Skip to main content

Posts

Scientific Discourse on Culture Continued

As noted in ths history of colonial Empires, the language and methodology of "science" have often been used to systematically turn human beings into populations to be studied and scripted, into subjects of interventions, as passive objects to be examined through the methodology of the scientist. The collection of systematic processes has in such instances been set in motion in order to precisely carry out the colonial project through the generation of knowledge. The ways in which knowledge has been produced have been intrinsically connected with the uses of such knowledge to perpetuate the oppression and exploitation of the subaltern classes, simultaneously keeping the subaltern sectors of the globe out of the discursive spaces of the mainstream. It is in this very backdrop that the native is once again silenced because she is told that she can't participate unless she trains with the masters, uses their tools, and speaks their language. The legitimacy of science is used ...

The double bind of culture

Just heard of one of these social scientists (who is known for making blanket statements) making some claim in a class that "there is no such thing as culture." This bright young mind (who truly believes he is a scientist in a lab coat and can measure things like skin color to predict social behavior) noted that culture doesn't exist because it can't be defined. In terms of epistemology, this raises a vital question regarding how social scientists think of the legitimacy of the science they do: To the extent they can define something, lay it out (they call it operationalization), and come to an agreement about it (which is mostly some privileged white men and women sitting around a table/journal/conference panel/review panel), the thing comes to existence. So from this standpoint, having some privilege and then using the privilege to come to an agreement is what constitutes the valdity of a concept. What I find insightful in this logic is the agenda of neocolonial...

Spaces of Enunciation

The return of orientalist frames within the multicultural academe that emphasizes the need for mapping out other cultures in order to generate profits for TNCs is played out in the form of the mushrooming of "culture experts" across university campuses. These "culture experts" use the language of cultural sensitivity and multiculturalism to serve an industry of orientalist politics with neocolonial agendas. With the increasing emphasis on culture across the academic disciplines, there is a growing turf war about the legitimacy of who gets to participate in this enunciative politics and in the politics of representation. Who gets to be the one that is doing the "representing?" First, it is worth noting that much of this turf war is situated within the terrains of West-centrism as Western scholars find themselves amidst a situation where they now have to make justifications in order to maintain the privilege embedded in their enunciative position amidst this...

Engaging Structures

One of the key elements of the CCA is the concept of structure (Dutta, 2008). Structures refer to forms of social organization that create as well as constrain access to a wide range of resources. These resources not only include basic necessities such as food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, education etc., but also the communication infrastructures necessary to participate in the dominant public spheres. Based on empirical evidence documented in health communication scholarship for instance, the CCA notes the correspondence between the absence of communication infrastructures and the lack of health infrastructures. These correlations narrate an underlying economic dimension where being poor gets constituted in the realm of being unable to secure access to a plethora of resources necessary for life. Having noted this economic base of structures then, CCA raises questions about the role that communication scholars could play in challenging and transforming structures. In other words, no...

Feminism, Afghanistan and Imperialism

One of my earlier blogs talks about US intervention in Aghanistan and the earlier support for Taliban offered by the US. This blog continues that conversation thread further. One of my students is studying the portrayals of "freeing Afghan women" that circulated in the US media during the US intervention in Afghanistan, further exploring the ways in which women in/from the Middle East construct, participate in and resist these images. In recounting a story of one of her interviews, she shared with me how a feminist scholar from the Middle East discarded postcolonial theory, stating that "Afghanistan really is backward. They don't even have a railway system." This statement stayed with me the entire evening, and here I am posting this message after much thought. When I begin with the notion, what really is backward, I also have to ask myself who gets to define the discursive frame of advanced/backward. The dominant logic of Western empires have historically scrip...

Neoliberal trade

As we wrap up our discussions of the culture-centered approach, I am drawn to the question of the role of dominant social institutions (academia, funding agencies, global agencies, NGOs) as tools for neoliberal trade. The other day, I found myself in the midst of this meeting where the people assembled were talking about how there is a lot of funding now for doing things related to poverty and inequality. What struck me was the dishonesty of the conversation. Poverty now has become a hot topic area that could draw a lot of funding. So the same people who were running after these other things when the wind was blowing in another direction are now running after poverty because this is fundable. What I find problematic here is not that academics/agencies etc. have now become interested in issues of poverty (in fact, this could be a great thing), but rather what is disconcerting to me is the mercenary logic underlying the renewed emphasis on poverty. And what lies this mercenary logic is ...

Why I won't shut up.

No I am not going to shut up And pretend That I agree with Whatever it is That you Shove down my throat. No I am not going to shut up And sing praise to your cross and white coat and Whatever it is That you Want me to memorize. No I am not going to shut up And sing Praises for Whatever it is That you Throw at me as aid.