Carlos Alberto Torres. (1995). In Critical Theory and Educational Research (pp. 237-255). MaLaren, P. & Giarelli, J. (Eds.). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Torres finds the origin of PAR in Latin America largely in Freire's pedagogy of liberation. PAR is particularly prevailing in adult education, which takes a form of cultural action offered to consenting and self-motivating adults. The central objective of this action is by and large described as 'conscientization', meaning critical consciousness as forms of class knowledge and practices from a Freirian perspective. Adult education not only provides direct needs of communities where the participants belong, but also constitutes an instrument of mobilization and the development of political consciouness in the transition to socialism in Latin America, Torres argues. He asserts that although questions regarding its methodology and paradignamic position in educational research, PAR is a major contributor to emancipatory, problem-posing education throughout Latin America now.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Gramsci (1891-1937): Prison Notebooks
Selections From the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (1971). Hoare, Q & Smith, G. (Trans & Eds.). NY: International Publishers
The Intellectuals (pp. 5-23)
To Gramsci, all men are intellectuals in that they carry on some form of intellectual activity, however, not all have in society the function of intellectuals. This discrepancy lies in elaboration of the intellectual activity. Then, what is the function of intellectuals? He quotes discussion about new intellectualism in the weekly Ordine Nuovo. In this discussion, the mode of new intellectuals consists in specialization--active participation in practical life--and politicization ('directive')--proceeding from technique-as-work to science and humanistic conception of history. This is 'organic' intellectuals, meaning that they are formed within a social group, in relation to 'traditional' intellectuals, who has no acknowledgment of class formation. The editors note that this perspective contains Gramsci's key ideas of (1) organic intellectuals of the proletariat and (2) the possibility of proletarian cultural hegemony through the work process. The relationship of intellectuals and the world is examined through the superstructures--civil society (private sector) and political society (State). Intellectuals, subordinate of dominant group, exercise the functions of social hegemony through spontaneous consent and political government through legal apparatus of state that coercive power.
On Education (pp. 26-43)
He points out that particularisation in school systems that increasing types of vocational school brought about constitutes the education crisis in his time. By its diversities and distinctions made from the traditional school, it may give the impression of democratic tendency in education, but in fact, it only deteriorated the real democratic order because individuals do not obtain "governing" stratum in a social and political context. First all children do not enter school with the same background--as Bourdieu indicates as "cultural capital"--thus those who are lack of certain assets aligned with the school system do hardly enter the system. He stresses that "child's consciousness is not something individual, it reflects the sector of civil society in which the child participates, and the social relations which are formed within his family, his neighborhood, his village, etc." Secondly, although it is implicit in this writing, the system that creates vocational school and its integration into State is philosophically far from democritization. According to him, each social group create its own types of schools , which contributes to the perpetuation of a specific traditional function, ruling and subordinate. To him, creating intellectuals from the working class is fundamental, but the task is enormous.
Here is his account of technocracy that comes to control both regimes and bureaucracies: "deliberative (having to do with policy) bodies tend to an ever-increasing extent to distinguish their activity into two organic aspects: into the deliberative activity which is their essence, and into technical-cultural activity in which the questions upon which they have to take decisions are first examines by experts and analyzed scientifically. this latter activity has already created a whole bureaucratic body with a new structure; for apart from the specialized departments of experts who prepare the technical material for the deliberative bodies, a second body of functionaries is created--more or less disinterested volunteers, selected variously from industry, from the banks, from finance houses. This is one of the mechanisms by means of which he career bureaucracy eventually came to control the democratic regimes and parliaments; now the mechanism is being organically extended, and is absorbing into its sphere the great specialists of private enterprise, which thus comes to control both regimes and bureaucracies. What is involved is a necessary, organic development which tends to integrate the personnel specialized in the technique of politics with personnel specialized in the concrete problems of administering the essential practical activities of the great an complex national societies of today."(27-28)
Mentioning the collectivism in academic culture that forces norms and particular ways of expressing, he uses the term, "Taylorise" intellectual work (more in Americanism and Fordism).
Political Struggle And Military War
Gramsci argues that political struggle, which is more complex than military war, takes three forms: 'war of movement (i.e. boycott)', 'war of position (i.e. strike)' and 'underground warfare (i.e. secret arms)'. He says while the war of position in politics, once won, is decisive, the war of manoeuvre [I think it is the same as movement] subsists when there is a question of the winning positions which are not decisive. When the balance is lost and only decisive positions are at stake, war occurs.
In opposition to iron economic determinism, Gramsci stresses civil society that "is resistant to the catastrophic incursions of the immediate economic element (crises, depressions, etc.)." Thus, the more advanced the civil society is, the more time is taken for destructive political power to be active and the less likely the civilians, defenders, lose their position or faith.
Internationalism and National Policy
Gramsci summarizes the philosophy of praxis such that "the international situation should be considered in its national aspect. In reality, the internal relations of any nations are the result of a combination which is original (in a certain sense) and unique. To be sure, the line of development is towards internationalism, ut the point of departure is national--and it is from this point of departure that one must begin. Yet the perspective is international and cannot be otherwise." In particular, this logic supports his political idea of the solidarity of the international proletariat class under the direction of international communism. (1933). [This brief but clearly provocative essay throws an analytical groundword for my research: begin with the national but move toward the international as a directive light.]
