Globalization,Collective Action,and Social Theory

Sociological Forum -     

Mind,Self, and Human-Animal Joint Action

Abstract

Because Herbert Blumer maintained that symbolic interactionism was useful in examining all realms of social behavior, and advocated what Martin Hammersley refers to as “critical commonsensism,” this paper focuses on one of the most common contemporary social relationships—that between people and companion animals. I first examine the basis for Blumer's (like Mead before him and many interactionist scholars today) exclusion of nonhuman animals from consideration as “authentic” social actors. Primarily employing the recent work of interactionists Eugene Myers, Leslie Irvine, Janet and Steven Alger, and Clinton Sanders, this paper advocates the reasonableness of regarding nonhuman animals as “minded,” in that mind, as Gubrium emphasizes, is a social construction that arises out of interaction. Similarly, I maintain that animals possess an admittedly rudimentary “self.” Here I focus special attention on Irvine's discussion of those “self experiences” that are independent of language and arise out of interaction. Finally, I discuss “joint action” as a key element of people's relationships with companion animals as both the animal and human attempt to assume the perspective of the other, devise related plans of action and definitions of object, and fit together their particular (ideally, shared) goals and collective actions. I stress the ways in which analytic attention to human-animal relationships may expand and enrich the understanding of issues of central sociological interest.     

Collective Action,Everyday Protest,and Lived Religion

The conflict in 2001 at the Kukdong (now Mexmode) maquila garment factory is one of the rare cases of success in the wider struggle for independent unionism in Mexico. The success of the struggle, which has attracted scholars interested in the campaigns against sweatshop labour conditions and on behalf of labour internationalism, has been attributed chiefly to the role played by transnational advocacy networks in mobilizing pressure on the global sportswear giant Nike, whose brand-name, collegiate apparel was being produced in the plant. In this paper we seek not to explain why the struggle was successful, but to examine the trajectory it took over a protracted period of about nine months. We draw on McAdam et al.'s reformulation of the analysis of contentious, transgressive politics to identify three mechanisms that were particularly salient in shaping the course taken by the conflict: scale shift, actor decomposition, and brokerage. Scale shift occurred as the workers quickly escalated the conflict by broadening their demands from the resolution of particular concrete grievances to a demand for freedom of association that made the existing corporatist union, the FROC-CROC, which had a signed a protection contract with the plant's management, the principal target of opposition and challenge. Actor decomposition occurred as the workers' strategy locally and transnationally sought to isolate the FROC-CROC by detaching it from other members of the corporate–state bloc (Kukdong management, Nike, and the local political authorities). Brokerage, finally, occurred as Nike in particular was used to mediate pressure from the workers' transnational supporters (principally labour rights NGOs and the anti-sweatshop movement) on Kukdong and the local political authorities to respect the workers' right to freedom of association, which resulted in the ouster of the FROC-CROC as the legally certified union at the factory and its replacement with an independent union (SITEMEX) formed by the workers themselves.     

Interprofessional Learning: Reasons,Judgement, and Action

This article uses the theoretical and methodological tools of cultural historical activity theory and critical realism to examine three case studies of the introduction and expansion of sustainable agricultural practices in southern Africa. The article addresses relevant issues in the field of agricultural extension, which lacks a theoretical “bridge” between top-down knowledge transfer and bottom-up participatory approaches to learning. Further, the article considers the learning environments necessary for sustainable agriculture. Such environments provided research participants with encounters with “postnormal” scientific practices that recognise and engage plural ways of knowing. Our research explored why farmers learn and practise sustainable agriculture, how they learn and practise it, the contradictions they are facing, and how these contradictions can be overcome in a context of change-oriented learning.     

Famine,Food Insecurity,Poverty and Public Action

Book reviewed in this article: Hunger and Public Action. By Jean Drèze and Amartya Sen The Political Economy of Hunger. Edited by Jean Drèze and Amartya Sen.     

Action,Technology, and the Homogenisation of Place: Why Climate Change is Antithetical to Political Action

According to Hannah Arendt, the concept of ‘political action’ is a fundamental component of the human condition because it encapsulates how the uniqueness of each human being intersects to create unpredictable political initiatives and effects. Recently, despite being one of the most daunting political challenges ever faced by humanity, there has been a noted collective action failure, or inaction, concerning the global threat of anthropogenic climate change. Why? This article seeks to explain this political inaction in a new way: by examining the metaphysical role that technology plays in disclosing the climate as a thinkable and global object. After applying the philosophy of Martin Heidegger to the complex mathematical general circulation models (GCMs) used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), this article details how the metaphysics underlying GCMs manifests the perceivable world by ‘enframing’ it, or by implicitly representing subjects, objects, and Nature itself, as a predictable, calculable, and orderable relation of static forces. When this metaphysical and mathematical uniformity constructs the climate as a calculable object that is globalised through the IPCC, it is ultimately found to be contradictory to the distinctness and unpredictability necessary for distinct human action to occur. Paradoxically, therefore, political action is argued to be metaphysically antithetical to the technologically enframed science, politics, and discourse, of global climate change itself. The importance of distinct and plural human places, when filtered through GCMs, becomes subsumed by the climate as a homogenous, calculative, and politically inactive, global object.     

