4. Backstage Social Divisions

2021 ◽  
pp. 94-141
Keyword(s):  
Social Divisions

Kapitalistische Krisen mit und ohne systemischer Herausforderung.

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (185) ◽  
pp. 543-560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingo Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
World Market ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Deep Penetration ◽  
World War ◽  
Major Overhaul ◽  
Domestic Markets ◽  
Global Restructuring ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
Class Power ◽  
Second World

This article draws on Marxist theories of crises, imperialism, and class formation to identify commonalities and differences between the stagnation of the 1930s and today. Its key argument is that the anti-systemic movements that existed in the 1930s and gained ground after the Second World War pushed capitalists to turn from imperialist expansion and rivalry to the deep penetration of domestic markets. By doing so they unleashed strong economic growth that allowed for social compromise without hurting profits. Yet, once labour and other social movements threatened to shift the balance of class power into their favor, capitalist counter-reform began. In its course, global restructuring, and notably the integration of Russia and China into the world market, created space for accumulation. The cause for the current stagnation is that this space has been used up. In the absence of systemic challenges capitalists have little reason to seek a major overhaul of their accumulation strategies that could help to overcome stagnation. Instead they prop up profits at the expense of the subaltern classes even if this prolongs stagnation and leads to sharper social divisions.

Social Divisions and Later Life

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Gilleard ◽  
Paul Higgs
Keyword(s):  
Later Life ◽  
Social Divisions

Epistemic Crisis

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yochai Benkler ◽  
Robert Faris ◽  
Hal Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Intellectual History ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
First Year ◽  
Fake News ◽  
Media And Politics ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
Echo Chambers ◽  
History Of ◽  
Media Ecosystem

This chapter describes the contours of the epistemic crisis in media and politics that threatens the integrity of democratic processes, erodes trust in public institutions, and exacerbates social divisions. It lays out the centrality of partisanship, asymmetric polarization, and political radicalization in understanding the current maladies of political media. It investigates the main actors who used the asymmetric media ecosystem to influence the formation of beliefs and the propagation of disinformation in the American public sphere, and to manipulate political coverage during the election and the first year of the Trump presidency, , including “fake news” entrepreneurs/political clickbait fabricators; Russian hackers, bots, and sockpuppets; the Facebook algorithm and online echo chambers; and Cambridge Analytica. The chapter also provides definitions of propaganda and related concepts, as well as a brief intellectual history of the study of propaganda.

Solidarity

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Dwan
Keyword(s):  
Social Setting ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
The Social ◽  
Internal Coherence

Orwell’s writings repeatedly extol the virtues of solidarity, or what he liked to call brotherhood. But brotherhood was often something of an ordeal for Orwell as much as it was a coveted value and practice. The issue may be partly a question of character, but it also had a conceptual element: a) the compatibility of solidarity with other values, b) its internal coherence, as it sometimes re-enlists the social divisions it seeks to transcend, c) its problematic scope given its seemingly partisan nature, and d) its practicality in a modern social setting. This chapter examines these four issues in detail, showing how they contribute to the particular heft of Orwell’s writing—its angular sympathies and superbly uneven tone.

Social Progress in Britain

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony F. Heath ◽  
Elizabeth Garratt ◽  
Ridhi Kashyap ◽  
Yaojun Li ◽  
Lindsay Richards
Keyword(s):  
Free Market ◽  
Youth Unemployment ◽  
Social Progress ◽  
The Road ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
Policy Interventions ◽  
The Usa ◽  
On The Road ◽  
Free Market Reforms ◽  
Made In

Social Progress in Britain examines how much progress has made in the years since Sir William Beveridge described the ‘five giants on the road to reconstruction’—the giants of Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor, and Idleness. The book has chapters examining the progress which Britain has made in improving material prosperity and tackling poverty; in extending length of life and tackling disease; in raising participation in education and improving educational standards; in tackling the scourge of unemployment, especially youth unemployment; and in providing better-quality housing and tackling overcrowding. In addition to Beveridge’s five giants, the book also explores inequalities of opportunity (focussing on inequalities between social classes, men and women, and ethnic groups), and the changing nature of social divisions and social cohesion in Britain. Throughout, the chapters put British progress into perspective by drawing comparisons with progress made in other large developed democracies such as Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Sweden, and the USA. As well as looking at the average level of prosperity, life expectancy, education, and housing, the book examines the extent of inequality around the average and pays particular attention to whether the most disadvantaged sections of society have shared in progress or have fallen behind. It concludes with an assessment of the effect of policy interventions such as Margaret Thatcher’s free market reforms of the 1980s on different aspects of social progress.

Conclusion

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie L. Derrick
Keyword(s):  
Social Mobility ◽  
Social Factors ◽  
Critical Component ◽  
Critical Difference ◽  
Middle Classes ◽  
Print History ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
Equal Importance ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Subject

The emphasis of this monograph has been on the historical, cultural, religious, and social factors that shaped C. S. Lewis and his reception. Until recently those who have considered the subject have attributed his popularity to virtues of the man himself. The fact that Lewis, in effect, was an image, a mitigated commercial product, a platform, has largely been overlooked. A critical component of Lewis’s reception is the opportunities that education provided the middle classes for social mobility in the twentieth century and the social divisions and anxieties attendant upon those evolutions. Of equal importance is the timing of Lewis’s life and publications with print history and the rise of mass media and entertainment. Lewis’s platform as a contrarian Christian resisting modernity and his reactions to the intellectual, social, and religious changes of his day made the critical difference to his transatlantic receptions.