Problem of the "Collective Man" or of "Social Conformism"
Perpetual educative and formative role of the State, according to Gramsci, is creating new higher types of civilization and turning it and morality of the popular masses to apparatus for economic production, and as a result, new types of humanity evolves. One becomes a collective man and tendency to conformism (standardisation of thoughts and actions) of society spreads. Big factories, Taylorisation, rationalisation, etc. are the economic basis of collective man, he argues. [He also talks about conformism, but it is not clear in this essay.] However, he stresses that the collective man do consent and collaborate, feeling "freedom" instead of coercion through the educative pressure of the State, and finds the apparatus in the 'Law', which includes not only legally natural activities but also the civil society. This civil society, which operates without compulsory obligation, exerts a collective pressure and develops customs, ways of thinking and acting and morality. Within the context, he mentions that the political concept of permanent revolution, which was described in the context of the epoch, where the society is still in a state of fluidity, expanded to the formular of "civil hegemony",where a State prepares a war 'minutely and technically in peacetime'. This is where the power of educative and formative role of the State arises. [A very succinct description of creeping State power that operates in civil society.]
Taylorism and the Mechanization of the Worker
The comparison Gramsci made between medieval copyist and new industrial workers highlights mechanization process of the production. He sneers at Ford's books and the work of Philip on the ground that these efforts are part of the wholesale cautionary measures and 'educative' initiatives not to leave the workers any moment to think inbetween their work times.
The Intellectuals (pp. 5-23)
To Gramsci, all men are intellectuals in that they carry on some form of intellectual activity, however, not all have in society the function of intellectuals. This discrepancy lies in elaboration of the intellectual activity. Then, what is the function of intellectuals? He quotes discussion about new intellectualism in the weekly Ordine Nuovo. In this discussion, the mode of new intellectuals consists in specialization--active participation in practical life--and politicization ('directive')--proceeding from technique-as-work to science and humanistic conception of history. This is 'organic' intellectuals, meaning that they are formed within a social group, in relation to 'traditional' intellectuals, who has no acknowledgment of class formation. The editors note that this perspective contains Gramsci's key ideas of (1) organic intellectuals of the proletariat and (2) the possibility of proletarian cultural hegemony through the work process. The relationship of intellectuals and the world is examined through the superstructures--civil society (private sector) and political society (State). Intellectuals, subordinate of dominant group, exercise the functions of social hegemony through spontaneous consent and political government through legal apparatus of state that coercive power.
On Education (pp. 26-43)
He points out that particularisation in school systems that increasing types of vocational school brought about constitutes the education crisis in his time. By its diversities and distinctions made from the traditional school, it may give the impression of democratic tendency in education, but in fact, it only deteriorated the real democratic order because individuals do not obtain "governing" stratum in a social and political context. First all children do not enter school with the same background--as Bourdieu indicates as "cultural capital"--thus those who are lack of certain assets aligned with the school system do hardly enter the system. He stresses that "child's consciousness is not something individual, it reflects the sector of civil society in which the child participates, and the social relations which are formed within his family, his neighborhood, his village, etc." Secondly, although it is implicit in this writing, the system that creates vocational school and its integration into State is philosophically far from democritization. According to him, each social group create its own types of schools , which contributes to the perpetuation of a specific traditional function, ruling and subordinate. To him, creating intellectuals from the working class is fundamental, but the task is enormous.
Here is his account of technocracy that comes to control both regimes and bureaucracies: "deliberative (having to do with policy) bodies tend to an ever-increasing extent to distinguish their activity into two organic aspects: into the deliberative activity which is their essence, and into technical-cultural activity in which the questions upon which they have to take decisions are first examines by experts and analyzed scientifically. this latter activity has already created a whole bureaucratic body with a new structure; for apart from the specialized departments of experts who prepare the technical material for the deliberative bodies, a second body of functionaries is created--more or less disinterested volunteers, selected variously from industry, from the banks, from finance houses. This is one of the mechanisms by means of which he career bureaucracy eventually came to control the democratic regimes and parliaments; now the mechanism is being organically extended, and is absorbing into its sphere the great specialists of private enterprise, which thus comes to control both regimes and bureaucracies. What is involved is a necessary, organic development which tends to integrate the personnel specialized in the technique of politics with personnel specialized in the concrete problems of administering the essential practical activities of the great an complex national societies of today."(27-28)
Mentioning the collectivism in academic culture that forces norms and particular ways of expressing, he uses the term, "Taylorise" intellectual work (more in Americanism and Fordism).
Political Struggle And Military War
Gramsci argues that political struggle, which is more complex than military war, takes three forms: 'war of movement (i.e. boycott)', 'war of position (i.e. strike)' and 'underground warfare (i.e. secret arms)'. He says while the war of position in politics, once won, is decisive, the war of manoeuvre [I think it is the same as movement] subsists when there is a question of the winning positions which are not decisive. When the balance is lost and only decisive positions are at stake, war occurs.
In opposition to iron economic determinism, Gramsci stresses civil society that "is resistant to the catastrophic incursions of the immediate economic element (crises, depressions, etc.)." Thus, the more advanced the civil society is, the more time is taken for destructive political power to be active and the less likely the civilians, defenders, lose their position or faith.
Internationalism and National Policy
Gramsci summarizes the philosophy of praxis such that "the international situation should be considered in its national aspect. In reality, the internal relations of any nations are the result of a combination which is original (in a certain sense) and unique. To be sure, the line of development is towards internationalism, ut the point of departure is national--and it is from this point of departure that one must begin. Yet the perspective is international and cannot be otherwise." In particular, this logic supports his political idea of the solidarity of the international proletariat class under the direction of international communism. (1933). [This brief but clearly provocative essay throws an analytical groundword for my research: begin with the national but move toward the international as a directive light.]
