Antonio Gramsci Contribution to Anthropology - Essay Example

Antonio Gramsci contribution to Anthropology Antonio Gramsci contribution to Anthropology Antonio Gramsci can be described as one of the most significant Marxist thinkers that existed in the 20th century, and he can be said to have particularly been important in the expansion of Western Marxism. Gramsci was one of the leading figures in Marxism prior to the start of the World War II (Mayo, 1999). As an Italian communist he faced a lot of challenges in his life, however, this did not deter him from writing about the different topics that came into his mind. In fact there are scholars that have considered him as one of the greatest Marxist philosophers that existed in the 20th century (Crehan, 2002). Gramsci saw the human history as being key to the Marxist agenda of social change and that it is only nature that mattered to the point that it interacted with the mankind. This paper is going to describe the potential significance for anthropologists of the ideas of Gramsci. The most obvious contribution of Gramsci to anthropology is cultural hegemony. This was a term that was coined by Antonio Gramsci, who is also credited for being the founder of the Italian communist party. He wrote while he was imprisoned in the Fascist jail. He was concerned with how power works and in fact how it wielded by those in power and how it won by those that they do not want to change the system. In fact, at the time the dominant idea amongst Marxist radicals like him was that in order for one to attain power one had to seize the means of production as well as the administration (Crehan, 2002). Gramsci recognized that taking over the means of production as well as the administration was not sufficient, this is because over the years he had witnessed workers take over and run factories in Turin, only to hand them back in several weeks because they were unsure of what to do with the factories or themselves. He had carefully observed the skill that the Catholic Church had employed in exercising its power as well as retaining the population’s allegiance. It is from this that he realized that in order for one to create as well as maintain a new society there was a need to create and maintain a new type of consciousness. The repository of consciousness is culture and it is aesthetic sense. In an anthropological sense, it can be described as the norms and mores as well as discourses that make up the everyday life of a person. Therefore, it helps people to navigate the world, and guides ideas of wrong and right, just and unjust and beautiful and ugly (Crehan, 2002). One may be able to seize a factory which is the source of production, however, if the material power that exists in the factors is not backed up by a cultural that reinforces the notion of what is good and possible, then any gains that occurs in the military, economic as well as political fronts are most likely to be short-lived. The importance of cultural hegemony in anthropology cannot be disputed; its power lies in invisibility. It is imperative to understand that unlike a soldier with a gun or a political system that is backed up by a written constitution, culture resides within people. It is not political, it is what people like and what they think is comfortable (Mayo, 1999). He provided the definition of culture to anthropologists as stories and images that are wrapped in figures of speech, he argued that there is a time that comes where culture becomes hegemonic and consequently, it automatically becomes common sense for the majority of people living in the population. Further, anthropologists are also interested in the study of humans past and present. Therefore, the thought of cultural hegemony in preventing revolutions cannot be ignored. In fact, its importance in socio cultural anthropology has been noted by various scholars. They argue that cultural hegemony can explain various anthropological phenomenons. For example, the reason as to why there is modern day reluctance on the part of workers as well as the declining lower middle class to resist through the use of a revolution. It is through the concept of cultural hegemony that it becomes impossible for the middle class and workers to revolt. People have over the years accepted values that are bourgeois and ideology as well as different and diverse institutions to which the middle class and the workers see no alternative. This has often occurred in the 21st century, where workers feel enough of a manager or president but there is nothing that they can do about the situation because there is the existence of cultural hegemony. Therefore, the conclusion is that cultural hegemony is triumphant because the irrational in human nature is often triumphant (Crehan, 2002). Therefore, it can be said to by a myth, that originated in Lockean philosophy as well as the influence on enlightenment thinkers on early anthropologists such as Marx that human beings are ration and that in the cases of a social revolution, the motivation as well as the intention of those following the revolutionary leaders is exclusively rooted on idealism. It is imperative to note that Gramsci’s conjecture of hegemony is attached to the hipbone to his conception of capitalistic state. In his writings it is clear that he does not appreciate the state in the thin sense of the administration. However, he divides the state between the political society, this includes the army, the police and the legal system, the civil society that is the family, the education and the trade unions. He stressed the fact that the division that he had drawn in the state was purely conceptual and as a matter of fact the two in realism often overlap. He argued that in capitalist states, the rule is often through force plus consent. These theories of the state and the government and the way they work is extremely important in anthropology and consequently, the theories of capitalistic and socialistic government has gone a long way in helping persons understand how government works in different conditions and why they work that way (Turner, 1986). There are instances where he draws from Machiavelli and argued that the revolutionary part is a force that will help in the propulsion of the working class to expand as organic intellectuals as well as an alternative hegemony that exists within the society. The complex nature that exists in the civil society according to him is just but a war of position that was carried out by the revolutionaries mainly through political agitations, advancement of a proletarian culture as well as development of other ways that would help in