Black lives matter,capital, and ideology: Spiraling out from India

Piketty's propositions for arresting inequality are discussed through the lens of racism/casteism. We focus on the case of India's George Floyds—the persistence of caste and tribe oppression under economic growth in India—through the insights of our long‐term ethnographic research. We show that inequalities are intimately tied to dynamics of capitalist accumulation in which racial/ethnic/caste/tribe and gender difference is crucial. We argue for an analysis that truly integrates ideology and the dynamics of political economy. The wider implications, we argue are political; they lie in the question of what is to be done. Despite his ambitions to decenter economics, Piketty remains trapped in the logic of economics for what he proposes are essentially economic reforms within capitalism. Moreover, ideological change cannot be a matter of choice only, and cannot be challenged solely at the level of ideas around economic inequality. It will also have to be fought as a direct contest of oppressive ideologies such as racism, casteism, and patriarchy, leading to new counter‐hegemonic positions. We will argue that this takes us from a global history of ideology to a global anthropology of praxis. A first step is to genuinely center conversations with disciplines like anthropology, sociology, and subaltern history studying people and voices from below and from the margins, and the perspectives of scholars and activists from below and from the margins.     

Piketty comes to South Africa

One of the most valuable features of Capital and Ideology is its concern to take history seriously and consider how the emergence of different political and economic regimes relate to discourses about fairness and justice across time. This paper pushes this agenda further by acknowledging that the experience of a few developed nations should not be taken as the template for the generalized study of inequality dynamics across time and space. In this paper, we interrogate Piketty's analysis and policy proposals against specificities that are central to understanding the production and reproduction of inequalities within South Africa. We reflect on the South African case, the structure of inequality and its changes since 1994. We review a battery of policy interventions that have been implemented to address inequality in the last 25 years. We emphasize that the long shadow cast by centuries of colonialism and various forms of apartheid strongly affirm Piketty's emphasis on understanding history. But this is both affirmation and critique given the foundational, imbedded impact that this specific legacy has had on post‐apartheid society and its policies. Piketty is aware that the levels of inequality in South Africa are so high that this is “unknown territory.” We map out some of this territory to reveal how these extreme initial wealth and racial inequities inform the reproduction of inequalities in all dimensions and undermine well intentioned policies. We claim that understanding extractive histories, imbedded wealth inequalities, and complex social and political institutions allows us to understand and confront some of the reasons why even in light of progressive policies, many of which are in line with the proposals from Piketty, government interventions have thus far failed to reduce inequality.     

Talcott parsons and the “far east” at Harvard, 1941–48: Comparative institutions and national policy

This article traces the involvement of Talcott Parsons in research and teaching about Asian nations, especially China and Japan, in the period of World War II. The data indicate that, in contrast to his Eurocentric image, Parsons worked to develop a global perspective in studies on comparative institutions. This approach, inspired by the sociology of Max Weber, also addressed the practical needs of policy makers in connection with the war effort. Within Parsons’s intellectual biography, it stands between the “voluntaristic” framework of his early treatise, The Structure of Social Action (1937) and the later non-historical formalism of The Social System (1951) for which he is perhaps most famous. An understanding of this relatively unknown phase of Parsons’s work is therefore indispensable for an adequate appreciation of his career as a whole.     

Illustrating the Implications of How Inequality is Measured: Decomposing Earnings Inequality by Race and Gender

This paper makes three distinct contributions: it presents a novel modification to an established methodology for assessing inequality using the CPS ASEC data, it illustrates how valuable a multi-metric inequality analysis is by reconciling some open questions regarding the trend in inequality and the role of the composition of income along the distribution, and it provides a baseline assessment of the trend in earnings inequality for four distinct groups of income earners. The evolution of earnings inequality from 1995 to 2010 is compared to increasing inequality in total income as documented by Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez to show that earnings inequality has followed a qualitatively similar, though less extreme trend. In the process, the disconnect between the trend in the Gini coefficient and inequality assessed via the share of income going to the top 1 % of income earners is reconciled through the use of several alternative inequality indices. Finally, the evolution of the earnings distribution for black women, black men, white women, and white men are considered separately, which shows that there are important differences in the experience of inequality. The main findings are that only white men have experienced changes in within-group earnings inequality that parallel the changes in inequality seen in the overall distribution. By contrast, black income earners have seen no notable increase in within-group inequality by any measure, suggesting that they may rightly perceive growing inequality as primarily a between-group phenomena.     

