Where in the world does neoliberalism come from?

Neoliberalism is generally understood as a system of ideas circulated by a network of right-wing intellectuals, or as an economic system mutation resulting from crises of profitability in capitalism. Both interpretations prioritize the global North. We propose an approach to neoliberalism that prioritizes the experience of the global South, and sees neoliberalism gaining its main political strength as a development strategy displacing those hegemonic before the 1970s. From Southern perspectives, a distinct set of issues about neoliberalism becomes central: the formative role of the state, including the military; the expansion of world commodity trade, including minerals; agriculture, informality, and the transformation of rural society. Thinkers from the global South who have foregrounded these issues need close attention from the North and exemplify a new architecture of knowledge in critical social science.     

Capital,conflict and convergence: a political understanding of neoliberalism and its relationship to capitalist transformation

ABSTRACT

In this article we argue against influential analyses of neoliberalism that prioritize variegation and the role of ideas as key theoretical foci relevant to understanding neoliberalism’s diffusion into myriad national and political settings. Rather, we contend that crucial to understanding neoliberalism is the role of politically-produced convergence around market rationality that reflects two core processes: the reorganization of production and the ascendency of financialization. We present a theorization and analysis of neoliberalism’s political production and diffusion over time, explaining its contested evolution and impact across diverse settings (both ‘North’ and ‘South’) and emphasizing its ever-intensifying symbiotic relationship with the consolidating world market in which the former has increasingly come to serve as the latter’s operating system (OS). Further, we posit that neoliberalism’s form, function and impact demand analytically prioritizing the leverage of constellations of ideological and material interests within the contradictory context of consolidating relations of production and financialization. Our analysis thus challenges many previous expositions of neoliberalism for their failure to locate neoliberalism’s manifestation as arising out of social conflict within particular junctures that privilege certain social forces and ideas over others. We also distinguish our position by highlighting how manifestations of neoliberalism in various settings have combined to yield a greater world market in which variegation has gradually given way to ever-intensifying disciplinary pressures towards market-policy conformity (mono-policy). While current populist movements may well turn out to be important counter movements to neoliberal hegemony, especially if they can internationalize, the disciplining effect of the world market renders many nationally-oriented policy alternatives costly and politically fraught.     

Latin American Identity Politics: Redefining Citizenship

Identity‐based social movements and politics have played an important role in Latin America since the 1970s and continue to do so today. In this essay, I argue that this form of politics – as it has taken shape across Latin America – has been defined by its intersectionality. I trace the ways in which neoliberalism has facilitated a certain kind of identity politics while limiting more radical political claims. I argue that identity politics have contributed to the current “pink tide” sweeping across the continent and are in continual dialogue with these new leftist governments as they redefine what it means to be citizen and what the relationship between state and citizen should be.     

Toward a political sociology of privatized punishment: Contestation,state structures,and stratification

Privatized punishment—in which nonstate actors carry out state-mandated criminal punishments—has developed into a common practice since its rise in the 1980s. Many disciplines, including criminology, political science, public administration, and economics, have examined its use over the past four decades. However, privatized punishment has not garnered much attention in sociology. This is surprising, as privatized punishment touches on the key themes in sociology, and in the political sociology in particular. In this paper, we attempt to insert privatized punishment into classic and contemporary discussions in political sociology. Below, we offer an overview of privatized punishment and provide a high-level review of how other social scientific disciplines have studied the phenomenon. Then we argue that political sociology provides a useful, if underutilized, lens for studying privatized punishment. In particular, we highlight three political sociological themes—contestation, state structures, and stratification—that can be fruitfully applied to the study of privatized punishment, and we sketch multiple lines of future research informed by these themes.     

Under Western Eyes? Elements for a Transnational and International History of Sociology in Asia (1960s–1980s)

Very few articles or chapters account for the history of sociology in Asia as a whole or for its inception from the late 19th century, especially in Japan, China and India. The following article, partly based on archival evidence, takes into consideration two important elements that bind together the various developments of sociology in Asia after World War II, namely calls for a better relevance of concepts and theories in order to fight academic colonialism, and strivings in the 1970s for the organization of an Asian sociological or social science organization. It will end with a short reflection and interrogation on the role of Asia in the world social science archipelago.     

Spencer is dead, long live Spencer: individualism, holism, and the problem of norms

The debate between the advocates of sociological individualism and those of holism has been pervasive in the development of social theory. This debate is often situated in the false problems of sociology, since it is seen as a particular form of the perennial and irresolvable dilemma between social nominalism and realism, as well as between freedom and determinism. Nevertheless, the debate is far from over within contemporary sociology and other social science, as indicated by the resurgence of individualism in rational action theory and its repudiation by holistic social theories. The aim of this paper is to identify some modern variations on this theme as well as to discern certain common tendencies of two seemingly opposite theoretical perspectives, viz. the convergence upon a normative solution to the problem of social order. This convergence is therefore denoted normative convergence between sociological individualism and holistic sociology.     

