign roots
Autochtonen: those who are from here
people with white skin manage to be considered as autochthone despite their foreign background
Which ideas of Said’s thesis of orientalism can be found in the way the Netherlands (and maybe other
metropolitan countries) deal with their colonial history and their ethnic minorities?
They create two parallel unconnected lines of history: the european continent one and the often-
ignored colonization one trying to insert those memories into the general memory often meets with
hostility and rejection. This regime of truth has enabled a myth of racial purity as homogenously white
– race is declared an alien body of thought to Europe. Therefore, all the people who are now black in
Europe can be considered as the ‘’Alien’’ unknown migrants and therefore a clear distinction between
we vs. them can be installed.
Why is the European and American knowledge of the Orient ‘political’ according to Edward Said?
1. Knowledge about the Orient is political because there’s no such thing as unbiased
knowledge. Every scholar is attached personally to the topic by the mere activity of being
a member of society.
2. Terms considered as being political vary over time and between varying contexts.
3. Saiid describes political importance as the closeness of a field to sources of power in
political society / political importance can thus easily shift between perspectives and
time.
4. There’s no neutral knowledge about the Orient because the interests of one’s country
all-determining and primary to any personal perception. A person comes up against the
orient as a european or American first (as belonging to a power with definite interest in
Orient and direct involvement over decades) and as an individual second.
1. Because there’s the general perception that if a humanist writes something political is not
directly involved in anything political and for that reason it has no direct political effect upon
reality in the everyday sense. They have a so called incidental importance to politics.
Whereas economics who work in a highly politically charged area where there’s much
government interest is considered as political. They are directly woven into his material-
indeed political sciences and therefore granted as political.
26
2. Literary scholar and philosopher are trained in literature and philosophy but not in politics or
ideological analysis
What does Said mean with the statement that Orientalism has less to do with the Orient than it does
with the West?
1. Orientalism responded more to the culture that produced it than to its putative object, which
was also produced by the west – Thus the history of Orientalism has both an internal
consistency and a highly articulated set of relationships to the dominant culture surrounding
it.
2. Orientalism changed over time according to popular paradigms – There’s never been a
neutral idea of the Orient
3. Western consider themselves in the post-Newtonian are which means they think that
knowledge about the world is external by the west claiming that they know how the Orient
works tells a lot about their world view
4. They don’t let the Orient speak for themselves but they believe that they know best what
eastern people think, feel and need.
1. The entire discourse about the Orient is talking about the Orient rather than talking with
‘’the Orient’’. The western forces consider themselves as rightful to talk for the Orient as
they have studied it for centuries. They know the best what the Orient represents and what
it needs – every deviation from the ‘’norm’’ of the Orient is considered as abnormal.
2. Moreover, they see that the Orient can’t represent itself but rather must be represented
because of their natural inferiority and their lack of intelligence
3. However, they are only RE- presented and in the cultural discourse only limited information
can circulate
Early Orientalism: before 1766 taken by Britain and France Napoleon occupation of Egypt
processes were set in motion between east and west still dominate contemporary cultural and
political perspectives. Keynote of relationship: Napoleonic invasion of Egypt in 1798 scientific
appropriation of one culture by another) set in motion processes between east and west that still
dominated contemporary cultural and political perspectives.
Beginning of Oriental renaissance new awareness of Orient was created as a result of newly
discovered and translated Oriental texts and a newly perceived relationship between the Orient
and the West art, colours. Lights. increase in scientific work about the Orient
Nevertheless, at most the ‘’real’’ orient provoked a writer to his vision it very rarely guided it
27
period of immense advance in the institution and content of Orientalist coincides exactly wit the
period of unparalleled European expansion
1. Ideal:
Ambition to formulate their discoveries, experiences and insight suitably in modern
terms to put ideas about Orient in very close touch with modern realities.
2. Discourse:
Orient was inferior to the West
The durability of the saturating hegemonic system of Orientalism does not only constrain writers but
also encourages them to discuss the topics in all its factettes. They might be biased in the way the
report about the Orient, but they give us different illustrations about the orient – which tell us more
about the nineteenth-century cultural richness than many volumes of hermetic textual analyses
(p.22).
28
What does Said mean with the concepts of ‘strategic location’ and ‘strategic formation’ and how does
he apply these concepts on Orientalism?
Strategic location: way of describing the authors position in the text with regard to the Oriental
material he writes about
The strategic location tells us where the writer locates herself in the Orient: translated into his text
the location includes: kind of narrative voice she adopts, the type of structure she build, kinds of
images, themes and motives that circulate in her text all of which add up to a deliberate ways of
addressing the reader containing the Orient and representing or speaking in its behalf
Strategic formation: way of analysing the relationship between texts and the way in which groups of
texts, types of texts, even textual genres, acquire mass, density and referential power among
themselves and thereafter in the culture at large.
The strategic formation: Every writer on the Orient assumes some previous knowledge of the Orient
to which he refers and on which he relies. Moreover, each work affiliates itself with other works, with
audiences, with institutions with the Orient itself. The ensemble of relationships between works,
audiences and some aspects of the Orient therefore constitutes an analysable formation – it presence
in time in discourse in institutions gives it strength and authority.
Which central elements of Orientalism can be found in Balfour’s and Cromer’s discourses?
1. Knowledge
England knows Egypt: Egypt is what England knows
Knowledge gives power, more power requires more knowledge and so in an increasingly
profitable dialectic of information and control
Justification of British occupation: supremacy of British mind is associated with our
knowledge of Egypt and not primarily economic or military power
Western countries have better knowledge how to govern country: at no point in history
have they managed to install successful self-governing apparatus
Western have more knowledge about the East than they have about themselves as they
know their history: therefore any deviation from that ‘’true’’ eastern self- is considered as
deviant and unnatural
Since western know what the eastern want they don’t need to speak themselves
academic knowledge was transformed into practical knowledge (policies, institutions)
Western People are smarter: trained intelligence works like a piece of mechanism; Eastern
people: can’t draw obvious conclusion from any simple premises. Think exactly oppositional
to Europeans
2. Power
Power relation was seen as hereto a relationship between a strong and a weak partner
Clear distinction between the Occident (the Englishmen: we) and the Orient (they)
they are subjected race, dominated by a race that know them and what is good for them
Their great moments of the past are only useful for the present because the west
transformed them into useful colonies of the contemporary world (Oriental backwardness)
29
any pursuit for power from Orient side has to be inhibited as it goes against the natural
self: The real future of Egypt lies not in the direction of narrow nationalism which will only
embrace native Egyptians but rather in that of an enlarged cosmopolitanism.
To which extent can these Oriental elements also be found in the discourse of current politicians and
opinions?
3. Kissinger: eastern as less intelligent: it’s easier to deal with west than east politically
Oppositional character (binary opposition) we vs. them
Cut world into pre-Newtonian and post-Newtonian world
4. Glidden:
that Arabs can’t deal with objectivity can’t make rational decision everything they do is out
of impulse
only individual success counts, and the end justifies the means (can’t govern themselves
based on those principles)
don’t value peace because raiding was one of the two main supports of economy
opposition between rational, peaceful, logical, capable west and east
What is the link of Orientalism with the linguistic technique of ‘binary opposition’?
The linguistic technique of binary opposition shows that there’re always two oppositional aspects of a
topic (two types of technique, two periods) etc. In the context of Orientalism Kissinger divides the
contemporary world in two halves: the developed and developing countries herewith he creates a
binary opposition.
The first half- The West- The developed countries: Proof of that division in the Newtonian revolution
which has only taken place in the developing world – cultures which escaped the early impact of
Newtonian thing have retained the essentially pre-Newtonian view that the real world is almost
internal to the observer.
The developed countries are: deeply committed to the notion that the real word is external to the
observer. That knowledge consists of recoding and classifying data -the more accurately the better
30
Class notes:
o The Orient
o The Oriental
o The Orientalist
o The Occidental
o The Metropole
o People of colour
“Is a sense Orientalism was a library or archive of information commonly and, in some of its
aspects, unanimously held. What bound the archive together was a family of ideas and a
unifying set of values proven in various ways to be effective.”