opposing the civil society. These types of resistance are important in anthropology as they address the complex question of globalization and the government. In conclusion, Gamsci’s thoughts have been instrumental in anthropology, although emanating starting the planned left; they have become important theories in academic discussions in anthropology. In fact, in anthropology, his theories have been used left right and center, for example, the concept of hegemony has become widely cited in anthropological circles. His works have helped explain several phenomenon in the society, and for this reason they have also gained acceptance and have heavily influenced intellectual discourse when it comes to popular culture as well as scholarly popular culture studies. It is from his teachings that several revolutionaries have found their potential and ideological resistance to dominant business interests and governments. However, there are those that argue that cultural hegemony contribution to anthropology is not entirely clear. This is because there are contradictions that exist that are not well explained in the theory. This is because later, Gramsci and later a person named Hall introduced the term counter hegemonic. This means that there is no culture that is completely hegemonic and consequently, under even the most completes systems of controls there is small pockets of counter hegemonic cultures (Coutinho, 2012). He argued that these counter hegemonic cultures in many cases have revolutionary potential because they often run counter to the dominant power. In fact, these cultures in many cases are located in traditional peasant beliefs or the shop floor culture of workers in industries. Therefore, this is a contradiction to anthropology as it is not clear whether this is the creation and maintenance of a new society as in the repository of consciousness or it is just plain resistance to conform to new culture. They go ahead and argue that cultural hegemony does not explain into detail several phenomenons in anthropology, for example, there are people in the society that defy the cultural hegemony and stand alone in terms of revolutions. For example, Thomas Hobbes stood up and although he belonged to the status quo he opposed the English civil of 1640’s. This can also be seen by the counter revolutionary Burke who stood alone and opposed the French revolution, therefore, from these observations it can be said that there are keen observations which can be made in regards to human nature manifesting itself in times of revolutionary times. Therefore, questions are bound to be asked on the relevance of cultural hegemony in explaining certain pertinent phenomenon for example, was there a rupture in cultural hegemony that took place in the Englightment that caused a challenge to the status quo and consequently providing legitimacy to a revolution? These are but some of the questions that cannot be answered by looking at cultural hegemony alone. It cannot be doubted that cultural hegemony is an important anthropological concept that was proposed by Gramsci, however, it also contains several loopholes in the theory that at times makes it inefficient when it comes to the explaining certain phenomenon in anthropology. The thought of intellectuals and education is important in anthropology as it helps in the better understanding of the society; it also explains various phenomenons that is related to anthropology. For example, the need to generate a working class society. In each and every culture since history, there has been a constant working class that has its own culture and relates with each other and believes that they are one. This has happened since the industrial revolution and has continued into the 21st century. This anthropological phenomenon can be explained by the theory of education and intellectuals by Gramsci. He argues that there is always a need for a king of education that will help create working class intellectuals. If this education is given to them they often believe that they are one team leading to the same place. For this reason, they tend to stick together and create their own cultural hegemony that relates them as one and gives a common sense way of behaving. There are some scholars that have argued that his ideas about an learning systems corresponds with the concept of critical pedagogy as well as popular education as theorized by Paulo Freire who lived in Brazil. Gramsci made a contribution to anthropology the role of power in the society. He particularly gave a lot of thought into the role that intellectuals played in the society; he argued that all different and diverse men are intellectuals. This meant that all mean had rational and intellectual faculties; however, not all men had the social purpose of intellectuals (Davidson, 1968). In fact, he argued that modern intellectuals were not talkers, but described them as practically minded directors as well as organizes that were able to produce hegemony by the use of ideas apparatus such as media and education (Davidson, 1968). He went further and was able to distinguish the traditional intelligentsia intellectuals that do not describe life in accordance to the scientific rules that exist but rather they articulate it through the verbal communication of culture, experiences, and feelings that the masses themselves cannot express for themselves. In conclusion, the contribution of Gramsci to anthropology cannot be overstated. He was able to take anthropology to new heights that the world of anthropology enjoys today. He defined cultural hegemony and explained the concept vividly and lucidly. This theory has influenced anthropology in a major way. Further, his thoughts on education, power and the role of different people in the society has also been pivotal in shaping anthropology in the 20th century. References Crehan, K. A. F. (2002). Gramsci, culture, and anthropology. Berkeley: University of California Press. Duranti, A. (2009). Linguistic anthropology: A reader. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Howell, B. M., & Paris, J. W. (2011). Introducing cultural anthropology: A Christian perspective. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. Turner, V. W., & Bruner, E. M. (1986). The Anthropology of experience. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Coutinho, C. N., & Sette-Camara, P. (2012). Gramscis political thought. Leiden: Brill. Mayo, P. (1999). Gramsci, Freire and adult education: Possibilities for transformative action. London [u.a.: Zed Books. Davidson, A. (1968). Antonio Gramsci, the man, his ideas. Sydney: Australian Left Review Publications. Read More