Decolonizing Sociology Through Collaboration,Co-Learning and Action: A Case for Participatory Action Research1

Despite important efforts by postcolonial scholars to “decolonize” sociology, this endeavor remains limited by the scaffolding of empirical research, or the institutionalized practices and beliefs embedded within data collection and researchers' relationship to research subjects. In its current form, this scaffolding excludes “subaltern” voices from critiquing and extending sociological theory, deriving benefits from the study, or informing social actions that stem from the research. This limits the field's understanding of the multi-faceted impacts of colonialism and retrenches inequalities between scholars and participants. Participatory Action Research (PAR) offers an alternative, decolonial infrastructure. PAR acknowledges the value of knowledge from the periphery and calls for (1) the participation of marginalized research populations in each step of the research process; (2) co-learning between researchers and participants; and (3) collaborative social action that centers the needs of marginalized research populations. Drawing on a case study of PAR in Rio de Janeiro, I demonstrate how PAR allows sociologists, in partnership with historically colonized groups, to decolonize sociology not only in theory, but in the concrete practices of empirical research.     

Social Strain, Structural Breakdown, Political Opportunity, and Collective Action

Sociology traditionally identified social strain and structural breakdown as causes of collective action. Such explanations were widely interpreted as endorsing social order and viewing its breakdown and the resulting collective action in a negative light. In the 1970s, advocates of the resource mobilization perspective criticized strain and breakdown explanations and this negative connotation of collective action. Rather than strain or breakdown, these theorists explained collective action in terms of solidarity, interests, and resources. Despite these criticisms, strain and breakdown explanations persisted at the margins of mainstream social movement theory. Moreover, the resource mobilization approach invoked 'opportunity' to explain collective action. There is a strong resemblance between 'strain and breakdown' and 'opportunity'. Both explain collective action in terms of external, facilitating conditions, but opportunity explanations connote a more favorable evaluation of the resulting collective action. Such resemblances suggest the viability of a synthesis between older and newer explanations of collective action.     

Action research,science, and the co-optation of social research

This paper centers on our argument that action research (AR) produces “better” research than orthodox social research but that AR is marginalized in “Northern” universities because it connects social research to social reform. The key viewpoints informing our work are easily stated but elaborate arguments are required to justify them. We argue that AR is the most credible and methodologically coherent way to create and apply reliable knowledge in social research.

Existing power structures prefer orthodox social research, not because it produces better research but because it does not interfere with existing social arrangements. The demand for social distance and objectification separates the researcher from the subject and prevents social research from becoming an instrument of social change. The dominance of these frameworks in university environments reveals that universities, in addition to being centers of learning, play an important role in replicating existing social arrangements (Noam Chomsky et al., 1997). We believe that AR's social change agenda, not its inferiority as social research, causes its marginality.     

Meta-Power,Social Organization,and the Shaping of Social Action

Interactionist analyses of social organization stimulate examination of how social situations and collective activity are shaped. Meta-power, the creation and control of distal situations, and organization as a structuration of meta-power are used as tools for exploring the shaping of situations. Five meta-power processes are presented: strategic agency, rules and conventions, structuring situations, culture construction, and empowering delegates. These processes illustrate how situations are created or altered. This paper offers a view of social organization that emphasizes relations among situations, linkages between consequences and conditions, and networks of collective activity across space and time. The conclusion calls for additional research to make more explicit the nature of social organization and its social conditions.     

Experience,Imagination, and Action: Versions of Artifact Mediation

Taking up a sociohistoric approach to writing as literate activity in functional systems and to disciplines as dynamic heterogeneous networks, I examine writing in graduate education as a key arena of disciplinary enculturation. Through an ethnographic analysis centered on the literate activity of students and a professor in an American Studies seminar, I work to integrate participants' situated activity around a field research and writing task with the historically sedimented affordances of key mediational means. The analysis particularly foregrounds heterogeneity, as multiple trajectories are woven together in the deeply laminated functional systems that (re)produce American Studies and its interdisciplinarity.     

White Racism,Social Class,and the Backlash Against Affirmative Action

Among scholars in sociology and history, the backlash against affirmative action has been blamed on White working‐class Americans. What has received far less attention is the individual and collective institutional role(s) played by the White middle and upper middle‐class in backlash politics. Given that individuals in these social classes have far greater institutional power than White working‐class Americans, their beliefs and practices deserve sustained critical attention, and, as the few existing research studies demonstrate, White middle‐class and upper middle‐class Americans have played an influential role in backlash politics. Part of the reason for this gap in the literature is that these groups are more difficult to access as research subjects. Gaining access to this population may require working through many levels of a bureaucratic organization designed to protect their time and privacy. Moreover, when interviewed, these Americans are more likely than their working‐class counterparts to mask racist sentiments through the polite language of “color blindness.” Research methods that complement surveys and in‐depth interviews are recommended as strategies for probing White middle and upper middle‐class Americans' deeply hidden beliefs.     

Masses,Crowds, Communities,Movements: Collective Action in the Internet Age

This article investigates two questions: One, how might the very differently structured social collectives on the Internet – masses, crowds, communities and movements – be classified and distinguished? And two, what influence do the technological infrastructures in which they operate have on their formation, structure, and activities? For this, we differentiate between two main types of social collectives: non-organized collectives, which exhibit loosely coupled collective behavior, and collective actors with a separate identity and strategic capability. Further, we examine the newness, or distinctive traits, of online-based collectives, which we identify as being the strong and hitherto non-existent interplay between the technological infrastructures that these collectives are embedded in and the social processes of coordination and institutionalization they must engage in, in order to maintain their viability over time. Conventional patterns of social dynamics in the development and stabilization of collective action are now systematically intertwined with technology-induced processes of structuration.