- Edward Said, Orientalism
“A racial grammar, a deep structure of inequality in thought and affect based on race, was
installed in nineteenth-century European imperial populations and that it is from this deep
reservoir, the cultural archive, that among other things, a sense of self has been formed and
fabricated.” - Gloria Wekker, White Innocence
“England knows Egypt; Egypt is what England knows; England knows that Egypt cannot have
self-government; England confirms that by occupying Egypt; for the Egyptians, Egypt is what
England has occupied and now governs; foreign occupation therefore becomes ‘the very basis’
of contemporary Egyptian civilization; Egypt requires, indeed insists upon, British occupation.”
c) Cultural archive
31
2. European self-representation
“This basis but deep-seated knowledge and affect, stemming from an imperial cultural
archive, will have purchase too in other former imperial nations” – Wekker 2016
(4/4) Occidentalism?
“Occidentalism is at least as reductive; its bigotry simply turns the Orientalist view upside
down. To diminish an entire society or a civilization to a mass of soulless, decadent, money-
grubbing, rootless, faithless, unfeeling parasites is a form of intellectual destruction”
- Ian Burama and Avishai Margalit (2004
3. Decolonizing processes
1) Gloria Wekker (2016): The introduction of her book ‘White Innocence. Paradoxes of Colonialism and
Race’ (p. 1-29)
What does Edward Said’s concept of ‘cultural archive’ mean and how does Wekker apply it on the
imperial history of the Netherlands? How can the ‘cultural archive’ be operationalized/measured?
1. Said:
- ‘Orientalism was a library or archive of information commonly and, in some of its aspects,
unanimously held. What bound the archive together was a family of ideas and a unifying set of values
proven in various ways to be effective’
- Orientalism: knowledge -> authority -> no autonomy of ‘it’ : They don’t have autonomy anymore,
because we know the orient, we define it, we know what they want and in this was we have authority
on them
- Orient as a bias, always in relation to the West: stereotypes with the power of knowledge, in order
to be stated as true knowledge of that minority, or culture (Orientals are mostly the same
32
everywhere)
- studying the Orient thought documents is already biased, because those documents have been
written by colonialists (another way of studying it might be through local documents, written by the
population)
- Cultural archive: material (poetry, literature etc.)
2. Wekker:
- ‘ A racial grammar, a deep structure of inequality in thought and affect based on race, was installed
in 19th century european imperial populations and that it is from this deep reservoir, the cultural
archive, that among other things, a sense of self has been formed and fabricated’
- Cultural archive: lifestyle, movies and TV shows, political discourse, common-day jokes, educational
books etc.
How does the dominant white Dutch self-representation look like? And how is it connected to
imperialism/colonialism? To which extent do you think this type of white self-representation is similar
in other ‘metropolitan’ countries with an imperial history? Why is ‘innocence’ useful for small nations
with an imperial history?
- Dominant white Dutch self-representation: tolerant, colour-blind, anti-racist, far from colonialist
tradition, innocent and emancipated, high tolerance for gender equality and sexual differences -> but
still racist episodes, and still a difference between ‘us’ (autochtonen, white, Christian) and ‘them’
(allochtonen, black, Muslim), and this is the racist ‘grammar’
- Innocent country: victims of German occupation (absence of imperial and colonial tradition in Dutch
self-representation)
- Other metropoles: Belgium with Leopold II and Congo, Portugal with Vasco da Gama, UK etc.
Edward W. Said (1978): The introduction and chapter 1 of his book ‘Orientalism’ (p. 9-57)
Which central elements of Orientalism can be found in Balfour’s and Cromer’s discourses?
- Balfour: UK, ‘Balfour’s declaration’: give a ‘national home’ to jews in Palestine, at that time still
under Ottoman rule -> in his discourse we see the distinction between Occidental and Oriental (UK
and Egypt), the authority of the Occident over the Orient, the fact that the Orient cannot speak for
itself
To which extent can these Oriental elements also be found in the discourse of current politicians and
opinions?
- es. discourses about terrorism: polarization, technique of binary opposition
What is the link of Orientalism with the linguistic technique of ‘binary opposition’?
Technique of binary opposition to exclude groups in society: if we make a distiction between ‘us’ and
‘them’, and we put ‘us’ always in a superior position (es. men and women, allochtoon and
autochtoon, rich and poor, heterosexual and LGBT) -> consequence: it is very productive
33
Notes class 4 (14/03/18): The legacy of Colonialism for European Self-representation
Different between the perception and treatment of the Near East and the Far East
2. European self-representations
European self-representation is based on colonialism
Ian Burama and Avishai Margalit, Occidentalism: ‘Occidentalism is at least as reductive; its bigotry
simply turns the Orientalist upside down. To diminish an entire society or a civilization to a mass of
soulless, decadent, money-grubbing, rootless, faithless, unfeeling parasites is a form of intellectual
destruction’.
-> might be a result from colonization: the arrival of the colonists in the regions
3. Decolonization processes
- Statutes: remove them or not? contextualize them? raise awareness and not forget or glorify?
- History books, museums, course materials
34
Class 5: Gender, Sexuality and Intersectionality
Gender, Sexuality and Intersectionality
Judith Lorber (2003) ‘Gender’
Why is gender considered as a socially constructed ‘social institution’?
A social institution is considered in sociology the main ordering principle of social life.
Gender structures social life, pattern social roles and provides individuals with identities and values.
Besides Gender pervades kinship and family life, work roles and organizations, the rules of most
religions. The outcome is a gendered social order.
What’s the argument of Nancy Chodorow with respect to the role of parenting on gendering?
She develops an influential argument for the gendering of personalities and its continuous
reproduction. Through parenting and socialization, the child develops a gendered identity that in
most cases reproduces the values, attitudes and behaviour that society considers as appropriate for
boys or girls.
Most of the parenting is done by women therefore boys need to separate themselves early from
their mother to establish their masculinity. Through that they develop characteristics such as
independence; rationality and objectivity. Girls however have from early days on the emotional
connection and intimacy with their mother which they’ll keep for the rest of their lives. Girls become
women and lack the intimacy from their husbands who have difficulties to bond therefore they have
children to get that emotional bond and the circle of gendered parenting is completed. Solution:
shared parenting
How is the matching process of ranked workers and jobs structuring gender and ethnic inequalities
at the labour market?
Matching process: sort women and men of different racial and ethnic groups into different types of
work
in time of economic recession men would rather be unemployed than employed in classical
women’s jobs
when women and men work in non-traditional occupations, gender tyoing is often maintained
symbolically ( policewomen sees work as social work; male nurse emphasize technical and physical
strength aspects)
lower-ranked workers get chance to climb up latter if job is abandoned by favoured workers
Employers will rank gender and ethnicity over qualification
35
sometimes have to take less favoured workers to save
How could we restructure the societal institutions (family, education, work, law…) so they are not as
rigidly gendered as they are today?
In sum to change gendered social orders to be more equal or less gendered will take individual effort
and modification of gender stereotyped attitudes and values, but most of all a restructuring of work
and family through the policies and practices of large-scale corporations and the governments of
dominant nations.
Jeffrey Weeks (2010) ‘Chapter 2. The Invention of Sexuality’ in his book ‘Sexuality – Third Edition’
What does Weeks mean with considering the history of sexuality as a history without a proper
subject?
He calls the history of sexuality a history without proper subject because the subject of interest
constantly changes over time. Depending on time and geographical location the definition of
sexuality changes and herewith the subject of investigation. Moreover, he suggests that Sexuality
tells more about the norms and values of the present than about the evolution of sexuality in
general.
36
And how does it relate to our changing preoccupations?
As mentioned above he believes that sexuality tells us a lot about or present live and about our
individual pre-occupation meaning our ideals of how we should live, how we should enjoy or deny
our bodies. The circulating discourse about sexuality reveals the mores and laws existing in the
present society.
How are the type of questions influenced by the preoccupations at certain time and place?
