Inherency- obama has already Solved 3 Harms- other things cause homelessness 5
Download 350.73 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Link- Poverty Discourse as Otherizing
Link Poverty RepresentationsMCMICHAEL ET AL 2007 – PROF DEVELOPMENT SOCIOLOGY CORNELL POVERTY OF THE GLOBAL ORDER, GLOBALIZATIONS VOL 4 NO 4 The 'poverty of the global order' refers to the institutional reproduction of a naturalized understanding of poverty, and its legitimation of the development industry. As required by the UN System of National Accounts, states and multilateral development agencies define development as accumulation, in positive measures of output and/or income. Other measures of well-being or the regeneration of social and ecological values remain unregistered and de-legitimized. In eliding or reducing multiple meanings of development to a monetary standard, poverty is naturalized as a measure of material scarcity, simultaneously impoverishing development. This process licenses the development industry to renew its reductionist view of inequality, everywhere, through the appropriation of alternative values and visions of development. This impoverished vision of the global order also informs responses to post-modern approaches to development. Such approaches contest the legitimacy of development discourse as a misrepresentation of non-European cultures and a discourse of control (Crush, 1995; Escobar, 1995; Sachs, 1992; Said, 1978). Saul characterizes this tendency as the 'discursive world of “development stinks”', arguing that despite the shortcomings of development in externalizing cultural and environmental relations, 'this need not dictate the abandonment of any vision of “development”'(Saul, 2004, p. 229). Similarly, Sutcliffe surmises that 'criticism of the standard development model seems at times too total,' and that a nostalgic postdevelopmentalism runs the risk of 'losing the baby when we throw out the old bath water' (quoted in ibid.). And Schuurman adds: The very essence of development studies is a normative preoccupation with the poor, marginalized and exploited people in the South. In this sense inequality rather than diversity or difference should be the main focus of development studies: inequality of access to power, to resources, to a human existence - in short, inequality of emancipation. (quoted in Saul, 2004, p. 230) As we wonder aloud why development studies has such a 'normative preoccupation' with the poor, we problematize the distinction between 'inequality' and 'difference.' Schuurman sees that inequality has diverse forms shaping the 'inequality of emancipation' (quoted in Saul, 2004, p. 230), but nevertheless affirms a binary between inequality and difference. We argue, however, that reinforcing this binary affirms the development establishment's economism as the core value. Alternatively, we propose that inequality and difference are relational, rather than oppositional or mutually exclusive constructs and experiences. Our phrase 'poverty of the global order' suggests that capital (and its fetishized representations) impoverishes not just (classes of ) people, but the material relations that enable the imagining and realizing of new social futures. The relationship between inequality and difference becomes particularly evident when we consider that development is anchored not just in institutions and structures, but also in the lives of its subjects (Pieterse, 1998). Understanding how subjects of development receive, legitimize, and/or contest institutional and historical constructions of development is indispensable to understanding how development is accomplished (Baviskar, 2005; Gupta, 1998; Klenk, 2004; Li, 1999; Mosse, 2004), as well as to reformulating its possibilities.1 Link- Poverty Discourse as OtherizingDISCOURSE OF POVERTY IS VIOLENTLY OTHERIZING LISTER 2004 – PROF LOUGHBOROUGH U POVERTY, PAGE This should not be taken to imply that less value-laden dis¬courses of poverty are necessarily unproblematic. Herbert J. Cans draws a distinction between stigmatizing 'labels' and descriptive terms (1995: 12). Although the 'p' words of 'poor' and 'poverty* fall into the latter category, their historical and contemporary connotations mean that they are not neutral terms (Novak, 2001). They form part of *a vocabulary of invidious distinction*, which constructs 'the poor' as differ¬ent or deviant (Katz, 1989: 5). The 'p' words arc used by 'us' about 'them' and rarely by people in poverty themselves (Polakow, 1993; Cordcn, 1996). Typically, the latter arc nor asked how they want to be described (Silver, 1996). The terms 'poverty' and 'poor', therefore, arc frequently experienced as stigmatizing labels by their 'unasked, unwilling targets' (Gans, 1995: 21). Research with people with experience of poverty in the UK elicited negative responses to the 'p* words from a number of them: 'horrid* or 'horrible' words; 'stigma*; 'socially worse'; 'puts you down' were among their reactions (Bercsford ct al., 1999: 64-5). The adjective 'poor' is also tainted by its double meaning of inferior, as in 'poor quality' or 'deficient'. Its use as an adjective can be experienced as insulting and demeaning (CoPPP, 2000). Moreover, it carries a definitional impli¬cation for identity that is inappropriate given that poverty is a circumstance that a person experiences rather than a personal quality (Warah, 2000; see also chapter 6). LINK – AFF OTHERIZES THE POOR LISTER 2004 – PROF LOUGHBOROUGH U POVERTY, PAGE The main focus of the chapter is how 'the poor' are 'Othcrcd' through language and images. It therefore starts with a more general discussion of the process of Othering and of the power of language and images - and the discourses they articulate - to label and stigmatize marginalized social groups, with fundamental implications for how members of those groups are treated. The previous chapter elaborated on the discourse of social exclusion. Here we consider the discourses of the 'underclass', 'welfare dependency' and poverty itself, having first put them in historical context. Finally, the chapter explores the stigma, shame and humiliation associated with poverty. It suggests that, for many, it is the lack of respect and loss of dignity that result from 'living in the contempt of your fellow citizens' that can make poverty so difficult to bear. This points to the importance of political struggles at the relational/symbolic rim of the poverty wheel as well as at its material core. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 350.73 Kb. Share with your friends:
|