Problem of the "Collective Man" or of "Social Conformism"
Perpetual educative and formative role of the State, according to Gramsci, is creating new higher types of civilization and turning it and morality of the popular masses to apparatus for economic production, and as a result, new types of humanity evolves. One becomes a collective man and tendency to conformism (standardisation of thoughts and actions) of society spreads. Big factories, Taylorisation, rationalisation, etc. are the economic basis of collective man, he argues. [He also talks about conformism, but it is not clear in this essay.] However, he stresses that the collective man do consent and collaborate, feeling "freedom" instead of coercion through the educative pressure of the State, and finds the apparatus in the 'Law', which includes not only legally natural activities but also the civil society. This civil society, which operates without compulsory obligation, exerts a collective pressure and develops customs, ways of thinking and acting and morality. Within the context, he mentions that the political concept of permanent revolution, which was described in the context of the epoch, where the society is still in a state of fluidity, expanded to the formular of "civil hegemony",where a State prepares a war 'minutely and technically in peacetime'. This is where the power of educative and formative role of the State arises. [A very succinct description of creeping State power that operates in civil society.]
Taylorism and the Mechanization of the Worker
The comparison Gramsci made between medieval copyist and new industrial workers highlights mechanization process of the production. He sneers at Ford's books and the work of Philip on the ground that these efforts are part of the wholesale cautionary measures and 'educative' initiatives not to leave the workers any moment to think inbetween their work times.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Globalization and Discontents
Joseph Stiglitz (2002). NY:W.W.Norton & Company
Stiglitz mentioned that the IMF and the U.S. Treasury, which emphasized information transparency in East Asia during the global financial crisis in 1997-98, were the least transparent he experienced with. Upon his experience, he asserts that the way international institutions such as the IMF influence the world economies is subtle such that it is a matter of a tone of voice, a meeting behind closed doors or a memo after discussions.(preface. pp. ix-xvi)
A new phenomenon in globalization, according to him, is anti-globalization wave in developed countries, which is based on the prevalent awareness that globalization in many developing countries did not bring the promised economic benefits. He supports this idea from a document of World Bank (Global Economic Prospect and the Developing Countries 2000): for the last decade, the number of people in poverty increased by almost 100 millions. The hypocrisy of the Western countries lie in that they push doors of the poor to eliminate barrier while keeping their own closed--in particular Japan and the U.S. The Uruguay Round (1986-1993 concluded by the agreements of 117 countries on trade liberalization and as a result, WTO was formed.), in particular, put the intellectual property right into fire and protected the interests of the producers, concentrated in the developed countries. He argues premature capital market liberalization caused global instability and destroyed job markets in poor countries such that a sense of job security is heightened, if not loss. Nevertheless, "capital market liberalization has been pushed despite the fact that there is no evidence showing it spurs economic growth"(p. 16). IMF, World Bank and WTo are the major international institutions who he states govern the global markets and it is interesting to how he sees these players in this context: "the application of mistaken economic theories would not be such a problem if the end of first colonialism and then communism had not given the IMF and the World Bank the opportunity to greatly expand their respective original mandate, to vastly extend their reach" (p.17) He also maintains the view that globalization can be good and reshaped as long as it is governed well, but a problem he frequently mentions is the way in which the three major players operate somewhat surreptitiously for their own financial interests--it is irony that IMF is run by taxpayers' money but its representatives are mostly directly from corporations--and there is no voice of developing countries although most activities are in the developing world.[He advocates progressive capitalism with certain governmental intervention to compensate market failure.] (pp.3-22).
Stiglitz calls it the colonial mentality or white man's burden that they know what is the best for developing countries. Furthermore, what they know about is solely based on an ideology--market fundamentalism--and they insist on playing a central role in policy making without consideration of local specifics. He presents two examples, Ethiopia and Botswana: while Ethiopia, who relied on the IMF funds, did not achieve sustainable development, let alone encountering a threat of fund cut, Botswana carefully selected advisers from various private sectors and wend through their way. Despite obvious atmosphere of discontents on the policies that the IMF pushed on Korea in 1997, the reason why government officials kept silent publicly was that they were afraid of being judged as "off track" by the IMF and losing opportunities to get funded from the IMF--also note that other access to funds contingent on IMF approval. One hot topic that the IMF imposed on Korea during the supervisory period is pushing further independence of the Central Bank from the government and having it focused on inflation. He argues that this policy reflects a groundless market fundamentalism that the IMF persists with two empirical evidence: there is a general consent that European Central Bank's independence actually exacerbated an economic downturn and also, even in the U.S., Federal Reserve Bank, U.S. central bank, refused to focus on inflation only and took into account employment and growth as well. [The U.S. doesn't have to listen to the IMF, but smaller countries often have no option, but it is a matter of balancing intellectual power to some degree. The IMF is not the only way to choose.] (pp. 23-52)
Stiglitz maintains his light that there are alternative strategies, for instance, land reform not capital market liberalization, competition policies before privatization, job creation along with trade liberalization. "The essence of freedom is the right to make a choice--and to accept the responsibility that comes with it." (pp.53-88)
Stiglitz says, "it became clear that the IMF policies not only exacerbated the ownturns but were partially responsible for the onset: excessively rapid financial and capital market liberalization was probably the single most important cause of the crisis, though mistaken policies on teh part of the countries themselves played a role as well" (pp.89-90). He recalls moments when the crisis in East Asia was about to break out: the IMF and U.S. Treasury began to criticize the countries about corruption, malfunctions, etc. although they were hardly experts. He defines that Fund aid was at the cost of accepting country's economic sovereignty. Even when the IMF calls the end of recovery, the criteria is given to stabilization of interest or exchange rate, however, he argues that there is no true recovery until workers return to their jobs and wages are restored. He continues to argue governments' role in recovering economic crisis and it is bizarre that he states that Korea is an example of the government's intervention, which not only led fast recovery but also could be more competitive in the near future. He mentions that the unemployment was up fourfold in Korea during the crisis. If the recovery was successful, the unemployment should have been reduced now. I do not have statistics, but considering skyrocket inflation, the wages are far from the restoration, I propose. (pp. 89-132).