PITFALLS IN TESTING FOR COINTEGRATION BETWEEN INEQUALITY AND THE REAL INCOME

Frank (2009) constructed a comprehensive panel of state‐level income inequality measures using individual tax filing data from the Internal Revenue Service. Employing an array of cointegration exercises for the data, he reported a positive long‐run relationship between income inequality and the real income per capita in the United States. This article questions the validity of his findings. First, we suggest a misspecification problem in his approach regarding the order of integration in the inequality index, which shows evidence of nonstationarity only for the post‐1980 data. Second, we demonstrate that his findings are not reliable because the panel cointegration test he used requires cross‐section independence, which is inappropriate for the U.S. state‐level data. Employing panel tests that allow cross‐section dependence, we find no evidence of cointegration between inequality and the real income. (JEL D31, O40)     

Property,wealth, and social change: Piketty as a social science engineer

This paper applauds the vision and originality of Piketty's Capital and Ideology. We draw attention to the distinctive methodological perspective which he adopts, which we liken to call “social science engineering.” This allows a problem oriented perspective on long‐term global social change which sidesteps siloed disciplinary debates in social science and history about the meaning of modernity, the rise of capitalism, the formation of social groups, and the primacy of nations. We bring out how his theory of property permits him to take forward his overarching insight that economic growth leads to wealth accumulation. This, therefore, challenges long standing sociological perspectives by insisting that modernity is a conservative, rather than a revolutionary and transformative process. We build on this essential contribution by noting some areas where his work can push forward even further, notably that his focus on shifting relativities obscures qualitative historical changes, and more particularly means his analysis of the 20th century is not as provocative as that of the 19th century.     

Growing up global and equal? Inequality trends among world children, 1980–2005

Children are increasingly expected to grow up global yet their worldwide inequality is understudied; while countries’ incomes may be converging, it is unclear whether children's outcomes also do. This paper investigates the recent trends in global inequality among children. Findings show a fall in resource inequality, driven by Asia's exponential economic growth and Africa's slowing fertility trends. Paradoxically, this resource convergence occurred alongside divergence in infant mortality. Such findings have three implications. First, they caution against assuming automatic convergence in children's well-being in response to income convergence between nations. Second, they illustrate how national differences in age dependency account for global inequality among children. Third and more broadly, they stress the importance of demographic and policy – in addition to economic – convergence in bridging substantive inequality among the world‘s children.     

Anthropological Approaches to Modern Societies in the 1940s

At the time that Julian Steward was formulating the Puerto Rico Project, several other approaches to complex societies were being pursued by American anthropologists. Beginning in the 1920s, funders'—and subsequently, New Deal agencies'—interest in addressing social problems impelled microcosmic community studies in the United States. That approach, essentially functionalist and ahistorical, was extended to village studies in other countries, and Redfield's folk-urban continuum became the dominant theoretical framework for comprehending regions within nations. Concurrently, acculturation theory legitimized anthropological interests beyond “primitives” and offered an alternative, two-way cultural contact model. With the onset of World War II, the culture and personality approach was applied to strategic nations, providing holistic configurational depictions of national character. Steward's effort can be seen as a critique of, and alternative to, these approaches that were prevalent in the late 1940s. Building upon his method of cultural ecology, his orientation toward work, and his notions about sociocultural integration, he devised a different way of studying a total society. Steward's framework was modified and expanded by members of his team, both in the field and in the writing of the jointly authored book. While slow to have a wider impact, the project—both in its successes and its limitations—signaled new departures for the anthropological study of the modern world.     

Beyond property or beyond Piketty?

Capital and Ideology represents a significant further statement from Thomas Piketty. The arguments made by the “New Piketty” are largely compatible with those of his previous Capital in the Twenty‐First Century, but reflect broadening of scope and deepening of causal analysis, most markedly through the adoption of a world historical perspective. The result is a fuller offering for understanding inequality's pattern in the world, why it exists and how we can best respond to it. The book presents a wide range of arguments, which do not on first glance appear unified. This review essay distills these into six propositions, describes and evaluates each in turn, and identifies some threads that link them. In the process, it provides a critical assessment of Capital and Ideology.     