Social movement studies in India,within and beyond sociology: Proposing postcolonial political sociology as an evolving framework

The social movement theories, particularly emerged since the late 1960s and the empirical studies informed by these theories occupy a decisive space in the current sociological studies of social movements. Often, the theories that emerged in the American and European contexts overlooked the significance of ‘political sociology’ as a theoretical terrain while conceptualizing contemporary social movements. Thus, this paper attempted to reinvent the significance of political sociology in two-ways: a) it critically engaging with the classical tradition of political sociology; b) critical scrutiny of the major trends appeared in the sub-field of social movements within the disciplinary domain of sociology in India since the 1980s has been undertaken. Given this, the paper recognizes the theoretical urge for a new framework to understand social movements in reference to the specificities of the non-Western societies like India, and thereby proposes an approach termed as the postcolonial political sociology of social movements.     

The Ethical Challenge for Sociology in the Face of Global Modernity: toward Solidarity-Oriented and Ethically Contextualized Practice

Sociology is facing difficult times: fragmentation within and between regional, national and international academic communities remains high while global interdependence and instability increase generating societal threats of unprecedented scale (progressing inequality, migration, ecological, political and economic crises). Ethical issues are very important for comprehending both: processes within sociology and transformations in the world around. Thus, we postulate the global ethical challenge for sociology, which requires: first, formulating the ethical stance of a sociologist towards the objects of disciplinary inquiry and the potentially involved social groups and, second, elaborating research tools adequate for studying the ethical dimension of the complex social reality. We demonstrate that dominating discourses in the current professional communities are largely inadequate and cannot effectively address this challenge. Drawing on Pitirim Sorokin’s theoretical heritage, as well as on John Meyer and Volker Schmidt ideas, we propose an alternative project of global sociology, emphasizing, first, solidarity-oriented and ethically contextualized sociological communication with various extra-academic audiences; and, second, sociologists’ ethical competence in exploring various localities and dimensions of global modernity with its progressively intersecting different (and sometimes contrasting) ethical systems.     

MOB SOCIOLOGY AND ESCALATED FORCE: Sociology's Contribution to Repressive Police Tactics

Mob sociology is a theory of crowd behavior that is found in U.S. police literature and that has been used to design and justify demonstration management practices. Mob sociology is derived from sociological theories about crowd behavior but ignores their originators'assertions that crowds occur within a larger social context. Mob sociology was diffused throughout the United States in the late 1960s and early 1970s through a national civil disorder training program and a variety of police manuals and magazines. It is highly compatible with the escalated force style of protest policing and has lost much of its influence since the introduction of negotiated management practices. However, it is still present in police literature and training programs and should be replaced by contemporary social science research and theory.     

How Not to Establish a Subfield: Media Sociology in the United States

US-American sociology has largely failed to examine the transformation of mediated communication of the past 20 years. If sociology is to be conceived as a general social science concerned with analyzing and critically scrutinizing past, present, and future conditions of collective human existence, this failure, and the ignorance it engenders, is detrimental. This ignorance, we argue, may be traced back to the weak self-identity, institutionalization and position of media sociology in the discipline. Our argument here is threefold: 1) There was an opportunity structure for specialization, that is, a venerable research tradition in media sociology since the first half of the twentieth century. This tradition links back to classics in sociology and peaked at a time (1970s and 1980s) when the discipline differentiated institutionally and many new sections emerged in the American Sociological Association. 2) Despite this tradition, media sociology has not become established in sociology in the United States until recently. 3) Lastly, we locate reasons for non-establishment on three distinct but interconnected levels: the history of ideas in media sociology, institutional/disciplinary history, and disciplinary politics.     

“Apathetic,active, or antagonistic”: A history of the American Sociological Association’s involvement in high school sociology

The role that the American Sociological Association (ASA) has historically played in reforming high school sociology courses has been alternately apathetic, active, or antagonistic. Apathy marked the time period between 1905 and about 1960, and again during most of the 1970s and 1980s. The Association played a much more active role during the New Social Studies movement of the 1960s, and has also been actively involved since the late 1980s. But even in its activity, the ASA has been antagonistic toward high school courses and teachers. During the 1960s, and again since about 1989, the ASA has pushed solely for the teaching of sociology as a scientific discipline. This approach has proven problematic for two reasons. First, it directly contradicts the traditional objective of the social studies curriculum—citizenship education. Teachers are much more concerned about molding good citizens than exposing students to the nuances of scientific inquiry. Second, it ignores the well-documented fact that high school sociology teachers typically have little training in, exposure to, or experience with formal, academic sociology. For that reason, they have had great difficulty satisfying the demands made by academic reformers. I conclude that the ASA must address these two issues and several others if it is serious about improving secondary sociology courses. This paper was awarded the 2004 Graduate Student Paper Award from the American Sociological Association's Section on the History of Sociology. I thank Larry Nichols and Afshan Jafar for their thoughtful feedback on an earlier draft.     