The anthropological approach investigates how the topic of sexuality was influences by time and
space. It looked at each form of sexuality individually without 21st Century bias – interested in
gaining sympathetic understanding of diversity of sexual patterns
19th Century: evolutionary history were former societies closer to nature or a more primitive form of
our current society link to conception about third world countries
20th Century: Ethnocentric racist theories were legitimised by primitive condition of other races
Sexuality as a biological mandate which presses against and must restrained by the cultural matrix
Weeks thinks that Biology conditions and limits what is possible, but it does not cause the patterns
of sexual life. Biology in his sense is a set of potentialities, which are transformed and given meaning
only in social relationships.
(1) There is general rejection of sex as an autonomous realm, a natural domain with specific effects,
a rebellious energy that the social controls. Sex cannot longer be set against society
(2) Importance of the social variability of sexual forms, and beliefs, ideologies, identities and
behaviour and of the existence of different sexual culture – sexuality has not one but more histories
which all need to be understood individually
(3) Sex is more than the dichotomy of pressure and release, repression and liberation – we have to
understand that sexuality is a result of diverse social practices that give meaning to human activities
37
Give a few examples of how sexuality differs between cultures, religions or societies; and try to go
beyond dichotomous orthodox thinking.
Sexual cultures are precisely that: culturally specific, shaped by a wide range of social and historical
factors - Each culture makes own restriction ‘’who restrictions’’ (gender, age, ethnicity) and ‘’how
restrictions’’ (organs we use, what we touch, how we touch it)
(1) There are asexual societies which show little interest in erotic life
(2) In Muslim community’s religion and sexuality is deeply interwoven:
Sexuality is radical legitimized but harshly punished in case of homosexuality or extra-marital activity
from women under Sharia law
(3) Western standard sets limited range of acceptable activities: age, gender); make clear connection
between sexuality and reproduction
(4) Homosexuality is clearly defined in western culture whereas other cultures didn’t see the
necessity to define it
How are kinship, economic, social and political factors interconnected in regulating sexuality?
All those factors are immediately effected by our globalizing world and hence drastically by changing
the outer circumstance the reformulation of norms and laws in our society.
(1) Kinship:
No incest is a universal law BUT there’s variation in degree of kinship. Interestingly those
relationships are defined by social relations between groups and not by link of blood. What
we define as family is clearly defined by historical factors. Family is constantly shaped and
reshaped by economic and social factors – and as kin and family patterns change so will
attitudes and beliefs concerning it.
38
How differ ‘Western’ preoccupations about sexuality from ‘Ancient’ preoccupations?
Difference of two patterns represent a major shift in the organizing significance given to sexuality
Western preoccupation: The West has been largely preoccupied with whom people have sex WHO
Ancient preoccupation: The Ancient dealt more with the question of excess or over-indulgence,
activity and passivity of sex. homosexuals could have sex but if one acted passive that was not
allowed since it represents characteristics of women HOW
And what are the key moments in the development of the dominant Western model?
(1) AD Reason of sex is reproduction therefore growing austerity against sex indulged in
purely for pleasure
(2) 12th and 13th Century Marriage was seen as a matter of family arrangement for the good
of families People in marriages (often strangers) were tied together by a tight set of rules
(3) 18th and 19th Century an increasing definition of sexual normality occurred in terms of
relations with the opposite sex and the consequent categorization of other forms as deviant.
Because sexual intercourse between same sex has always existed throughout history but only in the
19th Century where an entire personality was created around ‘’the homosexual’’ it became socially
constructed. Whereas before the act of specific sexual activities were punished not the simple
personally trait was being punished. At the end of the 19th Century ‘’the homosexual’’ was seen as
belonging to a particular species of being characterized by feelings, latency and a psychosexual
condition.
It is the consequence of social control because the body is seen as an intersection between who we
are personally and the society at large. In order to deal with moral decline and societal and political
issues which are considered to be closely linked with sexuality one needs to understand sex in order
to understand one-self. With the result to reach moral uniformity.
Why is, according to Weeks, the social regulation of sexuality rather productive than repressive?
Repressive represents a top- down approach: laws and regulation determine the sexual activities
performed in a particular time and space
Productive represent a bottom- up approach: many different practices and circumstances define the
regulation. Weeks emphasises rather the impact of various social practices and discourses that
construct sexual regulation, give meaning to bodily activities, shape definitions and limit and control
human behaviour Power is hereby not owned by an entity but is rather a process between shifting
cultures.
39
How is his power-based approach to sexuality multidimensional and complex?
He believes that sexual politics can never be a single form of activity, they are enmeshed in the
whole network of social contradictions and antagonisms that make up our modern world. There are
importantly various forms of sexuality: there are in fact many sexualities. There are classed
sexualities there are gendered-specific sexualities, there are racialized sexualities and there are
sexualities of struggle and choice. The invention of sexuality was not a single event. It is a continuing
process in which we are simultaneously acted upon and actors, objects of change and its subjects.
We are made by and make sexual history and the forms of power that enmesh it.
Power operates subtly through a complex series of interlocking practices Sexual politics can
never be single form of activity.
40
Class notes:
“Changing a gendered society entails structural and institutional change. Attitudes and
values must change, too, but these are often altered when social policies and practices shift.”
- Lorber 2003
“Thinking through unacknowledged male privilege as a phenomenon with a life of its own, I
realized that since hierarchies in our society are interlocking, there was most likely a
phenomenon of white privilege that was similarly denied and protected, but alive and real in
its effects. As a white person, I realized I had been taught about racism as something that
puts others at a disadvantage but had been taught not to see one of its corollary aspects,
white privilege, which puts me at an advantage.” – McIntosh 1998
Pioneering sexology
o Is the modern family something natural or evolved from the primitive clan?
o Did our ancestors live in a state of primitive promiscuity or was monogamy a
biological necessity?
o Was patriarchal domination present from the dawn of culture?
Anthropological approach
41
o How are our basic natural drifts satisfied in different cultures?
Current perspectives
o How are sexual beliefs and behaviors socially constructed?
o How to understand the history of the idea of sexuality itself?
3. Intersectionality
(2/2) Intersectionality:
o Intersectional perspective
o Matrix of domination
o Different purpose: critical social theory
o Different forms than standard academic texts
o Specific concepts
o Class downplayed by gender and race
42
Sexuality can be gendered: by advertisement, popular songs, that tells how to act as a male or female
in a way that society decides, society creates a standard way of dealing with sexuality
Gendering in family: woman and man have different tasks in the family; boys with blue things and girls
with pink things theory of the role of the mother (but critiques: what about single mothers or
fathers? what about non heterosexual families?)
Gendering in school: especially between high school and university, girls are more pushed to study
emotional and caring subjects (medicine, humanistic studies), while boys are more pushed towards
rational studies (economy, sciences etc.)
Gendering by peers: exclusion of those who do not fit in the categories of male and female, until they
become ‘normal’
Gendering in media: alternative sources are nowadays popular but not enough
Gendering at work:
- continuing gender segregation: women decided to work where already a lot of women were working
- gender re-segregate: shift from male occupation to female occupation
- symbolic gender typing: stressing the gendering skills of your work if it doesn’t match your gender
(es. policewomen stress how their job is focused on dialogue and understanding)
McIntosh, ‘white, male privilege’: white male people have more advantages because the non-male
non-white people are disadvantages; positive & negative advantages (the positive advantages have to
be enlarged for the whole population, while the negative ones should be given up)
3) Intersectionality: it developed throught the black feminist movement in the 70s and 80s
Intersectional paradigm:
- intersectional perspective: society as overlapping forms of oppression
- matrix of domination: the domains where the overlapping forms of oppression are organized and
reinforce each other (es. politics, media etc.)
- different purpose: critical social theory: not only explaining society, but also changing the oppression
and discrimination in society
- different forms than standard academic texts: alternative ways of intellectual production (es. art,
culture, music: r&b music, blues..)
- specific concepts: ‘women of color’ as intersection between sex and ethnicity
- class downplayed by gender and race?: one of the critiques is that it doesn’t take into account class,
mostly gender and race are analyzed in the intersectional perspective (Claudia Wekker underlines
that class is important)
43
Class 6: Urban Sociology
Reading Questions Class 6. Urban Sociology
The term ghetto denotes abounded urban ward, a web of group-specific institutions and a cultural
and cognitive constellation (values; mind-set, or mentality) entailing a socio -moral isolation of a
stigmatized category as well as the systematic truncation of the life space and life chances of its
members. The ghetto does not result from ecological dynamics but from the inscription in space of a
material and symbolic power asymmetry as revealed by the recurrent role of collective violence in
establishing as well as challenging ethnocidal confinement.