Political Inequality is International,Interdisciplinary, and Intersectional

Political inequality refers to the unequal influence over decisions made by political bodies and the unequal outcomes of those decisions. Political inequality is a subtype of power inequality, visible within the political processes of all kinds of political structures. In modern democracies, political inequality is simultaneously a dimension of democracy and a dimension of stratification. Two key theoretical and empirical questions are How much political inequality is there? and is political inequality rising, falling, or staying the same? The answer to these key questions requires us to specify the kind of political inequality – voice, response, and their subtypes – and whether we mean equality of political opportunities or of political outcomes. I argue that we need to understand better the form, duration, and magnitude of political inequality within and across nations. We need to study it systematically, continuously, and diligently, and in an inclusive, open‐minded way, inclining our ears to the varied contributions of the many academic disciplines. We should begin by studying political inequality as an international phenomenon and as an interdisciplinary enterprise, and from an intersectional approach.     

The Effect of World Economy on Income Inequality: A Reassessment*

The research on the world systems model of income distribution has been marked by some conflicting reports on whether or not periphery status is significantly related to inequality. Writers such as Rubinson argue for the salience of the world-systems model, while authors such as Weede claim that it is insignificant if we include a correctly specified control for level of development. This confusion is based, in part, on a debate over how periphery status should be measured. Previous work has often used measures of questionable validity, such as foreign trade, as a percent of GDP. The present investigation develops a conceptualization of dependency on the world market based on the concentration of export receiving nations. A multiple regression analysis of data from forty-three nations indicates that the index of periphery status does influence indicators of inequality. However, the parabolic model of level of development tends to explain more of the variance in inequality than the world-systems factor. Finally, a control for political democracy gave no support for the political paradigm on inequality.     

Gender and the Public Sphere: Alternative Forms of Integration in Nineteenth-Century America

This paper intends to evaluate two competing models of multicultural integration in stratified societies: the "multiple publics" model of Nancy Fraser and the "fragmented public sphere" model of Jeffrey Alexander. Fraser and Alexander disagree on whether or not claims to a general "common good" or "common humanity" are democratically legitimate in light of systemic inequality. Fraser rejects the idea that cultural integration can be democratic in conditions of social inequality, while Alexander accepts it and tries to explain how it may be realized. In order to address this debate, I analyze the cultural foundations of the female-led, maternally themed social movements of nineteenth-century America. The language of these movements supports Alexander's position over Fraser's, though it also suggests that Alexander is mistaken in the specifics of his cultural theory of a general and democratic "common good." While Alexander's model of integration is structured uniquely by what he and Philip Smith have called "the discourse of civil society," the evidence suggests a distinctly alternative, equally democratic code at play in this case, which I have labeled a discourse of affection and compassion.     

Theorizing the relationship between inequality and economic growth

This article explores a promising theoretical approach for reassessing the relationship between inequality and economic growth. The article draws some insights from the influential inverted U-curve hypothesis originally advanced by Simon Kuznets, but drastically recasts the original arguments by shifting two fundamental premises. First, retaining Kuznets’s emphasis on the importance of economic growth in generating demographic transitions between existing and new distributional arrays, we argue that a “constant drive toward inequality” results after replacing a Schumpeterian notion of “creative destruction” for the dualistic assumptions in Kuznets’s model. Second, while Kuznets devoted considerable attention to the impact of institutions on distributional outcomes, we argue that institutions should be understood as relational and global mechanisms of regulation, operating within countries while simultaneously shaping interactions and flows between nations. The article argues that economic growth, unfolding through institutions embedded in time and space, produces a constant drive towards inequality that results in a multiple and overlapping matrix of distributional arrays, an overall income distribution (e.g., within and between countries) that is both systemic and historical.     

‘I open the coffin and here I am’: disability as oppression and education as liberation in the construction of personal identity

This article presents a case study focused on the experiences of Rafael, a resilient young musician. The research is based on 180 records made through interviews, focus groups, observations and documentary collection, involving 190 informants. The data analysis shows that social systems create subordinated and stigmatised conditions of experience for people with disabilities which lead to social exclusion and reification. This understanding of disability as oppression (which is the ‘coffin of the dead’) can be combated by means of education, understood as resistance to inequality. This can be effected by questioning the social order and power relationships, thus striving to produce the possibility of being a subject. In this way Rafael has been able to construct his identity relatively autonomously, challenging social mandates that led him to exclusion and denied his existence as a subject. In his own words: ‘I open the coffin and here I am’.     

