Social Movements and the Politicization of Chronic Poverty - Annotated Bibliography Example

Anthony Bebbington. (2007). Social Movements and the Politicization of Chronic Poverty.> In this article, Anthony Bebbington highlights how social relations and structures in which particular groups exist cause the endurance of poverty. This makes chronic to become an issue of socio-political relationships and not just mere condition resulting from lack of assets. It is for this reason that programs and campaigns for social mobility are very central to discussions regarding chronic poverty. They are the vehicle through which society engages and possibly implements policies that reverse the poverty situation. Bebbington discusses social movements as a form of social mobilization; the ways in which the movements impact in situations of chronic poverty. Firstly, social movements exert their effects on the root dynamics of the politico-economic perspective of poverty. Social movements also work to challenge the common definitions of poverty in societies, directly affect the poor in society in terms of asset distribution and engage with the states with view of addressing underlying causes of poverty. According to the author, poverty becomes chronic because it resists chance. The resistance is attributable to relationships between social and political systems which structure society on the basis of discrimination, unequal distribution of resources & opportunities in the population and the traditional wisdom of societal organization. What this means is that unless the relationships change then the chances of reversing chronic poverty are slim. Many a times, social movements do not directly work on poverty and they rarely come up as a result of existence of poverty. They actually come up as a response to the need brought about by the daily colonization of the lives of people by accumulated social inequalities. They work to challenge existing socio-political structures that tend to have the effect of producing and sustaining poverty. They therefore operate in a political terrain by attempting to challenge notions, perceptions, stereotypes and practices that are dominant. This way the debates on poverty and societal development become politicized. The war by the movements against poverty normally most of the times have some victories which are usually temporary due to the many challenges the same movements have to encounter. The concepts used by the author expand our understanding of the interlocking systems of oppression by addressing the ways in which social and political systems conspire to produce and sustain poverty in society. The only issue I think needs more unpacking in this article is how social movements can get over the many challenges that limit their success in reversing chronic poverty. The author uses the relationships between politics and social structures to explain domination & oppression that gives birth to chronic poverty. The arguments are appropriate for a political-sociology course and will that is used again because of the key concepts discussed. In this article, David Harvey discusses how neoliberalism has progressively and creatively turned destructive. It is now a hegemonic topic and is influencing our way of thought, perception of the world, political and economic as well as how we live in the world. According the author, there are very intense forces behind the current status that neoliberalism holds in society. It is a project aimed at restoring the politics of domination especially in those sectors of the economy that had been threatened by emergence of socio-democratic ideas after World War II. Somehow those in the political and classes that were affected by the politics of social mobility have hit back and taken advantage that idea that was to liberate the masses to advance the goals of discrimination, economic exclusion and domination with the effect of having the poor remain where at the bottom of the pyramid. In fact, neoliberalism as an engine for social mobility has achieved very little. Instead, it has been very successful at channeling most of the wealth to the rich. The author therefore in short is sending a message that neoliberalism has been manipulated into being a tool for the elite gaining more at the expense of the low class members of society. Neoliberalism in its original intention proposed the advancement of humanity through maximization of entrepreneurship by encouraging more participation of the private sector and minimizing government control at all costs. The state ought to just create the platform for free markets to operate effectively and as much as possible reduce public spending. The unfortunate bit is that neoliberalist practices have diverged from the template and in fact advanced the capitalistic economic politics of exclusion and this clearly in connection with the interlocking systems of oppression. Powerful nations have also taken advantage of the same to transfer wealth the poor nations so as to make them easily governable. Those occupying key positions in government, non-governmental organizations, international organizations and even the UN itself are from the elitist political class. The net effect of this is accumulated poverty at the bottom, wealth at the top being enjoyed by a few members of society and the kind of mobility we see is transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. This has paved way for social programs such as food aid programs and social movements attempting to challenge the socio-political arrangements. The main theme again in this article is politics, power, domination and oppression. The author effectively describes oppression of the poor in the article; in fact the very title “neoliberelism as a creative destruction” says it all. The concepts he discusses are at the very heart of our modern politics where the political class takes advantage the situation in the lower classes to advance their selfish agendas at the expense of liberating the poor. It is a very informative article especially for socio-political classes given the author’s authority in the field. I therefore personally recommend its continued use for class discussions in socio-political classes. In this article, James Ferguson examines the concept of neoliberalism and its manifestation in modern politics. Neoliberalism in its original meaning refers to new ideas of economic liberation which emerged in the 70s and 80s in favor of free markets, reduction of government expenditure and any other effort in support of increased economic participation of the private sector. But as it is, neoliberalism has continued widen the problem of inequality and as such is not a good idea for the workers and those at the bottom of the economic pyramid. The rich have continued to benefit at the expense of the poor and as such the much anticipated social mobility is not happening especially on the African continent where prominence continues to rise. Informal laborers majority of