Which sociological functions does the ghetto fulfil for the dominating and the dominated groups?
The ghetto is a product and instrument of group power. Ghettos are the product of a mobile and
tensionful dialectic of external hostility and internal affinity that expresses itself as ambivalence at
the level of collective consciousness.
Dominant groups: its rationale is to confine and control which translated in what May Weber calls
the exclusionary closure of the subordinate category.
Intense cultural production – collective identity machine in its own rights
Dominated groups: protective and integrative device insofar as it relieves its members from the
constant contact with the dominant and fosters consociation and community-building within the
constricted sphere of intercourse it creates. Enforces isolation for the outside lead to the
intensification of social exchange and cultural sharing inside. By submitting them to unique
conditions they are perceived as outsiders as singular, exotic aberrant which fees prejudicial beliefs.
Apply these characteristics and functions on both the medieval Jewish ghettos and the American
Black ghettos of the 1960s.
Jewish Ghetto:
Dominated: constantly protested against the regulation within their outcast district – they were
nonetheless deeply attached to them and appreciative of the relative security and special form of
collective life they supported
Black Americans:
Dominated: they were pride to have ‘’erected a community in their own image’’ even as they
resented the fact that they had done so under duress as a result of unyielding whit exclusion aimed
at warding off the spectre of sic
44
Why does Loic Wacquant disagree with the Chicago School’s perspective of considering the ghetto as
‘natural’ and ‘uncontrollable’?
What does the Chicago school say? The ghetto is a natural area arising via environmental adaption
governed by a biotic logic akin to the competitive cooperation that underlies the plant community
BUT the Chicago history falsely converts history into natural history and passing ghettoization off
as a manifestation of human nature virtually coterminous with the history of migration when it is
actually a highly peculiar form of urbanization warped by asymmetric relation of power between
ethnocidal groupings – a special form of collective violence concretized in urban space.
Why are not all ghettos poor and why are not all poor areas (inside) ghettos?
Not all ghettos are poor: Ghetto arises through the double assignation of the category to territory
and territory to category (step 1. Everyone who has to live in ghetto step 2. The hierarchy within the
ghetto) there are avenues for economic betterment and upward mobility in its internal social
order. Whether a ghetto is poor or not depends on the overall economic standing of the category
and its distribution in the division of labour and surrounding economy. Conversely
Examples: Judengasse Frankfurt; was vibrant centre of trade and finance; only because they were
forced to dwell in walls didn’t stop them to thrive economically
In US Ghetto was ‘cultural capital’ of black Americans – place where ’’Negro’s advantages and
opportunities are greater than in any other place in the country’’
Not all poor areas are inside ghettos: southern Italy, east Germany, British Midlands are territories
of working-class demotion and decomposition not ethnic containers dedicated to maintain an
outcast group in a relationship of seclusive subordination
Why are all ghettos segregated, but not all segregated areas ghettos?
Not all segregated areas are ghettos: In some areas segregation is entirely voluntary and elective
and for that reason it is neither all-inclusive nor perpetual.
Example: enclaves of luxury package, security seclusion, social homogeneity, amenities and services
enable bourgeoisie families to escape what they perceive as the ‘’chaos, dirt and danger of the city’’
All ghettos are segregated: in order for a ghetto be a ghetto it needs to first be imposed and all-
encompassing and must be overlaid with a distinct and duplicative set of institutions enabling the
population thus cloistered to reproduce itself within its assigned perimeter.
Why could you not consider the ethnic minority neighbourhoods in European cities as ghettos?
You can’t consider the Banlieues in France as Ghettos because the people who live there are based
first on class and then on ethnicity and most importantly it is impermanent. People who move up
the social class move out of the neighbourhood so there’s definitely a geographic mobility given.
Population in Banlieues are mostly heterogenous and don’t have a duplicative set of institutional
organisations but they are rather lack ingrown organization what makes them rather anti-ghettos.
45
What’s the difference between a ghetto and an ethnic cluster?
Ghetto: material and symbolic isolation war geared toward dissimilation; symbolically a wall
Ethnic cluster: springboard for assimilation via cultural learning and social-cum-spatial mobility,
symbolically a bridge
segregation was partial and result of immigrant solidarity and ethnic attraction, geographic
separation was neither uniformly nor rigidly visited upon the groups thus clusters were ethnically
plural
Institution within turn outwards: they operate to facilitate adjustment to the environment; they
neither replicated the organization of the country of origin nor perpetuated social isolation and
cultural distinctiveness
within generations climbed up ladder gained access to American counterparts
What are the characteristics of the anti-ghetto? And apply these characteristics on the French
banlieues.
You can’t consider the Banlieues in France as Ghettos because the people who live there are based
first on class and then on ethnicity and most importantly it is impermanent. People who move up
the social class move out of the neighbourhood so there’s definitely a geographic mobility given.
Population in Banlieues are mostly heterogenous and don’t have a duplicative set of institutional
organisations but they are rather lack ingrown organization what makes them rather anti-ghettos.
To which extent could you consider the excluded position of the Roma in Eastern Europe as a
tendency towards ghettoization?
Romans have long been a marginalized group not only in rural areas but as well in urban districts –
what increases their tendency towards ghettoization is that fulfil the four structural components of
a) stigma b) constraints c) spatial enclosure d) institutional parallelism.
After fall of Soviet Union – anti-Roman prejudice were reactivated, and they were seen as criminal
race and highly discriminated. Political action by Berlusconi government reinstituting state run
camps to corral Gypsies on the outskirt of Italian cities
And the campaign of destruction of illegal- Rom encampment launched by Sarkozy in France in 2010
to curry favour with electors of the far right are there to remind that Roma remain prime candidate
for the (re)activation of socio-spatial enclosure even in western Europe
46
And why went some American areas from ghettos to hyperghettos?
The double-sidedness of the ghetto as sword (for the dominant) and shield (for the subordinate)
implies that, to the degree that its institutional completeness and autonomy are abridged, its
protective role is diminished, and risks being swamped by its exclusionary modality. In situations in
which its residents cease to be of economic value to the controlling group, extraction evaporates
and no longer balances out ostracization. Ethnocidal encapsulation can then escalate to the point
where the ghetto morphs into an apparatus merely to warehouse the spoiled and supernumerary
population, as a staging ground for its expulsion, or as a springboard for the ultimate form of
ostracization, namely, physical annihilation. The first scenario fits the evolution of America’s “Black
Metropolis” after the peaking of the civil rights movement in the mid-1960s. Having lost its role as a
reservoir of unskilled labour power, the dark ghetto crashed and broke down into a dual socio-
spatial structure composed of (i) the hyperghetto, entrapping the marginal fractions of the black
working class in the barren perimeter of the historic ghetto; and (ii) the black middle-class satellites
that burgeoned at the latter’s periphery in the areas left vacant by white out-migration, where the
growing African American bourgeoisie achieved spatial and social distance from its lower-class
brethren (Wacquant 2008a, 51–52, 117–118).
Unequal dispersion of groups over neighbourhoods within cities (when you are young you
are more in the city centre, when you are married you rather use the suburb regions;
different lifestyles)
(1) Concentration
Relative and absolute measure – relate it to city level if there are 30% Moroccans in
Brussels and in one region you have 50% concentration
(2) Isolation
Are specific regions isolated from vital functions of wider city life (schools,
university, public transport)
(3) Clustering
Identified different neighbourhoods – are the different neighbourhoods clustered
next to each other / are they segregated – not segregated – segregated (you think in
terms of neighbourhoods not of people)
(4) Centralisation
Where does specific societies
47
Explaining socio-economic segregation:
Even in cities where segregation is really high compared to US european cities are really lo
48
Theories explaining ethnic segregation:
Ghetto:
Institutional parallelism
Measuring ghettos: More than 70% of the neighbourhood inhabitants are from the same ethnic
group and more than 66% of that ethnic group live in that neighbourhood
Hyperghetto:
49
(4) state institutions of social control
police everywhere
(5) underclass: unemployed, welfare recipients
(6) Stigmatized but there is no collective identity
Anti- Ghetto
50
Class 7: Functions and Dysfunctions of Social Inequality
Functions and Dysfunctions of Social Inequality
Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore (1945). Some Principles of Stratification
Melvin M. Tumin (1953). Some Principles of Stratification. A Critical Analysis
Read the texts of Davis & Moore and Tumin together
The basic assumption from Davis and Moore is that social inequality and social stratification is
necessary for every society because it needs to fulfil the requirement to place and motivate
individuals in the social structure. AS a functioning mechanism a society must somehow distribute its
members in social positions and induce them to perform the duties of these positions.
