Mohan Dutta: Culture-Centered Approach

Figure 1: The #NoSingaporeansLeftBehind campaign created by families living in poverty in Singapore Across culture-centered interventions, the co-creation of voice infrastructures in partnership with communities living in poverty results in the ownership of decision-making processes in the hands of the poor. When the poor own the communicative platforms, make decisions on these platforms based on information they seek out in partnership with community organizations and researchers, and own the frameworks of evaluating the interventions they develop, the nature and quality of decisions become anchored in their everyday lives. As opposed to experts from the outside making decisions that are not grounded in the lived experiences of the poor, the culture-centered interventions developed and owned by the poor address the various underlying conditions causing poverty by being created by the poor. That experts often make decisions based on poorly informed, empirically empty ideolog

"No Singaporean Left Behind" (NSLB) campaign in Singapore Between 2012 and 2018, the Center for Culture-Centered Approach to Research and Evaluation (CARE) was housed at the National University of Singapore. Based on the theoretical framework of the culture-centered approach (CCA)  (Dutta, 2008), that conceptualizes communicative inequalities, inequalities in distribution of communicative opportunities, as intrinsically tied to structural inequalities, inequalities in the distribution of material resources, the Center co-created an array of communication interventions in partnership with communities at the margins in Singapore, India, Bangladesh, China, Philippines, Malaysia, and Indonesia.  Culture-centered interventions build voice infrastructures for the margins based on the theoretical argument that the erasure of voice infrastructures forms the basis of marginalization. The impact of these interventions are evident in the creation of material resources that

In what is a watershed moment in Communication Studies, recent conversations on what constitute diversity and excellence have created an opening for articulations of the problem of racism in the discipline. That Communication Studies as a discipline has historically operated on and reproduced racist norms emerged as the site of organizing. The long-hidden racist codes of the discipline, which so many of us at the margins struggled against and were all too aware of in our individual struggles, became visible. The intuition that disciplinary and sub-disciplinary awards, modes of recognition, and pathways for progress are racist was crystallized in the sudden-visibility of documents that have otherwise been hidden behind opaque structures and processes meant to evaluate merit. The normative constructions of Whiteness that are systematically written into the everyday structures of the discipline, tucked away under the polite language of diversity and inclusion, were rendered vis

Special Section of First Amendment Studies Race, coloniality & free speech Guest Editors: Anjali Vats and Mohan Dutta Full manuscripts Due: January 20, 2020 In this special focus on “Race, Coloniality, and Free Speech” in First Amendment Studies we seek 2,500-3,000 word manuscripts that interrogate the racial and colonial structures that animate free speech, including connections between free speech and Whiteness and the ways in which these connections are deployed in academia to protect and perpetuate racist hate. We also invite submissions that theorize frameworks for resisting the Whiteness of free speech.  We are particularly interested in essays that push us to think about the intersections between race, coloniality, and free speech differently, using new and evolving theories drawn from critical race studies, ethnic studies, cultural studies, decolonial theory, and so on, at a national and/or international level. While we welcome critical legal perspectives o

(Note: The generalizable threads in this piece can apply to a wide range of totalitarian power operating globally. The consolidation of totalitarian power as a global trend often works under the veneer of fighting corruption, as we see in the recent instance of the rise of fascist totalitarianism of Bolsonaro in Brazil through the elite deployment of techniques of fighting corruption) Totalitarian power consolidates its control and keeps intact its power through a variety of techniques of disciplinary performance. These disciplinary techniques of performance are given the appearance on the surface of a commitment to cleanliness, of good governance. You hear terms such as "clean governance," "transparency," and "accountability," that prop up the regime's disciplinary techniques as methods to monitor, control, and check corruption. The articulation of corruption becomes a communicative tool that is deployed by power, as the rationale for fo

The ideology of Whiteness excludes by delineating its boundaries, marking the "other" as the outside of these boundaries, as an inferior category that is not yet human. Setting up its own rules for what counts and how, Whiteness then goes on to circulate its hegemonic form through the active exclusion of the other. Turning these rules into universals, Whiteness ensures it perpetuates its hegemony. These hegemonic logics of Whiteness reproduce themselves within postcolonial contexts. After all, the technique of marking the other as inferior that enabled the White master to rule also serves colonial rule by postcolonial elites. These postcolonial elites are descendants of the local elite class in the colonies that collaborated with the colonizer in running the imperial projects. The god-granted privilege of these elites to rule over the popular other is intrinsically tied to their continual production of the other as inferior, lacking, backward, traditional. The figure

Totalitarian control thrives on the totality of power over every space of articulation. In turn, totalitarian control is intrinsic to the reproduction of absolute power. Power works through every corner of totalitarian societies, from the schools and universities in such societies, to work spaces, to neighborhoods, to homes. The effect of power is felt at the cellular level, in the everyday being of life in the regime. Totalitarian control is exercised not only through direct tools of repression, but also through various everyday norms that constitute interactions. One such form of normative control exercised in totalitarian systems is in the threat to reputation. The threat to reputation works to keep intact the practices of the regime, without questions or criticisms. Any criticism of the system and/or its corrupt processes can be controlled by attacking the reputation of the person raising the criticism. Such forms of attacks on reputation can work powerfully to silen