which are youth represent a better proportion of the populations. With elitist markets in which most of the wealth is in control of a few super rich who are not concerned about the rest of the populations neoliberalism according to the author is not actually liberating the poor. This clearly connects with interlocking systems of oppression since for as long as the poor will remain poor, they will be ruled and made subjects. As such therefore, there is a need for new approaches with the intention of elevating poverty so as to encourage social mobility. The author has discussed a number of welfare based interventions that may coexist and are actually necessarily complimentary to economic models of neoliberalism. This is because a clique of dominant groups across the world is taking advantage of neoliberalism ideas when in fact carrying out the politics of class. in this sense ‘Neoliberalism’ refers to an array of public policies that have led to the enriching of those with capital while giving birth to increased inequality, deterioration of living standards at the bottom of the pyramid, insecurity and loss of public services. In other words the political class has continued to use the term neoliberalism while in real sense referring to capitalism and the politics of oppression. The author here is saying that governments and a few extra rich persons in the business community promise social policies aimed at eliminating poverty and increasing purchasing power among the poor just for democratic reasons. Social payment programs such as the Basic Income Grants in South Africa and food aid programs by NGOs and other organizations such as the IMF & World Bank help the poor get something on the table but do not increasing their power of purchasing. in the article the author draws very fundamental arguments in relation to social policies and the politics of oppression and for this reason I think it can be used again. The article examines the effects globalization has had on nations and their relationships. According to the author the states face four threats; globalization of capitalism, environmental issues, the politics of identity and the post-nuclear geographic politics. The four elements working in together serve to increase the importance international and transnational networks with the net effect of either weakening or strengthening states in different fashions. Capitalistic transformation for instance has had a weakening effect on states in the north while economic development continues to strengthen the south. An ease in the hardcore geographical politics in the same way has weakened the north but not most of the south. The soft geopolitics seems to be everywhere giving rise to new national functions while strengthening international networks. On the contrary, the politics of identity appear to cement the politics of nations. The argument is that globalization and the growth of global networks have seemed to weaken local networks of interaction more than they had weakened national networks. This is yet another very appropriate article for socio-political classes because the concepts it discusses. Interaction between the politics of globalization, identity and the post-nuclear geopolitics has affected state and regional interactions in a number of different ways. Ultimately author talks about the politics of power and this article has very important information that significantly adds to our knowledge of the interlocking systems of oppression. Expansion of globalization for instance has allowed it to reign over local state politics and dictate the direction of international and national interactions. I would there definitely recommend its continued use in classes of sociology and politics. The author in this article takes a critical look at how sociologists for a long time have constructed their accounts in manner that seems to exclude nature. This according to Murphy has resulted from a tendency among sociologists of declining to accept biological determinism hence trending away from sociology of systems in favor of human-agency sociology. The title itself “Sociology as if Nature did not Matter,” sufficiently describes the attitude and approach taken by sociology in interpreting human behavior. Another factor influencing such attitude among sociologists is there assumption of the flexibility of human being when relating to the environment in which they live. He notes that there is an increasing awareness that social constructions unleash natural processes that are beyond the control of humans and this awareness can potentially transform sociology in a radical manner. He therefore proposes that sociology should be reconstructed to appreciate the influence of nature on social action. In a seemingly misguided thinking, sociologists hold the position that humans are exempt from the limitations of nature as a result of their exceptional characteristics. In their thought, the limits to our growth are not ecological but social. Sociologists also tend to think man is ultimately responsible for all knowledge & reality and not nature. Such positions in thought are a clear departure from science and particularly biology which holds nature is the ultimate determinant of our life and dictates the way we behave. They suspect any idea whose basis is grounded in nature and openly oppose any claim that nature influences the way we relate between ourselves and other animals in the environment. sociology of environmental issues for instance has continuously interpreted the issues as being socially constructed hence deflecting attention away from the fact environmental problems are connected to ecological changes. The author agrees to the fact that social constructions are essential but opines that unidirectional focus on them can lead to theoretic short sightedness. The issue is greater and we must understand the things share with the ecosystem in order to better understand social action. Our ecosystem plays a very important role in our behavior despite the fact that human action has significantly resulted in changes within the natural environment and for sociologists to neglect the ecosystems is a danger. The reality is that nature influences our relations and this reality can’t be reduced into a social construction as much as it interacts with our social constructions. It is total loss of direction therefore for sociologists to assume that the influence of nature is limited. Through the examination of supremacy battles and differences in opinions as held by sociologists when it comes to scientific thought the article significantly contributes to our knowledge of the interlocking systems of oppression. Sociology for instance appears to hold a different opinion from science when it comes to reality such as nature’s influence on human interactions. it is a very important article that can really expand the thinking of sociology and politics students and hence I would recommend it for use again in socio-political classes. Read More