Becks Thesis on Global Risk Society - Essay Example

BECK’S THESIS ON "GLOBAL RISK SOCIETY" By Beck’s Thesis on "Global Risk Society" The term “risk society” refers to the manners in which the society is organized to respond to risks. This term has connection to various writers who have shown interest in the nature of modernity. One of such writers is Ulrich Beck. Ulrich Beck is a socialist who defines risk society as a systematic manner in which the society can respond to insecurities and hazards that result from modernization. She links such risks to changes in factors such as lifestyle, structure of influence and power, a form of political participation and repression, and social norms. This paper aims at providing a critical account of Beck’s thesis that we are now coming to live in a new “global risk society” through the use of research evidence to support such claims. Management of risk in the 21st century is most reliant on the ability to manipulate and control misfortunes. This can only be a result of awareness and preparedness for any misfortune. Studies have revealed that human beings in the 21st century are more aware of the risks that they face in their environments. As a result of this awareness they are able act more cautiously in relation to activities that might involve some risks. This is particularly backed by a research that was taken involving children between the age of 7 and eleven. The finding was that when questioned in groups they showed more awareness of the risks involved in their environments. It was also noted that though, quite naïve, they were informed of various ways in which they could react to misfortunes and accidents (Dawson 2013, p. 98). Though most of them define accidents as occurrences that are not planned for and are beyond human control, most of them suggest that there are ways in which the probability of the occurrence of accidents can be lowered and manipulated. This trend is different from that of previous generations. In accordance to Beck, employment related opportunities and risks that results from the ushering in of the risk can be a result of individualization. The high rate in which capital, human beings, information, and labour are mobile tends to cause a loosening effect on cohesion of support networks that are collective. Evidence proves that there has been an increase in patterns of working flexibility. As commonly perceived, modern employees are expected to be receptive and adaptive to certain changes that can occur to the fluctuating labour market. This flexibility has in a way worked against the popularity of full-time contract that are standardized. This is supported by record from Britain, which proves that more than 6 million employees in Britain are employed on a part-time basis (Tulloch & Lupton 2003, p. 114). This just proves how much risk and insecurity has become a major issue in employment as opposed to previous eras. This goes a long way in proving that there has been a shift from the categorizing logic of classes to a global logic of risk. Through her thesis, Beck suggests that industrial societies are forced to play between socially approved things and those that are not socially approved. They have to do these both ideologically and materially. In the industrial phase, trade unions, political parties, and protest groups all struggle to get the socially good things, such as healthcare, employment, housing, and income. However, in the process of the creation of goods, the industrial societies unintentionally produce the less desired side effects that have negative impacts on the daily lives of human beings globally. As opposed to natural hazards and calamities, risks that arise from industrial activities cannot be limited in time and space. In managing such risks have proved to be specifically hard because of the positive results of the processes that lead to such risks (Beck 1992, p. 123). Most of the risks that result from industrial activities do not only affect the societies involved but affects the whole universe. Becks think that such a situation leads the general shift of political objective and cultural goals. This means that the society’s focus moves from the positive results of industrial processes to their negative effects. A good example will be the manner in which the sensitization on global warming has led to the criticism of various industrial and economic activities. This criticism remains despite the fact that most of these activities contribute positively to various economies. The pressure of making choices, in such an uncertain environment of late modernity is a common scenario for the youth. According to Beck, in a society that is highly individualized, individuals are expected to make direct plans of their own biographies including their group membership and social identity. In the process of making such choices, the choices made are always halted by uncertainness. Choices that either makes someone’s life a success or a failure have highly become individualized (Arnoldi 2009, p. 121). This does not necessarily mean that the social structure has been completely destroyed. Such condition makes risks that individuals face in their day-to-day life more personalized than it used to be in the previous regimes. When young people weigh up the potential benefits against the possible risk of accepting an illicit drug offer, they consider the interwoven nature of agency and structure in modernity. The youth act as reflexive agents undertaking a customary act of biography. The modern society has overemphasized on the ability of an individual to reflect on and make decisions that would shape or destroy their lives. This makes it very easy for individuals, especially the youth to make decisions that are going to affect their lives negatively (Mythen & Walklate 2006, p. 134). Due to individualism, many young people are able to downplay the risks that are involved in activities such as drug and substance abuse. Such risks have been discovered to have increased with the increase in individualism. In comparison to previous eras, the modern youth can be said to be at a higher risk of facing such consequences. The contradiction in this thesis is the fact that Beck claims that modernization has led to the decline of social classes. In his opinion all that remains to be evident is individualism. However, he still notes that the issue on social classes still remains to be a commonly discussed matter in sociology. This still happens just as if social classes were just as they were. Thus, he claims that is an attempt by sociologists to impose social classes on the society despite the fact that it is not really existent. He also claims that the sociologists do impose other ideas such as family and employment to the modern society (Wilkinson 2010, p. 87). This explains why he chooses to refer to education, social classes, and family as “zombie categories”. However, Beck’s thesis can be said to be data free due to the fact that there are various studies that show that social classes still exist. Studies that were carried out in Europe prove that social classes still have an influence on access to health, consumer products, and opportunities. The confusion comes in when one views the possibility of both claims being true. This is because both sides give data evidence for their claims. Critics of Beck’s thesis claim that the data used in support of this thesis are inclined towards a single side, thus cannot be used to support this thesis. Looking at the counter evidence, someone can notice that they are also inclined towards giving a certain impression. In such case the only viable conclusion is that social classes still exist. However, the influence of social classes on how things happen in the society is slowly diminishing. Beck also fails to give details of the extent to which social classes have been displaced by individualism. Now that it is clearly evident that, social classes still exist and that they are still influential in political, economic, and social aspects of human lives, it would have been prudent to illustrate just how much these changes have been prevalent. Failure to do so has left this thesis vulnerable to multiple criticisms. If he had not generalized the effect, maybe the thesis would have had fewer critics. Though he argues that the risks have been distributed along phases of life instead of social classes, he is still unable to totally exclude social classes from his explanation of the nature of the distribution of risks in the modern society. It cannot be disputed that individualism has a particular effect on social classes and its implication on risks and security. This is particularly very true for modern societies. In previous eras risks, accidents, and calamity preparedness were taken care off at the social class level. However, as time goes by individualism keeps on taking a tighter grip on the structure of decision making in the society. People have a belief that they have the capability of individuals making decisions that concern their wellbeing and the risks that they face in the environments that they live in. However, this thesis fails to entirely explain the trends in risk handling in the modern society. For instance, it attempts to downplay the effect of social class on social risk have not been convincing. Bibliography Tulloch, J. & Lupton, D 2003, Risk and Everyday Life, SAGE, London. Beck, U 1992, Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, SAGE, London. Wilkinson, L 2010, Risk, Vulnerability and Everyday Life, Routledge, New York. Mythen, G., & Walklate, S 2006, Beyond the risk society: critical reflections on risk and human security, Open Univ. Press, Maidenhead. Mcguigan, J 2006, Modernity and postmodern culture, Open Univ. Press, Maidenhead. Arnoldi, J 2009, Risk an introduction, Polity Press, Cambridge, UK. Dawson, M 2013, Late modernity, individualization and socialism an associational critique of neoliberalism, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. http://www.palgraveconnect.com/doifinder/10.1057/9781137003423. Read More