Suchergebnisse

AbstractFour towns in the state of Morelos, Mexico, are lobbying the state government for the right to become independent "indigenous municipalities" operating under local customary law. Focusing on one of those towns, Hueyapan, this article ethnographically and ethnohistorically examines the process that has led the people of Hueyapan to overwhelmingly favor the decision to opt for municipal independence. In doing so, it attends particularly to the ways that discourses of indigeneity and sovereignty have interacted with local political conflicts between the town of Hueyapan and the municipal seat, Tetela del Volcán. Using an analysis based on Bateson's concept of schismogenesis, I argue that today, for the first time, Hueyapan is in a position in which demanding independence is feasible, because it has successfully established itself as a competitor to the municipal cabecera (municipal seat) community of Tetela, rather than as a subordinate and marginalized community. Nevertheless, by framing the quest for independence within the narrative model of indigeneity, Hueyapan can represent its demands with a stronger ethical and historical force than it could otherwise.

Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, is simultaneously an experiment in anarchic knowledge production and a realization of the long dream of modernity: storing all human knowledge. It is also a battleground for the politics of representation and for creating and circulating realities and "Wikialities." I ethnographically describe how Wikipedians, most of whom are white Anglo-Americans, negotiate the representation of Native Americans as objects of encyclopedic knowledge and how the sins of our anthropological forebears come back to haunt us in this process. In 2015, I participated in the collaborative writing of the article on Irataba or Yara tav, who was an important leader of the Mohave people of California and Arizona in the late 19th century. This process brought representational dilemmas to the fore in the negotiation between the inadequacies of historical and anthropological knowledge and Wikipedia's policies establishing how to authorize and re-represent narratives. These dilemmas point out to us, as 21st-century anthropologists, that we have a responsibility for being the stewards of the knowledge created by anthropologists past as well as for correcting their mistakes and guiding the global public of readers and writers when they make forays into our traditional territories.

The close ties between modes of governing, subjectivities and critique in contemporary societies challenge the role of critical social research. The classical normative ethos of the unmasking researcher unravelling various oppressive structures of dominant vs. dominated groups in society is inadequate when it comes to understand de-politicizing mechanisms and the struggles they bring about. This article argues that only a non-normative position can stay attentive to the constant and complex evolution of modes of governing and the critical operations actors themselves engage in. The article outlines a non-normative but critical programme based on an ethos of re-politicizing contemporary pervasive modes of governing. The analytical advantages and limitations of such a programme are demonstrated by readings of both Foucauldian studies and the works of and debates regarding the French pragmatic sociology of Boltanski and Thévenot.

Over the last few decades, public administrations and managers have been under extreme pressure to handle ever more complex societal problems with dwindling resources. One of the promising responses to this double challenge has been collaborative governance. Various dubbed interactive governance, co-creation, participatory governance, network governance or even new public governance, governments and many scholars have proposed collaborative forms as a means to unearth the resources of public and private actors in policymaking and in the design and production of public services (Ansell and Gash 2007; Torfing and Triantafillou 2011; Voorberg, Bekkers, and Tummers 2015; Warren 2009). By including the knowledge of experts and relevant and affected actors in the design of policies and by mobilizing the local experiences, needs and energies of frontline workers and citizens in the coproduction of services, collaborative governance may enhance motivation among civil servants and produce more value for money for citizens (Bennington and Moore 2011). A number of studies have examined the effectiveness and productivity of collaborative governance (Emerson and Nabatchi 2015; Provan and Kenis 2007; Torfing et al. 2012). Yet, collaborative governance is not only about effectiveness. It is also about accountability and legitimacy (Warren 2009).

This article seeks to provide a set of pointers for methodological reflections on Foucauldian-inspired analyses of the exercise of power. Michel Foucault deliberately eschewed methodological schemata, which may be why so little has been written on the methodological implications of his analyses. While this article shares the premise that we should refrain from a standardized methodology, it argues that providing broad pointers for analyses informed by the critical ambition and conceptual framework offered by Foucault is both desirable and possible. The article then offers some reflections and general guidelines on how to strengthen the methodological quality of Foucauldian analyses. We argue that the quality of Foucauldian-inspired analysis of modern power may gain from methodological reflections around four pointers: curiosity, nominalism, conceptual grounding and exemplarity.

The following presents parts of an interview conducted with Maurizio Lazzarato discussing his 2012 book, The Making of the Indebted Man. In this interview, Lazzarato first elaborates on his theoretical inspirations. Drawing on the work of Deleuze and Guattari in order to connect Nietzsche and Marx, he develops a theory of debt suggesting that the power of credit, central to neoliberalism, requires the construction of an indebted subjectivity. Producing a responsible, guilty and thus hindered subject, this condition involves individuals and societies facing an infinite social debt. According to Lazzarato, post-Fordism should be understood through the ascending influence of neoliberalism, as the state has retroceded its power of money creation to private creditors. Through this process, the relation between capital and labour has been transcended by the creditor–debtor relationship. In the economy of indebtedness, the welfare state is transformed into an inverted Keynesian redistribution system that allows for wealth transfers from non-owners towards owners.

This paper examines the economic and social thought that has evolved around the Lisbon strategy, which aimed to turn the European Union into the world's most competitive knowledge economy by 2010. It argues that a new regime of rationality has emerged in which economic and social objectives, which were previously thought to be at odds with one another, have become increasingly aligned. The supposed antinomy between economic efficiency and social security has been gradually replaced by a Rawlsian-inspired understanding of social justice in which the individual right to self-development and employment is seen to go hand-in-hand with economic innovation and competitiveness. This alignment, which is expressed through the worshipping of the Nordic welfare model in general and the notion of flexicurity in particular, seems to have a strong depoliticizing effect.

AbstractIn accounts of institutional change, discursive institutionalists point to the role of economic and political ideas in upending institutional stability and providing the raw material for the establishment of a new institutional setup. This approach has typically entailed a conceptualisation of ideas as coherent and monolithic and actors as almost automatically following the precepts of the ideas they hold and support. Recent theorising stresses how ideas are in fact composite and heterogeneous, and actors pragmatic and strategic in how they employ ideas in political struggles. However, this change of focus has, until recently, not included how foundational ideas of a polity, often referred to as 'public philosophies', are theorised to impact on institution‐building. Drawing on French Pragmatic Sociology, and taking as a starting point recent efforts within discursive institutionalism to conceptualise the dynamic nature of public philosophies, this article seeks to foreground moral justification in accounts of ideational and institutional change. It suggests that public philosophies are reflexively used by actors in continual processes of normative justification that may produce significant policy shifts over time. The empirical relevance of the argument is demonstrated through an analysis of gradual ideational and institutional change in French labour market policy, specifically the development from the state‐guaranteed minimum income scheme of 1988 to the neoliberal make‐work‐pay logic of the 2009 scheme, Revenu de solidarité active. The analysis shows that public and moral justifications have underpinned and gradually shaped these radical changes.