Definitions fromThe Social Science Encyclopedia Hande Işık METU ID 501 Literature Review March 8th, 2012
Outline• Social Mobility• Capitalism Economics• Political Economy Government and Politics• Centre and Periphery• Power
Social Mobility• Social mobility can be classified as: – Vertical mobility: The movement of individuals and groups up or down the socioeconomic scale. Those who gain in property, income, status, and position are said to be upwardly mobile, while those who move in the opposite direction are downwardly mobile. – Horizontal mobility: The movement of individuals and groups in similar socio-economic positions, which may be in different work situations. This may involve change in occupation or remaining in the same occupation but in a different organization, or may be in the same organization but at a different location. – Lateral mobility: It is a geographical movement between neighborhoods, towns or regions. *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility
• N. American scientists interested in how individuals take up positions in the vertical hierarchy by material advantage, achievement. – Social structure for white males (except females and black males )• European scientists consider life-chances and degree of class consciousness of collectivities to predict whether this aggregates are likely to undertake class action. – They ask whether mobility disrupts class solidarity and induces alienation one sort or another
• USA – Ease of upward movement in 19th century prevented socialist movement. – N. American 20th century mobility is asymmetric as USA changed from a rural to urban society • No more mobility in US than Europe • Correlation between education and social standing (1960) • IQ is a predictor of educational achievement and education • Middle class Americans moved down into working class • Farmer sons moved up into middle class – In USA there is very great discrepancies • Pluralistic society
Capitalism• A particular system of socioeconomic organization• Sombart, Weber, Tawney – Relate changes in economic organization to shifts in religious and ethical attitudes. – The essence of capitalism in the acquisitive spirit of profit- making enterprise and focused on developments occurring in the 16, 17 and early 18th centuries.• Historians perspective: Reaching its fullest development in the course of the Industrial Revolution as part of a long transition from feudalism. – Evolution of capitalism • Merchant capitalism, agrarian capitalism, industrial capitalism and state capitalism
Emergence of Capitalism• Wallerstein – World-economy perspective, located origins in the European agrarian capitalism of 16-18th centuries.• Tribe – Original mode of capitalist production, the essence of capitalism in a national economy where production is separated from consumption and is co-ordinated according to the profitability of enterprises operating in competition with each other.
Marxist View• Karl Marx (1867–94), systematic analysis of the ‘economic law of motion’ – ‘Mode of production’ in which there are basically two classes of producers: • The capitalists, who own the means of production (capital or land), make the strategic day-to-day economic decisions on technology, output and marketing, and appropriate the profits of production and distribution; • The labourers, who own no property but are free to dispose of their labour for wages on terms which depend on the numbers seeking work and the demand for their services.• It is primarily the emergence of a dominant class of entrepreneurs supplying the capital necessary to activate a substantial body of workers.
Historical Progress• Aftermath of WW2 – Developed countries took full employment and faster economic growth as objectives of national economic policy. – Capitalist economy governments intervened in the process of production. – Western economists changed balance of private and public economic power, ‘mixed’ capitalist economies converged towards socialism.• Late 1960s and 1970s – Marxist economists pointed out ‘crisis of capitalism’ for which they found evidence in rising unemployment and inflation in capitalist countries. – Non-Marxist economists were hostile to state intervention; they believed in free private enterprise as the key to sustained technological progress which was weakened by socialist economic policies.
Other Views• Post-WW2 debates – Economic development regard the emergence of ‘capitalist spirit’ as an essential prerequisite to the process of sustained economic growth in non-socialist countries.• Economic historians – Emphasize the rational, profit-maximizing, double bookkeeping characteristics of capitalist enterprise.• Modern debate – Advanced economies has revolved around its being an alternative to socialism. – Marxist economists follow Marx in seeing capitalism as a mode of production whose internal contradictions determine that it will eventually be replaced by socialism.
Political Economy• The measures taken by governments to regulate trade, exchange, money and taxes (economic policy).• Jevons and Alfred Marshall – ‘Economies’ had for the most part replaced ‘political economy’ by the end of the 19th century• Engels (1843) argued that favoring competition and free trade, by not questioning private property, was guilty of covering up the fact that capitalism necessarily led to social and economic evils.