Stiglitz mentioned that the IMF and the U.S. Treasury, which emphasized information transparency in East Asia during the global financial crisis in 1997-98, were the least transparent he experienced with. Upon his experience, he asserts that the way international institutions such as the IMF influence the world economies is subtle such that it is a matter of a tone of voice, a meeting behind closed doors or a memo after discussions.(preface. pp. ix-xvi)
A new phenomenon in globalization, according to him, is anti-globalization wave in developed countries, which is based on the prevalent awareness that globalization in many developing countries did not bring the promised economic benefits. He supports this idea from a document of World Bank (Global Economic Prospect and the Developing Countries 2000): for the last decade, the number of people in poverty increased by almost 100 millions. The hypocrisy of the Western countries lie in that they push doors of the poor to eliminate barrier while keeping their own closed--in particular Japan and the U.S. The Uruguay Round (1986-1993 concluded by the agreements of 117 countries on trade liberalization and as a result, WTO was formed.), in particular, put the intellectual property right into fire and protected the interests of the producers, concentrated in the developed countries. He argues premature capital market liberalization caused global instability and destroyed job markets in poor countries such that a sense of job security is heightened, if not loss. Nevertheless, "capital market liberalization has been pushed despite the fact that there is no evidence showing it spurs economic growth"(p. 16). IMF, World Bank and WTo are the major international institutions who he states govern the global markets and it is interesting to how he sees these players in this context: "the application of mistaken economic theories would not be such a problem if the end of first colonialism and then communism had not given the IMF and the World Bank the opportunity to greatly expand their respective original mandate, to vastly extend their reach" (p.17) He also maintains the view that globalization can be good and reshaped as long as it is governed well, but a problem he frequently mentions is the way in which the three major players operate somewhat surreptitiously for their own financial interests--it is irony that IMF is run by taxpayers' money but its representatives are mostly directly from corporations--and there is no voice of developing countries although most activities are in the developing world.[He advocates progressive capitalism with certain governmental intervention to compensate market failure.] (pp.3-22).
Stiglitz calls it the colonial mentality or white man's burden that they know what is the best for developing countries. Furthermore, what they know about is solely based on an ideology--market fundamentalism--and they insist on playing a central role in policy making without consideration of local specifics. He presents two examples, Ethiopia and Botswana: while Ethiopia, who relied on the IMF funds, did not achieve sustainable development, let alone encountering a threat of fund cut, Botswana carefully selected advisers from various private sectors and wend through their way. Despite obvious atmosphere of discontents on the policies that the IMF pushed on Korea in 1997, the reason why government officials kept silent publicly was that they were afraid of being judged as "off track" by the IMF and losing opportunities to get funded from the IMF--also note that other access to funds contingent on IMF approval. One hot topic that the IMF imposed on Korea during the supervisory period is pushing further independence of the Central Bank from the government and having it focused on inflation. He argues that this policy reflects a groundless market fundamentalism that the IMF persists with two empirical evidence: there is a general consent that European Central Bank's independence actually exacerbated an economic downturn and also, even in the U.S., Federal Reserve Bank, U.S. central bank, refused to focus on inflation only and took into account employment and growth as well. [The U.S. doesn't have to listen to the IMF, but smaller countries often have no option, but it is a matter of balancing intellectual power to some degree. The IMF is not the only way to choose.] (pp. 23-52)
Stiglitz maintains his light that there are alternative strategies, for instance, land reform not capital market liberalization, competition policies before privatization, job creation along with trade liberalization. "The essence of freedom is the right to make a choice--and to accept the responsibility that comes with it." (pp.53-88)
Stiglitz says, "it became clear that the IMF policies not only exacerbated the ownturns but were partially responsible for the onset: excessively rapid financial and capital market liberalization was probably the single most important cause of the crisis, though mistaken policies on teh part of the countries themselves played a role as well" (pp.89-90). He recalls moments when the crisis in East Asia was about to break out: the IMF and U.S. Treasury began to criticize the countries about corruption, malfunctions, etc. although they were hardly experts. He defines that Fund aid was at the cost of accepting country's economic sovereignty. Even when the IMF calls the end of recovery, the criteria is given to stabilization of interest or exchange rate, however, he argues that there is no true recovery until workers return to their jobs and wages are restored. He continues to argue governments' role in recovering economic crisis and it is bizarre that he states that Korea is an example of the government's intervention, which not only led fast recovery but also could be more competitive in the near future. He mentions that the unemployment was up fourfold in Korea during the crisis. If the recovery was successful, the unemployment should have been reduced now. I do not have statistics, but considering skyrocket inflation, the wages are far from the restoration, I propose. (pp. 89-132).