The Medium Is the Mass: Marshall McLuhan's Catholicism and catholicism

Conflicting assumptions have been proffered about Marshall McLuhan's Roman Catholic beliefs: (a) that he was a "compartmentalized Catholic" who kept his Sunday beliefs separate from his Monday-to-Saturday academic thinking; (b) that his Catholicism was ubiquitous, and thus the "global village" is a longing for one world body as camouflaged Teilhard de Chardin; (c) that McLuhan was an academic who addressed all topics, including religious ones, orally and in writing but not with a proselytizing perspective; (d) that as a convert to Catholicism (in the spirit of Chesterton and Lewis) he was a clever and subtle evangelical who infused academe with adapted theology; and (e) that some mixture of these assumptions is likely to be true, although McLuhan kept his articles of faith largely off the record. Based on interviews with McLuhan and with some of his closest colleagues and friends, as well as on research about the religious vein within McLuhan's writing, I report aspects of the "Marist McLuhan," that is, the McLuhan moved by Mary, and by her church, as well as aspects of McLuhan's theological subtext within his writing and thinking.     

Global Governance and Universities: The Power of Ideas and Knowledge

Abstract

So as to advance understanding of global governance, one can pick up on Robert Cox's critical formulations. Best known for his insights on the interplay of material conditions, institutions, and ideas, he later developed his framework by giving greater weight to the ideational dimensions of intersubjectivity. Yet it is usually deployed with regard to the former phase of his work while the latter phase goes unnoticed or is neglected. Cox's more recent conceptualization may serve as a springboard for thinking afresh about global knowledge production and dissemination. His approach can be stretched by exploring specific spheres of authority at particular sites. Focusing on universities as one of them, this article suggests a research itinerary that maps clusters of agents and guides empirical digging into how these structures operate. A complex of actors and processes, detailed in the findings, is redesigning global knowledge governance. The connective tissue in a cross-continental web of educational restructuring is gradually spreading. Cox's theorization may be fruitfully expanded to analyze this dynamic.     

THE INSTITUTIONALIST ECONOMIC THEORIES OF CLARENCE AYRES

This paper creates a synthesis of Ayres's views, drawing them together from his many publications, and displaying his work as an intellectual system. His work is also evaluated, with the conclusion that his basic distinction between institutional and technological behavior is not tenable, but that he made some contributions of lasting value in his elaboration of institutionalist theory. In particular, he demonstrated the necessity for a recognition of the cultural and technological environment within which economic behavior occurs, he argued persuasively in favor of an interdisciplinary approach, and he contributed to the analysis of the process of technological change.     

Continuity and Change in Place Stratification: Spatial Inequality and Middle‐Range Territorial Units*

Abstract Sociologists have produced large, well‐known literatures on inequality across geographic territory at two ends of the spatial scale continuum, within the city and across nation‐states. In this paper, I discuss a different scale of focus, subnational stratification processes across middle‐range spatial units, those between the city and nation‐state. While characterizing much contemporary rural sociological research, this approach to spatial inequality does not tend to be seen as a coherent tradition that cross‐cuts substantive areas. First, I discuss why attention to subnational inequality, rural regions, and middle‐range spatial units are important to social science understanding of stratification processes. Second, I provide an overview of contemporary research traditions in rural sociology which, taken together, form a distinct and innovative approach to spatial inequality. Third, I draw from my own work to explain how factors affecting socioeconomic inequalities across middle‐range territorial units may be conceptualized and provide two sets of empirical examples. Finally, I discuss what should be done in terms of furthering rural sociology's regional approach to spatial inequality.     

Gendered Power and Privilege: Taking Lenski One Step Further

In Power and Privilege , Gerhard Lenski's theory of the evolution of systems of inequality, he showed some recognition of gender inequality but, as universally accepted in sociology at the time, "social" stratification was conceptualized implicitly as inequality between male household heads. To move from this to explaining gender inequality requires consideration of constructs in addition to those developed by Lenski, but in terms of his typology of societies based on technology and size of economic surplus, the level of gender stratification tracks that of "social" stratification and the basic variables he delineates remain centrally important.