The main functional necessity of any stratification system is the requirement faced by any society of
placing and motivating individuals in the social structure. It must distribute its members in social
positions and induce them to perform the duties of these positions.
What are the steps in their reasoning to defend stratification and inequality (use maybe the analysis
of Tumin to get the steps)?
A) Certain positions in any society are functionally more important than others and require specific
skills for their performance.
B) Only a limited number of individuals in any society have the talents which can be trained into the
skills appropriate to these positions (i.e. more functionally important positions) – The rarity of
appropriate talent
C) The conversion of talents into skills involves a training period during which sacrifices of one kind
or another are mad by those undergoing the training (medical students)
D) In order to induce the talented persons to undergo these sacrifices and acquire the training, their
future positions must carry an inducement value in the form of differential, i.e. privileged and
disproportionate access to the scarce and desired rewards which the society has to offer
E) the scarce and desired goods consist of the rights and perquisites attached to, or built into, the
positions and can be classified into those things which contribute to a) sustenance and comfort and
b) humour and diversion c) self-respect and ego expansion
F) This differential access to the basic rewards of the society has a consequence the differentiation
of the prestige and esteem which various strata acquire. This may be said along with the rights and
perquisites to constitute institutionalized social inequality i.e. stratification
G) Therefore, social inequality among different strata in the amounts of scarce and desired goods,
and the amounts of prestige and esteem which they receive is both positively functional and
inevitable in any society.
51
Which types of rewards do they differentiate? And give for each type a concrete example.
Davis and Moore differentiate between
What are the critiques of Tumin on the different steps in the logic of Davis and Moore?
A) That the labour highly or lower ranked are equally important and are only a result of prior
judgment and are culturally shaped. Because the issue of motivation concerns all different kind of
jobs not only the highly ranked ones. Tumin sees the system of inducement and rewards as only one
of many forms of a reward system.
B) Societies often ignore the talent which is available and the more rigidly stratified a society is the
less chance dies that society have of discovering any new facts about the talents of its member
range of available talent is huge but not used
- because of lack of educational opportunities many people don’t get the chance to explore their
talent
- unequal distribution of motivation in one generation sets directly limits of equal distribution of
motivation in next generation
C) Training period should not be regarded as sacrifice but rather as reward ( see other
question)
D) Davis and Moore limit the term of rewards only to prestige and material rewards and completely
ignore hereby the case in which the fulfilment of the job gives intrinsic motivational reward – highly
skilled work already offers a greater possibility because of its diversity to fulfil the criteria of intrinsic
reward. The author proposes that effort should be put into also institutionalizing other forms of
rewards in our system
E/F ) He criticises that Davis and Moor don’t emphasis how the different motivation should be
spread as a reward which one is most important etc. Moreover, he points out that they ignore the
double sense of stratification in one society namely the hierarchy within the conforming society and
between the part which conforms to the stratification and the ones who don’t live up to the norm
Despite older people often have more power than younger ones because of experience etc. they
don’t have necessarily a different valued stratum. For no society rates its young as less morally
worthy than its older persons flaws in their assumptions
G) Society must distribute unequally power and property necessary for the performance of different
tasks - they should however been seen as resources and not as rewards. Only if they are viewed as
resources no link can be established between prestige and esteem.
A man should be judged on how well he does his job and not what he does.
52
What do they think of the differentiation of jobs in terms of ‘functional importance for a society to
survive’?
Functional necessity describes that despite certain jobs are important to society they are not highly
rewarded because the positions are easy to be filled. Other jobs with the same degree of importance
however are more rewarded because those position. Functional importance is therefore the
necessary but a sufficient cause of high rank being assigned to a position.
What are the three ways in which stratification systems, once operative, tend to reduce the survival
value of a society by limiting the search, recruitment and training of talented personnel?
Societies often ignore the talent which is available and the more rigidly stratified a society is the less
chance dies that society have of discovering any new facts about the talents of its member range
of available talent is huge but not used
- because of lack of educational opportunities many people don’t get the chance to explore their
talent
- unequal distribution of motivation in one generation sets directly limits of equal distribution of
motivation in next generation
- Elites tend to restrict access to their privileged positions
Why is it exaggerated to consider training as a ‘sacrifice’ and why could you also see it as something
‘rewarding’?
53
Training (medical students) is seen as sacrifice because the training period is lengthy and during that
time they can’t work. Reasons why this assumption is false:
1) Only advantaged people can even start to do the training in that field because otherwise they
can’t afford it or are categorically excluded from the training
2) Wage in relative terms pays the training period costs in the first 10 years the following 30 years
are only for the profit of the trained individual. (even that is relative because labour worker tends to
start family first & get married have less money at proposal)
3) American society only focuses on material returns of position completely ignore non-material
rewards highly trained people get already throughout training period
Rewarding:
a) prestige is way higher in society (colleges students) b) extremely highly privileges of having
greater opportunity for self-development c) psychic reward in being allowed to delay the
assumption of adult responsibilities such as earning a living and supporting a family d) access to
leisure and freedom of a kind labour worker can’t experience
What is Tumin’s critique on the reward system in the reasoning of Davis and Moore (step 4, 5 and 6)?
See E- F- G
To which extent are the ‘alternative motivational schemes’ captured by the rewards.
The alternative motivational schemes are not captured at all by the rewards because they are not
material. In the western society rewards are only associated with material things thus prestige,
psychic gain and privilege are not considered as rewards.
Claude S. Fischer et al. (1996). Inequality by Design. Cracking the Bell Curve Myth
Which two types of questions could be asked with respect to social inequality and stratification?
1) Who gets ahead and who falls behind in the competition for success? – Why this person rather
than that person ended up on a higher rank
2) What determines how much people get for being ahead or behind? – why some societies have tall
and narrowing ladders
Inequality follows inevitably human nature. Some people are born with more talent than others, the
first succeed the others fail in life’s competition. Individual talent – assumption that nature defeats
any sentimental efforts by society to reduce inequality they say such efforts should therefore be
dropped as wasteful.
54
What are the central ideas of the so-called Bell-curve hypothesis?
The assumption is that human talents can be reduced to a singled fixed and essentially innate skill
they label intelligence. They error in asserting that this trait largely determines how people end up in
life. And they err in imagining that individual competition explains the structure of inequality in
society.