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Korea's Globalization
Samuel Kim (Ed.). (2000). NY: Cambridge University Press.
7. K. Moon. Strangers in the Midst of Globalization: Migrant Workers and Korean Nationalism (pp.147-169).
Through an empirical review about migrant workers in Korea, Moon points out globalization in Korea resembles its common dual process--market/labor integration as well as defensive nationalism. Here are some examples that support her propositions: as seen in the case that Korean Chinese are better welcome as labor force, cultural homogeneity is inveterate. Also, the opposition against legalizing an employment-permit system bears worried anticipation of massive labor movements from North Korea after Korean reunification. According to the author, this is territorially bounded--rather than ethnically or economically--nationalism which is expressed with xenophobia oppressive toward others. But in September 1997, Immigration Control Law was revised such that legal workers may be allowed to join unions. She argues that this revision resulted from worrying the international reputation of the nation. There were some changes in citizenship as well. Here is a quote from media that the author inserted with the revision: "the government's attempt to modernize the Korean legal order in accordance with the era of globalization" (Hankyoreh, 20 September 1997).
However, this soft policy took another turn with the IMF crisis with the announcement from Justice Ministry on December 27, 1997. All illegal foreign workers were required to leave by the end of March 1998 without fine. The author interprets this action as viewing migrant workers as a threat to national job security. Finally she states that democracy movements should temper excessive nationalism and boost globalization in terms of human rights and democritization, while resisting economic globalization.
7. K. Moon. Strangers in the Midst of Globalization: Migrant Workers and Korean Nationalism (pp.147-169).
Through an empirical review about migrant workers in Korea, Moon points out globalization in Korea resembles its common dual process--market/labor integration as well as defensive nationalism. Here are some examples that support her propositions: as seen in the case that Korean Chinese are better welcome as labor force, cultural homogeneity is inveterate. Also, the opposition against legalizing an employment-permit system bears worried anticipation of massive labor movements from North Korea after Korean reunification. According to the author, this is territorially bounded--rather than ethnically or economically--nationalism which is expressed with xenophobia oppressive toward others. But in September 1997, Immigration Control Law was revised such that legal workers may be allowed to join unions. She argues that this revision resulted from worrying the international reputation of the nation. There were some changes in citizenship as well. Here is a quote from media that the author inserted with the revision: "the government's attempt to modernize the Korean legal order in accordance with the era of globalization" (Hankyoreh, 20 September 1997).
However, this soft policy took another turn with the IMF crisis with the announcement from Justice Ministry on December 27, 1997. All illegal foreign workers were required to leave by the end of March 1998 without fine. The author interprets this action as viewing migrant workers as a threat to national job security. Finally she states that democracy movements should temper excessive nationalism and boost globalization in terms of human rights and democritization, while resisting economic globalization.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Power/Knowledge:Selected Interviews & Other Writings (1972-77)
Michel Foucault. (1980). Colin Gordon (Ed). New York: Pantheon Books.
Prison Talk (pp. 37-54)
"With the prisons there would be no sense in limiting oneself to discourses about prisons; just as important are the discourses which arise within the prison, the decisions and regulations which are among its constitutive elements, its means of functioning, along with its strategies, its convert discourses and ruses, ruses which are not ultimately played by any particular person, but which are none the less lived, and assure the permanence and functioning of the institution. All of this has to be brought together and made visible by the historian." Foucault asserts that power exists in a capillary form as it operates on body, actions, attitude, and discourses in granularity of every day life. Foucault's suggested study of history is to use a magnifying instrument to make unseen visible. By looking into one particular incident, one may not only reveal the same domain but also add another layer to history. His particular contribution to the study of history is that he started to investigate the relation between power and knowledge. He argues, "the exercise of power perpetually creates knowledge and, conversely, knowledge constantly induces effects of power." His comments on university is of interest: "The university hierarchy is only the most visible, the most sclerotic and least dangerous form of this--relation of power and knowledge-- phenomenon...Diffused, entrenched and dangerous, they operate in other places than in the person of the old professor."
Truth and Power (pp.109-133)
This conversation records Foucault's perspective on truth and power and methodological approach to knowledge. By the productive aspect of power, he means power that 'traverses and produces things, induces pleasure, forms knowledge and produces discourse' through the whole social body. According to him, this is a new 'economy' of power--biopower in Hardt and Negri's term. He emphasizes study of power goes beyond the State and sovereignty because the State can only operate on already existing power relations, not regulating all the powers. Detaching power from sovereignty and law, he suggests redefining power as a form of warlike domination, peace as a form of war and the State a means of waging it. As reflected in Hardt and Negri's work, Foucault stresses permanent war in civil society, and questions the role of army and military in this society. [It is interesting to find overlaps with regard to constant war and characteristics of power between Hardt & Negri and Foucault.] Unlike in feudal societies, power is exercied through 'social production' that intends to obtain productive services from individuals in their concrete life, Foucault argues, and thus power has to permeate the bodies of individuals, acts, attitudes and behaviors, as seen in school discipline.