Reconstructing Chinese Sociology: A Quest for an Applied Science

After nearly a 30-year absence from the curricula of higher education, sociology as an academic discipline was reestablished in China in the late 1970s. Like Chinese sociology in the pre-communist era, contemporary sociological research in China embraces an applied orientation. This article reviews issues confronting Chinese sociologists and explains why Chinese sociology continues to evolve as an applied science. A directory of major sociology departments and research centers in China is provided.     

Development, Diversity, and Conflict in the Sociology of Science *

The sociology of science has undergone considerable growth and diversification in recent years. Early sociology of science was developed within philosophical debates regarding the nature of science and the social bases of knowledge in general. Karl Mannheim and Max Scheler in the 1920s gave these discussions a specifically sociological bent. In the 1930s, the theme was made into an explicit sociology of science both by Marxists and by the functionalist Robert Merton, and both approaches were followed up during the next 30 years. The takeoff of the sociology of science into a flourishing research area occurred in the early 1960s, with the publication of works by Derek Price and by Thomas Kuhn, as well as important studies by Joseph Ben-David and by Warren Hagstrom. In the 1970s, sociology of science burgeoned into a variety of approaches: citation and network studies, conflict theory, social constructivism, ethnomethologically-influenced studies of laboratory life, and others. The idealized functionalist image of science has largely given way to more critical, relativist, and highly empirical approaches to science.     

Public social science in Norway: Migration research in the public debate

How do Norwegian migration and diversity researchers experience and maneuver participation in public debate? And do their experiences and strategies fit with Michael Burawoy's image of Norwegian social science and with his model of public sociology? In this article, the concept of public sociology is expanded to public social science, encompassing communication of research not just from sociology but social science in general. Semi-structured interviews with 31 Norwegian migration and diversity scholars from 10 academic institutions about their experiences of, and views on, public research communication constitute the empirical material. The article concludes that Burawoy is right about the relatively high participation in public debate among social scientists in Norway. And his ideal-typical distinction between four types of sociology is helpful in analyzing how researchers relate differently to the science-public interface. Yet the results indicate that his perspective on public sociology is overly optimistic and not sufficiently attuned to the normativity already attached to highly politicized issues in public debate.     

From sociology to historical social science: prospects and obstacles

Analysis is provided of the roots of sociology and its links with historical optimism. Particular focus is placed by such a sociology upon the origins of modernity and problems of urban disorder. Sociology's golden age was in the immediate postwar period. But since the 1960s, 'globalization', the sciences of complexity and cultural studies have transformed the context for sociology (especially transforming the so-called 'two cultures'). The article concludes with some wide-ranging recommendations as to how sociology should be developed into a re-unified, historical social science on a truly global scale.     

After New Social Movements

This article combines an historical and a sociological approach. Historically, it distinguishes three main moments in the history of social movements since the 1960s. After working-class movements, which corresponded to industrial societies, came the so-called new social movements, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and these were followed by a third generation of actors deserving a new denomination as alter-globalization activists. Sociologically, this articles analyses the differences between these three figures from the point of view of the identity of the actors, of their relationship to culture, to their adversary, to their subjectivity, or to their framework for action (national or otherwise). The article introduces the concept of anti-movement, which is illustrated with the contemporary cases of ‘global’ anti-movements such as global terrorism or global anti-Semitism.     

The political economy of sociology: An interview with David Goslin,national research council

In this interview, David A. Goslin responds to a variety of questions concerning the relationship between the federal government and the political economy of sociology. He addresses the identity of sociology in Washington, the treatment of behavioral and social sciences as a special case in science policy, the greater acceptability of the behavioral sciences, the battle of 1981, the recurring need for reviews of the discipline, the role of the National Research Council and the National Academy of Sciences, the current status and rising prospects of the social sciences, and emerging areas of national concern. Lawrence J. Rhoades has been on the Washington scene for more than a decade. During the first four years, he served as executive associate of the American Sociological Association and wrote a social science and government series forFootnotes. He has since served in research policy, planning, and evaluation positions in the federal government. He currently is Washington correspondent forThe American Sociologist.     

Interpersonal trust and voluntary associations: examining three approaches

The relationship between interpersonal trust and membership in voluntary associations is a persistent research finding in sociology. What is more, the notion of trust has become a central issue in current social science theorizing covering such diverse approaches as transaction costs economics or cognitive sociology. In different ways and for different purposes, these approaches address the role of voluntary organizations, although, as this paper argues, much of this thinking remains sketchy and underdeveloped. Against an empirical portrait of this relationship, the purpose of this paper is to assess such theorizing. We first set out to explicate major approaches to trust in economics, sociology and political science, using the non-profit or voluntary organization as a focal point. We then examine the various approaches in terms of their strengths and weaknesses, and, finally, identify key areas for theoretical development. In particular, we point to the social movement literature, the social psychology of trust, and recent thinking about civil society.     

Global public social science

Burawoy’s classification of the complementary aspects of the discipline of sociology is used to describe an emergent global public social science that will assist transnational social movements in the building of a democratic and collectively rational global commonwealth.