Can Humanism be the Social Norm?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon D. Welch
Keyword(s):  
Social Norms ◽  
Social Norm ◽  
Human Cognition ◽  
Human Reasoning ◽  
Individual Freedom ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
The Social

Assaults on truth and divisions about the nature of wise governance are not momentary political challenges, unique to particular moments in history. Rather, they demonstrate fundamental weaknesses in human reasoning and core dangers in ways of construing both individual freedom and cohesive communities. It will remain an ongoing challenge to learn to deal rationally with what is an intrinsic irrationality in human cognition and with what is an intrinsic tendency toward domination and violence in human collectivities. In times of intense social divisions, it is vital to consider the ways in which humanism might function as the social norm by, paradoxically, functioning in a way different from other social norms. Humanism is not the declaration that a certain set of values or norms are universally valid. At its best and most creative, humanism is not limited to a particular set of norms, but is, rather, the commitment to a certain process in which norms are continuously created, critically evaluated, implemented, sustained or revised. Humanism is a process of connection, perception, implementation, and critique, and it applies this process as much to itself as to other traditions.

scholarly journals Intersectionality: Mapping Critical Relations for Quality in Long-Term Care Research

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 39-39
Author(s):  
Katie Aubrecht ◽  
Ivy Bourgeault ◽  
Tamara Daly
Keyword(s):  
Long Term Care ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Power Differentials ◽  
Care Relationships ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Relations Of Power ◽  
Status Of Care

Abstract Intersectionality is a useful method (Lutz, 2015) for interdisciplinary long-term care (LTC) research to advance a more critical understanding of how experiences of quality are shaped by mutually reproducing social divisions, identities and relations of power that shape LTC. This paper discusses insights from the “Mapping Care Relationships” stream of the Seniors – Adding Life to Years (SALTY) project, a pan-Canadian program of research examining clinical, social and policy perspectives on quality in LTC. “Mapping Care Relationships” mapped how promising approaches to care relationships are organized and experienced in LTC. From January 2018-August 2019 our team of nine researchers conducted rapid ethnographies in eight nursing homes, two in each of four provinces across Canada. We purposively observed and interviewed workers from a wide variety of positions and backgrounds, informed by an intersectionality approach. We traced how promising approaches in person-centred dementia care (PCDC) in particular may reify the subordinated status of care workers (some more than others) and reinforce inequities within LTC systems. In multiple LTC homes, front-line care workers described experiencing physical and emotional harm in care relationships with residents which caused them distress. However, consistent with a PCDC approach, the harm was attributed to ‘behaviours’ clinically symptomatic of dementia. In framing power differentials from a medical perspective, PCDC makes it possible to interpret harmful experiences as 'part of the job’ and something workers should know to expect, prevent, avoid, redirect, or ignore. Lutz, H. (2015). Intersectionality as method. DiGeSt. Journal of diversity and gender studies, 2(1-2), 39-44.

scholarly journals Bodies, non-human matter and the micropolitical production of sociomaterial dis/advantage

2021 ◽  
pp. 144078332110026
Author(s):  
Nick J Fox ◽  
Pam Alldred
Keyword(s):  
Social Inequality ◽  
Cultural Reproduction ◽  
Sociological Study ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
Context Specific

This article sets out a more-than-human framework within which to explore the contribution of non-human matter to social inequality. Applying an approach based in Deleuzian ethology, we extend three invitations: to address the multiplicity and fluidity of dis/advantage, to explore its production in everyday interactions, and to acknowledge non-human as well as human matter in the emergence of dis/advantage. The article examines how the interactions between human and non-human matter produce and reproduce context-specific bodily capacities and incapacities, and consequently ‘a thousand tiny dis/advantages’. These dis/advantages may accumulate to produce substantive inequalities and social divisions. An illustrative re-reading of Paul Willis’s 1970s study of the cultural reproduction of social inequality Learning to Labour reveals the complex ways in which daily encounters between human and non-human matter produce both transient and lasting dis/advantage. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of this more-than-human perspective for the sociological study of inequality.

scholarly journals The transformative public of Jane Addams

Journalism ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 146488492095858
Author(s):  
Leena Ripatti-Torniainen
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual History ◽  
Social Ethics ◽  
Public Intellectual ◽  
Political Life ◽  
The Public ◽  
Jane Addams ◽  
Journalism Studies ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
The Social ◽  
Political Inquiry

This article provides an alternative contribution to journalism studies on a foundational concept by analysing texts of Jane Addams, a public intellectual contemporary with the seminal scholars Walter Lippmann and John Dewey. The author uses methods of intellectual history to construct the concept of the public from Addams’s books: Democracy and Social Ethics and The Newer Ideals of Peace, showing that all three authors, Lippmann, Dewey and Addams, discuss the same topic of individuals’ changed engagement with public political life. Addams departs from Lippmann and Dewey in setting out from the standpoints of exclusion and cosmopolitanism. Her argument regarding the public, as constructed by the author, consists of two premises. First, public engagement is a method of democratic inclusion as well as social and political inquiry for Addams. She sees the extension of relationality across social divisions as a necessary method to understand society and materialise democracy. Second, Addams emphasises cooperative and reflexive involvement especially in the characteristic developments of a time. She considers industrialisation and cosmopolitanism as characteristic developments of her own era. Addams suggests an in-principle cosmopolitan concept of the public that includes marginalised persons and groups. Compared to Lippmann’s and Dewey’s accounts of the public, Jane Addams’s argument is more radical and far more sensitive to the social inequality and plurality of a drastically morphing society.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document