His perspective on intellectuals also meets Hardt and Negri's. Foucault emphasizes 'specific' intellectuals rather than 'universal' intellectuals. He asserts that 'specific' intellectuals, experts or savant, specialized in certain domain of knowledge, maintains concrete awareness of struggles, thus drawn even closer to the proletariat since they confront the same adversary as the proletariat in their own struggles. Their growing importance is exemplified by Foucault with physicists debating in political realm at the turn of the century. He finds the real importance of specific intellectuals in the extention of 'technico-scientific structures' in the economic and strateific domain. Foucault stresses that unlike universal intellectuals, who were the writers of genius and opposed the unjust sovereignity, specific intellectuals are a group of handful people who possess at their disposal power, which can either produce or destroy life. [Here again resonates the concept of biopower by Hardt and Negri.] Foucault continues, the pitfall of experts' struggles lies in lack of a 'global strategy' or 'outside support.' In other words, isolation or singularity lacking network is a problem. [Grounding in this idea, Hardt and Negri argues that a distributed communication network can be an instrument for orchestrating these struggles.]
Foucault says, "truth isn't outside of power." According to him, truth is produced by constraints and induces power through the regime of truth, or the general politics of truth, of each society. The regime of truth is explained by him as follows, "the types of discourse which it accepts and makes function as true; the mechanisms and instances which enable one to distinguish true and false statements, the means by which each is sanctioned; the techniques and procedures accorded values in the acquisition of truth; the status of those who are charged with saying what counts as true."
He suggests that political problems for intellectuals should be placed in terms of power and truth rather than science and ideology. In this way, he argues that professionalization of intellectuals, which distinguishes intellectual labors from manual labors, can be 'envisaged' in a new way. Thus, according to him, emancipating truth from power does not hold the same importance as "detaching the power of truth from the forms of hegemony at social/economical/cultural levels."
The History of Sexuality (pp.183-193)
Foucault argues that one should go beyond focusing on a negative grid of power in terms of justice, technology and strategy and need to see a productive side of it--'bio-power' or 'somato-power'--which operates on the body itself bypassing the subject's consciousness. He also emphasizes on certain power, which is not a projection of sovereign's power. He calls this power the concrete and 'changing' soil that sovereign power is grounded. He criticizes the existentialism with the notion that it lays everything at individual responsibility, while those with a political/economic perspective limit their views to the market economy or capital exploitation. Thus, he brings about new schemas of politicisation for political anaylsis.
Prison Talk (pp. 37-54)
"With the prisons there would be no sense in limiting oneself to discourses about prisons; just as important are the discourses which arise within the prison, the decisions and regulations which are among its constitutive elements, its means of functioning, along with its strategies, its convert discourses and ruses, ruses which are not ultimately played by any particular person, but which are none the less lived, and assure the permanence and functioning of the institution. All of this has to be brought together and made visible by the historian." Foucault asserts that power exists in a capillary form as it operates on body, actions, attitude, and discourses in granularity of every day life. Foucault's suggested study of history is to use a magnifying instrument to make unseen visible. By looking into one particular incident, one may not only reveal the same domain but also add another layer to history. His particular contribution to the study of history is that he started to investigate the relation between power and knowledge. He argues, "the exercise of power perpetually creates knowledge and, conversely, knowledge constantly induces effects of power." His comments on university is of interest: "The university hierarchy is only the most visible, the most sclerotic and least dangerous form of this--relation of power and knowledge-- phenomenon...Diffused, entrenched and dangerous, they operate in other places than in the person of the old professor."
Truth and Power (pp.109-133)
This conversation records Foucault's perspective on truth and power and methodological approach to knowledge. By the productive aspect of power, he means power that 'traverses and produces things, induces pleasure, forms knowledge and produces discourse' through the whole social body. According to him, this is a new 'economy' of power--biopower in Hardt and Negri's term. He emphasizes study of power goes beyond the State and sovereignty because the State can only operate on already existing power relations, not regulating all the powers. Detaching power from sovereignty and law, he suggests redefining power as a form of warlike domination, peace as a form of war and the State a means of waging it. As reflected in Hardt and Negri's work, Foucault stresses permanent war in civil society, and questions the role of army and military in this society. [It is interesting to find overlaps with regard to constant war and characteristics of power between Hardt & Negri and Foucault.] Unlike in feudal societies, power is exercied through 'social production' that intends to obtain productive services from individuals in their concrete life, Foucault argues, and thus power has to permeate the bodies of individuals, acts, attitudes and behaviors, as seen in school discipline.
His perspective on intellectuals also meets Hardt and Negri's. Foucault emphasizes 'specific' intellectuals rather than 'universal' intellectuals. He asserts that 'specific' intellectuals, experts or savant, specialized in certain domain of knowledge, maintains concrete awareness of struggles, thus drawn even closer to the proletariat since they confront the same adversary as the proletariat in their own struggles. Their growing importance is exemplified by Foucault with physicists debating in political realm at the turn of the century. He finds the real importance of specific intellectuals in the extention of 'technico-scientific structures' in the economic and strateific domain. Foucault stresses that unlike universal intellectuals, who were the writers of genius and opposed the unjust sovereignity, specific intellectuals are a group of handful people who possess at their disposal power, which can either produce or destroy life. [Here again resonates the concept of biopower by Hardt and Negri.] Foucault continues, the pitfall of experts' struggles lies in lack of a 'global strategy' or 'outside support.' In other words, isolation or singularity lacking network is a problem. [Grounding in this idea, Hardt and Negri argues that a distributed communication network can be an instrument for orchestrating these struggles.]
Foucault says, "truth isn't outside of power." According to him, truth is produced by constraints and induces power through the regime of truth, or the general politics of truth, of each society. The regime of truth is explained by him as follows, "the types of discourse which it accepts and makes function as true; the mechanisms and instances which enable one to distinguish true and false statements, the means by which each is sanctioned; the techniques and procedures accorded values in the acquisition of truth; the status of those who are charged with saying what counts as true."