The rich will invest their capital in production and thus create job for all
What are the central ideas of the ‘supply-side’ or ‘trickle down’ economics in the 1980s?
supply side: rewarding the wealthy for example by reducing income taxes on returns from their
investment would stimulate growth to the benefit of all everyone would profit from it
And what’s Fischer et al.’s reaction?
that increasing inequality undermines growth
Class 7:
Social Differentiation
Differences amongst societies
Social Stratification
Why is it important that we have social inequality between different jobs? – jobs ordered in
horizontal way
55
Manager in company: entire company depends upon decisions taken by manager
therefore his position is more important
Scarcity: medical students the costlier and sacrificing a training is the greater rewards should
be
The more pleasant a job the less reward should be granted
The more talent is needed (football player) the more rewards should be granted
Critique of Tumin:
2) talent doesn’t mean training – people face many difficulties to live their talent to
the fullest (access to education is unequal -the higher social inequality the higher
the access to educational access)
3) Most of the time parents pay for education so profits after training is for
themselves
Not material-rewards are not taking into consideration by Davis and Moore
Prestige of being a student
Having greater opportunity for self-development; more leisure time
Can delay adult responsibilities
4) pure work satisfaction is not taking into account (mama with music)
56
5) It is necessary that someone does that job- that is the reason why I do it
Humour and diversion: lot of leisure time
Prestige: you want to do the job because it has high social value
Esteem: you like that job because it is more enjoyable
Self- respect and ego-expansion: status symbols
6) We can have different prestige and rewards but that doesn’t mean we must have social
stratification (older people in society often have more prestige and rewards but that doesn’t mean
we have age stratification)
1) Once people are in position of high reward they have so much power that they can ask for more
rewards which turns out then unfunctional
2) There are still difference between people and jobs how big is your desk, chairs (minor
psychological differences have impact on your status); it is not only about material things but also
about minor things which can create inequality
One can have complete socio-economic equality but still feels symbolically discriminated
3) Critique of Wrong on Tumin: you need rewards in order to lead people to the jobs which are more
important to our society otherwise everyone ends up as actors and we have no doctors left
Critique: Historical research: more unequal nations grew less quickly than more equal nations
Equality fosters economic growth the spirit level
57
Critiques:
Similar genetic societies have different degrees of inequality (inequality in Sweden is not as
omnipresent as in the US despite same spread of intelligence)
IQ tests are biased
Talents cannot be reduced to intelligence (Ronaldo)
Debate about the influence of genetic versus social environment factors on intelligence
Explanation: if you have a more equal societies people in lower position will not be as relatively
depresses as in more unequal societies
Higher self-esteem better health more productiveness more social cohesion ( less
violence) ; both high and low strata of society profit from social inequality
Critiques: Cherry picking (didn’t take all countries into consideration while analysing inequality) - left
out certain indicators
Causality: they state that higher equality more health but maybe it is vice versa – better health
leads to more equality etc.; confounding factors:
all theories for social inequality or equality have direct political policy implications: trickle- down
were used by conservatism whereas spirit level was more used by socialist, sociology is being used
Social (Im)Mobility
Who ends up on which step of the ladder
58
Class 8: Social (Im) Mobility
Social (Im)Mobility in Europe
Robert Erikson and John Goldthorpe (1992). Trends in Class Mobility. The Post-War European
Experience
The three main propositions which distinguishes industrial and pre-industrial societies are according
to the liberal theory of industrialism:
(1) absolute numbers of social mobility are high; trend for upward mobility from less to more
advantaged positions
(2) relative rates of mobility; individuals of differing social origins compete on more equal terms to
attain particular destinations
(3) level of absolute rate of mobility and the degree of equality in relative rates tend to increase over
time
What are the arguments of Lipset and Zetterberg; of Sorokin; and of Featherman, Jones and Hauser?
Lipset and Zetterberg:
Lipset and Zetterberg want to emphasise that greater social mobility mostly stems from the
structural change it is not seen as a constant upward trend. They assume that the increase in
mobility often happens at an early stage in the industrialization process. They claim that higher
mobility doesn’t imply social equality and greater openness of a society
Sorokin:
Sorokin believes that yes mobility rose but sees it more as a specific horizontal phase as part of a
cynical societal process. There can be no definite perpetual trend be established towards greater or
less mobility but inly trendless fluctuation. He acknowledges that industrialization removed certain
59
barriers for social mobility such as juridical or religions but at the same token also introduced new
ones such as educational selection and occupational qualification. If he had to believe in a constant
trend it would be in a constant downward trend since social strata becomes more closed over time
as the cumulative result of those in superior positions using their power and advantage to restrict
entry from below. Mobility is often a result of interrupted state order in times of conflict etc. since
the guiding structures are missing in those times.
Take a close look to the class schema of Erikson and Goldthorpe. Try to give some concrete examples
of jobs for each class.
What’s the difference between absolute and relative mobility? What do they mean with social
fluidity?
Absolute mobility: is concerned with patterns and rates of mobility, where mobility is understood
simply as movement between class origins (the social class in which someone was brought up) and
class destination (the class they occupy at the time of the survey). Absolute mobility is treated as
consequence of social fluidity (the relative chances of people from each origin being found in each
destination class) operating within fixed origin and destination distributions.
Changes over time and differences between countries in absolute mobility are driven by variation in
the origin and destination distribution rather than in social fluidity.
60
Social fluidity is also referred to as relative mobility: is concerned with the relationship between class
origins and current class positions: specifically, it is based on the comparison, between people of
different class origins of their chances of being found in one destination class rather than another.
Social fluidity is often interpreted as an index of equality in the chances of access to more or less
advantageous social positions between people coming from different social origins (in other words,
as an index of societal openness) and contemporary research on social mobility according pays much
more attention to social fluidity than to absolute mobility.
How do the absolute and relative mobility rates look like in post-war Europe? What are the main
patterns?
Absolute mobility: Convergence ins class structures, decline in manual work and unskilled workers –
reason of that is the decline of farm classes in countries which were mainly based upon farm work
before the 20th Century. Recent rapidity of the transition out of agriculture is striking and
omnipresent. Concentration of women in white-collar works (more rapid in countries which differed
in 1970 substantially from that pattern)
Social fluidity: trends ins social fluidity are similar for men and women showing a tendency towards
greater fluidity. In contrast to absolute mobility to convergence patterns can be observed between
countries in social fluidity. There is widespread tendency for social fluidity to increase even though
this might not be a statistically significant trend in every case. Fluidity for men is nearly in every case
greater at the end then compared to the beginning. Also for women fluidity increases over time in
most of the countries.
Why are the conclusions of Breen so different with respect to relative mobility and social fluidity
than those of Erikson and Goldthorpe?
Breen finds evidence for change and cross-national difference where Erikson and Goldthorpe claim
that there is a basic similarity in social fluidity in all industrial societies given furthermore they see a
high degree of temporary stability.
Temporary stability: Erikson and Goldthorpe take age- groups to represent different birth cohorts
they take – Breen takes also later born cohorts into consideration up until 1970 whereas E& G. only
take people until 1945 they therefore completely leave out in their analysis the post-war economic
boom an the general more egalitarian educational and social welfare policies that follower in its
wake the major reduction in class inequalities in educational attainment took place amongst
cohorts BORN between 1910 and 1950 and that since then there has been no further equalization
older generations and less fluid once are replaced by younger and more fluid cohorts.
61
Variation in social fluidity between countries: Overall same data – but different conclusion why?
Erikson and Goldthorpe they measured the strength of effect of fluidity on overall mobility but not
measure the variation in fluidity itself and therefore mistakenly conclude that social fluidity is
common an invariant. What can be shown is that between countries over time large variation sin
social fluidity can be found which nevertheless have little impact on the overall mobility regime.
The texts of Featherman & Hauser (1978) and Ganzeboom, Treiman and Ultee (1991) are optional.
(So, Ganzeboom et al.’s study also became an optional reading)
62
Class notes:
How to measure socio-economic position?
Difficult you need long-term data in a consistent way
1. First issue administrative how to we get our info?
Occupation reflect prestige, skill, property and income good overall indicator of social class
Negative: you have uncountable different occupations
What do you do with unemployed people? Look at their job before
What do you do with students? Housewives? Elderly people? Average score or minimum
score
Education: easy to count; continuous variable; easy to do it amongst countries and different
age groups; a bit related to prestige and income (rude educator)
Easy access for that data
Property: direct measure of income and resources (doesn’t say anything about
prestige/education)
Negtaiv: There are countries in which you don’t talk about income; wage – you talk about
Netto or Brutto? Do you talk about your saving/stocks/shares? Mostly being used monthly
income after taxation
Once you have that data you can classify it in sociological categories
Gradational scales:
Occupational prestige scale: only describe social inequality and social position but does not
explain reasons for social inequality
Continous- scale / popular evaluation of occupational standing/ survey based. Which occupation
has the most standing/ strongly correlated with other classifications/ High level of cross-national
consensus (different countries same values) / Rich American functionalist tradition (prestige/
inequality has function in society) legitimization of prestige and inequality
Most widely used SIOPS scale
63
Disadvantages: Prestige differs over time (farmer)/ Different classes in society evaluate prestige
differently (lower educated evaluate lower jobs higher than higher educated)
They don’t reveal underlying class injustices/ Difficult to interprete what means one prestige
difference on the scale?