Marxist View• Marx and Engels believed that political economy as a science arose alongside capitalism: – Exploitative nature of pre-capitalist economic systems was transparent, they did not require a science to explain them, merely an ideology (religion) to legitimize them; but, since the nature of capitalist exploitation was opaque (being hidden behind the veil of money and market relations), it needed its own economic science (political economy) to reveal it.• For Marx, a truly scientific political economy must study not only exchange but also the nature of production and labor. – Vulgar economics concealed capitalist exploitation by treating all relations as exchange; it was, therefore, an ideology rather than a science. – The distinction between (scientific) political economy and (vulgar) economics has been a constant in critical, and especially Marxist, economic thinking.
Historical Progress• Since 1980, political economy has partly lost its association with Marxism. • Although political economy expressed a renewed interest in the questions and methods of the classical economics and of Marx, the use of the term became increasingly loose, often simply denoting non-economic (political) factors.• In these ways the distinction between political economy and economics is becoming more blurred. The term has also undergone a number of mutations. – Political economy is being used to connote the economic and political characteristics of a particular place (country, city, region). • European political economy
Centre and Periphery• Attempt to – Explain the processes in which capitalism is able to affect the economic and political structure of underdeveloped or developing societies. – Analyse the processes of capitalist surplus extraction• Assumes: – Central capitalist countries • There is a high organic composition of capital, and wage levels approximate the cost of reproducing labour. – Peripheral countries • There is a low organic composition of capital, and wages are likely to be low, hardly meeting the cost of reproducing labour.• Underdevelopment is the result of contradictions within capitalist production relations at the centre.
Studies on centre and periphery: – Production of exchange relations – Relations or articulations between different modes of production• The concept of the semi-periphery – Brazil, Argentina and Mexico – Particular political cultures and the mixed nature of their industrialization places these countries in a buffer position.
Power• Disagreed on definition. – Different forms of power (such as influence, coercion and control) – Different uses of power (such as individual or community ends, political ends and economic ends)• It is not clear if it refers to: – A property of an agent (or system), – A relationship between agents (or systems) – Potential or a resource• 1950’s conflicting power-elite theories – Power as a form of domination exercised by one group over another in the presence of fundamental conflicts of interests; • Power as a relationship in which one side prevailed over the other. – Structural-functionalism which saw power as the ‘generalized capacity of a social system to get things done in the interests of collective goals • Power as a systems property, as a capacity to achieve ends
Luke’s Analysis on Power• A affects B contrary to B’s real interests— where B’s interests may not be obtainable A B in the form of held preferences, but where they can be stated in terms of the Contrary to B’s preferences B would hold in a situation real interest where B exercises autonomous judgement.
Views on Power• No distinction between A’s intended and unintended effects on B; nor does it restrict A B the term power to a particular set of effects Non-intentional which A has on B. Power, an ineradicable logic of social feature of all social relations, while it makes dynamics no presumption that being affected by. • Power as force, influence, education, socialization and ideology.• A exercises power over B when A affects B in a manner contrary to B’s preferences, interests, needs. No requirement that A A B affect B intentionally, nor that A could have Identifying foreseen the effect on B. victims on • A social class to realize its specific objective power interest
Views on Power(Cont’d)• Attributes power only when A intends to affect B, but which does not place any restrictions on the A B manner in which A affects B, switches the focus from A’s power over B to A’s power to achieve Agents’ ability to certain ends. bring out desired consequence • Force, persuasion, manipulation, influence, threats, offers, strategic positioning• A gets B to do something A wants which B would not otherwise do. Getting B to do something that B would not otherwise do may involve mobilizing A B commitments or activating obligations, and it is Intentional action common to refer to such compliance as secured and significant through authority. We may also be able to get B to effects do something by changing B’s interpretation of a situation • Influence, persuasion, manipulation, physical restraint, force
1st View 2nd View 3rd View 4th View Neutral analysis of the Powerlessness Prediction and Model or theory strategic but non- and dependency explanation of building intentional logic of social action dynamics• Each definition satisfies different interests, produces different results.