He suggests that political problems for intellectuals should be placed in terms of power and truth rather than science and ideology. In this way, he argues that professionalization of intellectuals, which distinguishes intellectual labors from manual labors, can be 'envisaged' in a new way. Thus, according to him, emancipating truth from power does not hold the same importance as "detaching the power of truth from the forms of hegemony at social/economical/cultural levels."
The History of Sexuality (pp.183-193)
Foucault argues that one should go beyond focusing on a negative grid of power in terms of justice, technology and strategy and need to see a productive side of it--'bio-power' or 'somato-power'--which operates on the body itself bypassing the subject's consciousness. He also emphasizes on certain power, which is not a projection of sovereign's power. He calls this power the concrete and 'changing' soil that sovereign power is grounded. He criticizes the existentialism with the notion that it lays everything at individual responsibility, while those with a political/economic perspective limit their views to the market economy or capital exploitation. Thus, he brings about new schemas of politicisation for political anaylsis.
Rigour and Complexity in Educational Research (2)
Kincheloe, J., & Berry, K. (2004). Open University Press.
1. Introduction (pp. 1-22)
This book deals with bricolage as research methodology and bricoleur's role in it. The author, following the delineation of Lincoln (2001), defines bricoleurs as researchers who employ eclectic research methods given circumstances and engage in multidisciplines for the purpose of social changes. According to him, knowing is an interpretative act and discursive and contextual analyses are its main dimensions, thus, knowledge or interpretation is subject to perspectives and background questionning empirical data. Then, which position should researchers undertake? Kincheloe expands the bricolage into the power dimension. "Discourse cannot be removed from power relations and the struggle to create particular meanings and legitimate specific voices...Power creeps in on little cat's feet to accomplish its regulation and fiscipline of various individuals and groups...Indeed, it works best when everyting seems normal and comfortable" (p.7). He also emphasizes that researchers employ philosophical inquiry, such as ontology, epistemology, cosmology, axiology (study of values) and teleology (study of purpose), in order to develop the logic and pshchology of research strategies and do that in historical context--historicity. Therefore, the interpretative dimension of bricolage connects to critical hermeneutics because research is intended to reveal power relations that operate to shape or construct meanings and lived consequences. Kincheloe contends that accepting multiple interpretations and differences and realizing the tensions of differences may bring insights that move researchers to new understanding of the subject, and simultaneously urges researchers to employ hermeneutic circle to understand the whole beyond the parts we deal with.
4. Redefining and interpreting the object of study (pp.82-102)
Kincheloe classifies the interpretative act, a central dimension of bricolage, into two concepts: critical hermeneutics to denote power inscription in words/knowledge and symbiotic hermeneutics to emphasize an interpretation in relation to others. The symbiotic hermeneutics is more specified by him with the term of hermeneutic circle, which is a process of meaning making through systematic collisions between parts or betweem part and whole that interconnects parts. He stresses that bricolage by and large based on multiperspectivism moves to a higher step through hermeneutic circle, however, does not anticipate the finality by summing up all parts as the reality is constructed multidimensionally and ever-changing and every aspect of knowing--interpretation--is 'fugitive' and 'elusive.' He quotes hermeneut Hans-Gerg Gadamer's argument that all meaning-making is historically and culturally specific, thus, prodedualized methods only disconnet research from living experience, therefore different procedures should be employed in different purpose and divergent circumstances.
1. Introduction (pp. 1-22)
This book deals with bricolage as research methodology and bricoleur's role in it. The author, following the delineation of Lincoln (2001), defines bricoleurs as researchers who employ eclectic research methods given circumstances and engage in multidisciplines for the purpose of social changes. According to him, knowing is an interpretative act and discursive and contextual analyses are its main dimensions, thus, knowledge or interpretation is subject to perspectives and background questionning empirical data. Then, which position should researchers undertake? Kincheloe expands the bricolage into the power dimension. "Discourse cannot be removed from power relations and the struggle to create particular meanings and legitimate specific voices...Power creeps in on little cat's feet to accomplish its regulation and fiscipline of various individuals and groups...Indeed, it works best when everyting seems normal and comfortable" (p.7). He also emphasizes that researchers employ philosophical inquiry, such as ontology, epistemology, cosmology, axiology (study of values) and teleology (study of purpose), in order to develop the logic and pshchology of research strategies and do that in historical context--historicity. Therefore, the interpretative dimension of bricolage connects to critical hermeneutics because research is intended to reveal power relations that operate to shape or construct meanings and lived consequences. Kincheloe contends that accepting multiple interpretations and differences and realizing the tensions of differences may bring insights that move researchers to new understanding of the subject, and simultaneously urges researchers to employ hermeneutic circle to understand the whole beyond the parts we deal with.
4. Redefining and interpreting the object of study (pp.82-102)
Kincheloe classifies the interpretative act, a central dimension of bricolage, into two concepts: critical hermeneutics to denote power inscription in words/knowledge and symbiotic hermeneutics to emphasize an interpretation in relation to others. The symbiotic hermeneutics is more specified by him with the term of hermeneutic circle, which is a process of meaning making through systematic collisions between parts or betweem part and whole that interconnects parts. He stresses that bricolage by and large based on multiperspectivism moves to a higher step through hermeneutic circle, however, does not anticipate the finality by summing up all parts as the reality is constructed multidimensionally and ever-changing and every aspect of knowing--interpretation--is 'fugitive' and 'elusive.' He quotes hermeneut Hans-Gerg Gadamer's argument that all meaning-making is historically and culturally specific, thus, prodedualized methods only disconnet research from living experience, therefore different procedures should be employed in different purpose and divergent circumstances.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Globalization and Neoliberalism
A Taxonomy and Some Implications for ‘Anti-Globalization’
Bowles, Paul. (2005). Canadian Journal of Development Studies. Vol. 26(1).