64
Capitalists: CEO (in possession of part of company)
Expert Manager:
Nonskilled Manager: Farmer
Petty Bourgeoisie: Painter
Expert: Scientist/ Economists /Engineers
Workers: Cleaners
65
Difference is based on your belief on social inequality: if you believe it is something functionalist
you’ll use prestige skills/ if you follow more conflict perspective that class is based on conflict and
polarisation in society relational class schemes.
Orthodox consensus:
They seek to establish scientific fact like natural facts
Logical framework of positivism
Paradigm of functionalism they take gradational skills prestige skills
Liberal industrial society thesis: in industrial society everyone has more opportunities
Absolute and relative mobility are high and increase over time
Relative mobility = social fluidity is the same
Tendency of convergence among industrial stratification system
Explanations:
o Structural: technology & bureaucracy occupational redistribution
Moe occupations available in technological advanced sectors because of mass
(Fordism) production more bureaucracy more services needed
Agriculture decreasing technology increasing
o Processual: from ascriptive to achievement selection processes
You focus on skills of person and not on ascriptive characteristics
o Compositional: achievement is more important in expanding sectors
Achievement in technological sectors become more important for society
Post-war years of optimism ‘ You have never had it so good’ ; absolute and relative mobility
increases
66
Absolute vs. Relative mobility
Relative: No relative social mobility If you class of origin automatically determines your class of
destination (class system) parents teacher you become teacher
Perfect relative mobility: It is only your skills education that counts for your class of destination
Relative mobility is concerned with fairness in society high relative mobility (fair society)
Conflict theories:
Sorokin: current mobility trends are only temporary; power and inequality have self-maintaining
properties, degree of fairness will decrease again
Featherman, Jones and Hauser: No absolute mobility trend in the longs run, Industrialism is not
associated with steady; highest degree of fairness can be found after state of crisis: war etc. pp;
opposing idea of industrial society thesis – once society is industrialised not continuous mobility
anymore
Upward mobility in Europe is twice as high as downward mobility increasing absolute mobility is
true for those countries
Industrialism thesis: was right in the sense that absolute mobility increases and relative decreases
but not in the sense that industrialism is the reason for it
67
Class 9: The Upper Class and Elites
If you can affect with your decisions the everyday world of the ordinary citizen.
They do not need to meet the demands of the society (family responsibilities, community ties) of the
day and hour but in some part, they create these demands and cause others to meet them. Rulers of
big corporations
Major corporations have extreme shaping power in nations. Religious, educational and family
institutions are not autonomous centres of national power; on the contrary these decentralized
areas ae increasingly shaped by the big three in which developments of decisive and immediate
consequence now occur.
Which three major institutions does Mills distinguish in the development of the power elite in the
United States? Could you give current examples of the power elite?
The economic, the military and the political domain. Each of the domains got enlarged and
centralised over time consequences of activities get greater!
Economy is now dominated by few hundred corporations – administratively and politically
interrelated which together hold the keys to economic decisions.
What are the main characteristics of these institutions in modern, capitalist times? And what are the
consequences?
Over time in politics/ military /economy means of power has increased enormously over time their
central executive powers have been enhanced, within each of them modern administrative routines
have been elaborated and tightened up. Politic: influence economy activity & military programs
Military decision: affect political life & economic activity Political economy: linked in thousands of
ways to military institutions and decision makers.
Economy: German weapon company is allowed to produce more weapon then usually because they
are super successful
Politics: Politicians
Military:
To which extent is Mills’ conceptualization different from ‘gradational’ scales (see previous class)?
The gradational scales ranked different occupation according to their prestige – Mills also sees that
members of upper strata are defined in terms of psychological and moral criteria as certain kinds of
selected individuals (prestige). Prestige plays an important role but also smart people in lower strata
can develop counter-ideology in order to tackle the dominance of the upper strata. Every institutions
has same set of elite which interacts – hierarchy is not according to prestige of job but rather
determined by social class and opportunities you are born in with. Power – prestige and money goes
together and is inherited by elite of military, politics and economy.
68
To which extent would you consider Mills as a conflict theorist?
Mills theory can be considered as a conflict theory as he clearly distinguished between the power
elite and the wider society who is not part of the ruling elite. AS he emphasized in the example of
the U.S. we see that in countries which had an opposition to the bourgeoisie (church/ royals /feudal
system) the bourgeoisie formed differently and has in respect less power than in countries where
the bourgeoisie was able to expand without restrains. But not really a conflict theorists because he
questions openly the existence of one power elite – the elite is rather scattered and their influence
can’t be determined as such therefore one can’t speak of a conflict theorists : our definition of the
power elite cannot properly contain dogma concerning the degree and kind of power that ruling
groups everywhere have.
What is according to Mills the dominant trend in the history of the West in respect of power
concentration?
That power concentration will increase even more over time as the institutional means of power and
the means of communication that tie them together have become steadily more efficient, those now
in command of them have come into command of instruments of rule quite unsurpassed in the
history of mankind.
69
And what’s the difference between solidary, uniform, abstract and established elites? Could you give
an example of each?
What’s the relationship with relative mobility (or social fluidity) we have seen in last class?
What’s the difference between institutional mediation of power and the mediation of power in terms
of control?
Institutional mediation of power: General form of state and economy within which elite groups are
recruited and structured. This concern, among other things, the role of property in the overall
organisation of economic life, the nature of the legal framework defining economic and political
rights and obligations, and the institutional structure of the state itself.
Mediation of power in terms of control: Refers to the actual power of policy formation and decision-
making held by the members of particular elite groups: how far, for example economic leaders are
able to influence decision taken by politicians.
Which four power-structure forms Giddens distinguish? Could you give an example of each form?
According to these definitions the consolidation of effective power is greatest where it is not
restricted to clearly defined limits in terms of its lateral ranger and where it is concentrated in the
hands of the elite or an elite group.
Oligarchic: Issue strength restricted and consolidated power
Power holding, where the degree of centralisation of power in the hands of elite groups is high, but
where the issue-strength of that power is limited
hegemonic: Issue strength and diffused power
those in elite positions wield power which while it is not clearly defined in scope and limited to a
restricted range of issues is shallow.
Democratic: Issue strength restricted and diffused power
effective power of elite groups is limited In both respects.
Autocratic: Issue strength broad and consolidate power
70
What’s the difference between ‘ruling class’, ‘governing class’, ‘power elite’ and ‘leadership groups’?
Under which form falls Mills’ conceptualization of the power elite?
Strongest case of ruling class where a uniform elite wields autocratic power weakest is where an
establish elite holds oligarchic power
Ruling class: Elite formation: Uniform established elite; power-holding: autocratic/ oligarchic
Power elite: elite formation: solidary elite; power-holding: autocratic/ oligarchic
distinguished from a ruling class in terms of pattern of recruitment as is a governing class from a
system of leadership groups. The latter exists where elite groups only hold limited power and where
in addition elite recruitment is relatively open in character.
Leadership groups: Elite formation: abstract elite ; Power-holding: hegemonic/democratic
Why is r > g so important in the reasoning of Piketty? How does g (growth rate of the economy)
relate to labour incomes? How does the gap r-g relate to social mobility?
How can the increasing inequality in labour income in the United States be explained?
What are the main trends in income inequality and wealth inequality in Europe and the United
States during the last two centuries?
How could the ‘moderate’ income and wealth inequalities during the post-war decades be
explained? (compare this with the so-called Kuznets-thesis) What are the predictions of Piketty
about wealth inequality in the 21th century?
Which kind of shocks can make wealth trajectories of families more unequal?
71
Income distribution in the US
Richest 30% of American po
Wealth distribution in the US
Top 1 % own 34% of all wealth in united states
Top 10% own 75 % of all wealth in US
Economic
o Managers abilities to extract rents from firms – not only share of profit but also of
capital stocks
o Increase in company size – if companies get bigger they are able to give greater
bonuses and wages for CEOs- the bigger the firm the bigger the wage
o Higher task demands of managers- firm look for overall managers not only specialist
very rarely demand and supply (gain more)
o Up warding effects of economic cycles- If things are going well CEOs can ask for
higher wages; in bad economic times they don’t experience cut in wages because of
their position of power
o R> G- Rent ( income out of capital) G economic growth
High economic growth there’s much profit to share amongst ordinary people – if
they can make more profit out of their capital Inequality increases
Political
o Changing tax rates
tax cuts you have to pay less taxes on income out of wealth
o Decline of labour unions – EU labour union are strong
U.S. labour unions have little power less collective bargaining power money goes to
CEO rather than employees
o Financial deregulations
Easier to distract money from the firm to individuals
o Political shocks (inverse explanation)
Economic crisis / world wars cerates less inequality
Social
o Peer group effects
At one point the managers don’t need the extra money anymore – but increase of
wage of one manager leads to pressure amongst other managers who also want
increase
o Inheritance:
Few children wealth is distributed amongst fewer children wealth is more
concentrated
o Saving versus consumption:
People save rather than consume wealth accumulation
o Rising inequality in access to skills/ higher education
tuition fees in US increased over time
72
Policy implication: more investment in higher universities so education becomes free
Elites
Three dimensions
o Recruitment
openness or closeness of elite – how possible is it for lower classes to enter the elite
from son of farmer to prime minister
o (Moral) / (Social) Integration
Moral integration of elite – do they share the same values of country and about
society? – do the owners of media/ politics economy know each other? Do they
have persona relationships? -
o Distribution
Distribution of power – Is power diffused or concentrated? How far reaching is your
power of the lives o f your people? Vertical with how many people you have to
change it
How many different aspects of life can you address with you power? (sexuality;
economy; religion; military) - horizontal how far reaching is it?
73
uniform elite: royal families, aristocracies
abstract elite: open access to elite university way of getting into power position
but no socialisation in university happens anymore
solidary elite: It is doable to go from lower to upper class; people within class know
each other quite well access is open to elite university graduating from there you get
into position of power
Esablished elite: no real world example because it is hard to know each other quite
well with the integration being low
Autocratic: power is the greatest, you say a lot about diverse topics (Iran)
Oligarchic: A lot power but you have to share it with other elite forms
Hegemonic: You have to say a lot about different things, but it is limited from below
(Murdoch – what he decided; people didn’t have to follow but he was able to say
things about political, economic life) – Populist leaders in democracies
Democratic: Different leadership groups different elite groups can only say
something about very specific part of life not everyone has to follow them have to
share their influence with the people of the country
74
Ruling class: Dictatorship based on family ties Not opened to get into
governing class: political/economic elite – power is diffused have to share power
with ordinary people (access to politics often comes from families – Bush
administration) Uniform class high social integration; power is difused have to share
it some extent with their people (Castro regime) can influence diverse aspects of live
hegemonic elite
Power elite: open recruitment – strong social and moral integration – Don’t have to
share their decision making with ordinary people
Leadership groups: open recruitment without any moral or social integration – they
have to share power with ordinary people - Scope of influence varies
75
Class 10: Welfare state
Reading Questions
Class 10.
Welfare States
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). ‘The Three Political Economies of the Welfare State’ In: The Three
Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. It is only necessary to read p. 21-32.
What’s a ‘broad’ and ‘narrow’ approach to welfare states? What’s the definition of a ‘welfare state
regime’?
Narrow approach: Anglo- Saxon goal is to strengthen the market because all of those who don’t
fail are encouraged to contract private-sector welfare. You only are entitled to basic human needs
but if you can avoid it you do
Broad approach: Beveridge type it offers basic, equal benefit to all, irrespective of prior earnings
contributions or performance.
Citizen can freely and without potential job, income or general welfare opt out of work when they
themselves consider its necessary.
Which three types of welfare state regimes are distinguished by Esping-Andersen in his book? Give a
few social policy measures per type.
(1) Liberal Welfare state – US, Canada, Australia
Only guaranteeing minimum welfare subsidies or subsidize private welfare schemes. Entitlement
rules are therefore strict and often associated with stigma.
(2) Conservatism, Corporatism – Germany, France, Italy
In those systems social right was never a contested issue was always seen as basic right. State was
perfectly capable of displacing the market as provider of welfare- private insurance play therefore a
rather marginal role. BUT since it’s based on conservatism values women were mostly excluded from
social insurance and uphold strongly the status differences.
(3) Social democratic regime – Northern countries
Aspire equality of highest standard and not as the other two systems of equality of minimum needs.
All Strata’s are included in one universal insurance system.
Why are welfare state regimes related to different patterns of social stratification?
Rural classes were decisive for the future of socialism. In countries had stronger unions and capital
intense work were more inclined to promote strong socialist policies. In contrast to labour-intense
saw left-wing parties as a threat. Political dominance was a long-time a question of rural class
politics.
76
States create by expanding the social services and public employment the middle class devoted to
social democracy and therefore instrumentally broadened their voter base.
A societal regime in some rich, capitalistic parliamentary countries, through which basic social rights
of citizens are guaranteed by an institutional, legal framework
Broad approach of welfare states (Organization of labour market, education, family, life)
It is not only about social benefits
If you want to improve incomes amongst women/men you need to ensure that there’s enough child
care broad approach of welfare state
If you lower employer contributions you encourage them to create new jobs
Welfare state regimes the political economy of state, market and family
77
Restricted social rights
Flat-rate and means tested (stigmatizing?)
o For everyone the same social rights no matter what you worked before
everyone gets the same amount of money
o Means tested (you need to show that you are entitled to social benefits);
everyone who gets social benefits is been looked down on.
Target group: very low-income groups (underclass)
o Passively (because welfare is so low that you are pushed towards private
insurance) even middle- class families
Labour market policy: low wages, flexibility, de-regularisations and weak unions
o No min. max. level of income it all comes down how good you are in negotiating your
wage
Labour market policy: decent wages, strong unions, passive unemployment policies
not too high / not too low income
o Large unions – unemployed policies are weak that means you only get
unemployment benefit which is decent but there’s no training which brings you out
of unemployment
78
Social democratic welfare state regime
Labour market policy: active (un) employment policy, public employment, strong unions
Once un-employed state pushes you to find new work
Too much attention for social benefits and to little for social services
Empirical analyses of only a limited number of countries
Only focuses on centre Europe – elderly care especially in southern european countries take
care of their elderly families members
Only three worlds of welfare- capitalism
o South – European type
o Post- communist type
o Confucian type?
Many alternative welfare state classifications possible
Obama care – liberal care system encourages your private insurance
What does he do? Increasing the overage for most of the people becomes more and
more universal less means tested
Unemployment benefits in Belgium: continental: you can family benefit and not individual
(single/ single with kids / families)
79
Social welfare selective or universal?
Flat-rate or earning related?
Pro selectivity
o Efficient use of scarce budget
You only have little budget use it efficiently
o Giving money to non-poor increase inequality
o High visibility of social policy
good for politicians in run- up to elections
Pro flat-rate benefits:
o Strong- incentive to work
If you only give little money people are more inclined in start working again
o Earnings- related benefits reproduce inequality
‘’The more we target benefits at the poor only the more concerned we are with
creating equality via equal public transfers to all, the less likely we are to reduce
poverty and inequality’’ Korpi & Palme
in order to help the poor you need to help the rich ones too
Selective or universal? Flat- rate or earning related?
Must social policy be selectively focussed on poor people or rather be universally oriented
towards the whole population?
Must social benefits be flat-rate (equal for everybody) or rather earnings-related?
Matthew effects: Whoever has will be given more, and he will have and abundance.
Social benefits and services especially benefit the higher income groups
Clubs/ health organisation/ education social services are taken up way more by middle class
Policy implications ‘’selectivity within universalism’’
o Examples: who goes to higher education? Middle class people / who goes to
museum? Middle class people / who asks for social educational benefits? Middle
class people
Pensions: all pensions would be the same (flat-rate not earnings related) middle-
class people benefit more because they live longer
Explanations
80
o Most of sport facilities are more connected to middle class values
o Youth movement middle class cliental
o Policy implications:
81