Bowles argues that neoliberalism is primarily an economic concept dedicated to ‘free markets’ based on privatization and deregulation and it takes various polities and identifies four different groups of views on globalization.
Group 1: globalization is an inevitable process driven by communication technology, thus weakening state power. Within this context, neolieralism is the 'rational' policy responding to the change and the roles of state should shrink to maximize the flow of technology and deregulate national trade policies at all levels. In this way, poor nations can be more benefited than others and 'economic convergence', in the term of economist, will occur. On this other hand, there is a school of thought that criticizes this neoliberal view. They argue that new forms of governance has to established in order to realize the immense productive potential of globalization. The current neoliberalism at both state and international levels just doesn't meet the condition.
Group 2: Globalization is a myth, as global worldwide trade is not new, and only serves as a tool for neoliberalists, thus ideology or globalism. "globalization is really a myth, an over-hyped idea designed to support the neoliberal agenda with its political redistribution of power to corporate and financial elites."
Group 3: "Globalization can be seen as a code word for the ascendancy of U.S. imperialism" (Petras & Veltmeyer, 2001). They also argue that globalization is a project to open up markets abroad as an exit from the crisis of profitability and therefore, neoliberalism joins this imperial impetus as the policy thrust to achieve the objectives, and nation-states play a more vigorous role to implement the policy.
Group 4: Globalization is in fact regionalism, as often expressed as "stumbling bloc" or "building bloc." Thus, regions are central to globalization and the way they are being structured is neolibral.
The author argues that anti-globalization is in fact anti-neoliberalism and looks for new governance forms at the global and local levels as an opposition to corporate power. He quotes David Held's position as an explanation of the local level: Held (1995) argues that at the local level, forms of participatory development and community-based organizations and institutions are seen as the governance structures necessary to empower the losers in the neoliberal globalization process and to democratize local processes (cited on p 22). [Democracy and Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. (1995)] In this movment, the author adds, 'global civil society' gets into the main stream and 'deradicalized' by taking 'well-worn footsteps' of gender and sustainability, thus 'global social justice' movement differentiates itself from the mainstream movement. Walden Bello, the author quotes, argues anti-globalization, which means deglobalization, aims decentralizing decision-making at the local, national and global levels. According to the author, the common central idea of global social justice movement is that local spaces are essential in order to resist corporate driven, or neoliberal, globalization as stated in group 1. There seem other movements correspondent to the other groups, but they are relatively insignificant.
Bowles, Paul. (2005). Canadian Journal of Development Studies. Vol. 26(1).
Bowles argues that neoliberalism is primarily an economic concept dedicated to ‘free markets’ based on privatization and deregulation and it takes various polities and identifies four different groups of views on globalization.
Group 1: globalization is an inevitable process driven by communication technology, thus weakening state power. Within this context, neolieralism is the 'rational' policy responding to the change and the roles of state should shrink to maximize the flow of technology and deregulate national trade policies at all levels. In this way, poor nations can be more benefited than others and 'economic convergence', in the term of economist, will occur. On this other hand, there is a school of thought that criticizes this neoliberal view. They argue that new forms of governance has to established in order to realize the immense productive potential of globalization. The current neoliberalism at both state and international levels just doesn't meet the condition.
Group 2: Globalization is a myth, as global worldwide trade is not new, and only serves as a tool for neoliberalists, thus ideology or globalism. "globalization is really a myth, an over-hyped idea designed to support the neoliberal agenda with its political redistribution of power to corporate and financial elites."
Group 3: "Globalization can be seen as a code word for the ascendancy of U.S. imperialism" (Petras & Veltmeyer, 2001). They also argue that globalization is a project to open up markets abroad as an exit from the crisis of profitability and therefore, neoliberalism joins this imperial impetus as the policy thrust to achieve the objectives, and nation-states play a more vigorous role to implement the policy.
Group 4: Globalization is in fact regionalism, as often expressed as "stumbling bloc" or "building bloc." Thus, regions are central to globalization and the way they are being structured is neolibral.
The author argues that anti-globalization is in fact anti-neoliberalism and looks for new governance forms at the global and local levels as an opposition to corporate power. He quotes David Held's position as an explanation of the local level: Held (1995) argues that at the local level, forms of participatory development and community-based organizations and institutions are seen as the governance structures necessary to empower the losers in the neoliberal globalization process and to democratize local processes (cited on p 22). [Democracy and Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. (1995)] In this movment, the author adds, 'global civil society' gets into the main stream and 'deradicalized' by taking 'well-worn footsteps' of gender and sustainability, thus 'global social justice' movement differentiates itself from the mainstream movement. Walden Bello, the author quotes, argues anti-globalization, which means deglobalization, aims decentralizing decision-making at the local, national and global levels. According to the author, the common central idea of global social justice movement is that local spaces are essential in order to resist corporate driven, or neoliberal, globalization as stated in group 1. There seem other movements correspondent to the other groups, but they are relatively insignificant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
