Responses to Discrimination and Social Resilience Under Neoliberalism

Lamont, Michèle; Welburn, Jessica S.; Fleming, Crystal M.

doi:10.1017/cbo9781139542425.009

Cited by 43 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Instead of finding fault in a work with which I am largely in agreement, I take this opportunity to initiate a dialogue between Wimmer's perspective and my own recent efforts to contribute to a sociology of inequality that is focused on fundamental cultural processes grounded in classification and the production of group boundaries -processes that I have been studying through my work on evaluation (Lamont 2009(Lamont , 2012 and stigmatization (e.g. Lamont, Welburn, and Fleming 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflections inspired byEthnic Boundary Making: Institutions, Power, Networksby Andreas Wimmer

Lamont¹

2014

Ethnic and Racial Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay engages with Wimmer's Ethnic Boundary Making to consider how cultural processes feed into inequality. It describes the strengths of the book, relates it to my early work, and draws on Lamont, Beljean, and Clair (forthcoming), to describe two types of identification processes (racialization and stigmatization) and two types of rationalization processes (standardization and evaluation) that contribute to an understanding of the relationship between symbolic and social boundaries. It stresses similarities and differences between approaches and suggests possible points for convergence.Ethnic Boundary Making: Institutions, Power, Networks (Wimmer 2013) has the makings of a classic. The author takes on a vast and important topic, provides a bold and ambitious theoretical agenda, and engages in theory development by convincingly confronting his hypotheses with data of various kinds. As he goes along, he explains the implications of his findings for a wide range of theories and debates in sociology and beyond, and thus demonstrates the significance of these findings. The result is impressive because of Wimmer's mastery of American and European literature from various fields, his encyclopedic knowledge of ethnic group composition and differentiation from around the globe, and his ability to use new statistical techniques to establish empirical patterns of group cohesion, differentiation and boundary work.One of the many theoretical contributions of the book is its presentation (in chapter three) of a broad typology of boundary changes, which appears to apply to all configurations possible. This is followed by another more elaborate typological analysis in chapter four that discusses the conditions that help us predict boundary work (with a focus on the institutions, power and networks singled out in the title of the book). The theoretical generativity of the analysis, and its wide applicability to fundamental sociological questions, are simply remarkable.Wimmer's focus on the making of groupness (and more specifically, ethno-national groupness) shares much with my own work on boundaries and classification, from its insistence on not predefining the categories through which individuals self-identify. Indeed, this is precisely the inductive approach that I used in Money, Morals and Manners (Lamont 1992) and The Dignity of Working Men (Lamont 2000), where I asked professionals, managers and workers to produce boundary work in the context of interviews -that is, to describe who they feel similar and different from, inferior and superior, and so on -so as to tap where they draw lines and what criteria they use to draw such lines. The conclusion of Money, Morals and Manners opened up the question

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflections inspired byEthnic Boundary Making: Institutions, Power, Networksby Andreas Wimmer

Lamont¹

2014

Ethnic and Racial Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, in recent years, students of social movements have become increasingly interested in "sustainable community movement organizations" (Forno and Graziano 2014), new collective initiatives which empower consumer and producer networks on a smaller scale, thereby pointing to economic outcomes of those organizations. Kousis and Paschou (2017) note scholars have focused on a wide range of actions which can be subsumed under the heading of the solidarity economy (Laville 2010), including solidary bartering (Fernández Mayo, 2009), local exchange trading schemes (Granger, Wringe, and Andrews 2010), local and alternative currencies (North 2007), ethical banks (Tischer 2013), local market cooperatives (Phillips 2012), cooperatives for the supply of social services, such as in health and education (Costa et al 2012), alternative forms of production (Corrado 2010), critical consumption (Fonte 2013), spontaneous actions of resistance and reclaim (Dalakoglou 2012), and the reproduction of cultural knowledge via oral and artistic expression (Lamont, Welburn, and Fleming 2013).…”

Section: Changing Market Rules and Practices In The Social Spherementioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Outcomes of Social Movements

Giugni¹,

Grasso²

2018

The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Social Movements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In his theory of the state as expressed in the Philosophy of Right, Hegel relegated the market to the sphere of civil society-or "the system of needs"-as separate from both the family, as a private institution, and the state, as politics and the site of " ethical life." He regarded civil society and the market as forming a sphere of social life where individuals were set against each other in egoistic terms, each searching to fulfill their own needs and desires. An initial theoretical problem in discussing the economic outcomes of social movements is thus: To what extent and in what sense can social movement action in the sphere of politics change or impact the economic sphere? Recent scholarship looks at how social movements bring contentiousness to the market and how they might bring about market change (

show abstract

“…This consensus notwithstanding, there are disagreements among scholars on how to label and problematize aspects of this proposition. Some scholars propose “cultural repertoire” (Lamont, Welburn, and Fleming ), “temporal regime of processuality” (Juntunen and Hyvönen ), or “antecedent condition” (Ancelovici ), while others embrace the general label “context” (Bourbeau ). This third proposition also accepts that the meanings of the shocks and critical junctures in the face of which resilient strategies are elaborated are socially constructed.…”

Section: The Premises Of Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The central hypothesis in the field is currently that myths and collective imaginaries often stand in a mutually reinforcing relationship with policies promoting resilience (Bouchard ; Lamont et al. ). Whereas myths and symbols are the anchoring devices by which agents convince other citizens of the validity of their own interpretation of a particular event, resilience may be the key vector to explain how a particular understanding can gain an enduring logic of its own, thereby contributing to a better understanding of the seeming endlessness and intractability of a conflict.…”

Section: Opportunities and Challenges Of A Resilience Research Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilience and International Politics: Premises, Debates, Agenda

Bourbeau

2015

Int Stud Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resilience has gained substantial traction in international politics of late. This scholarship has sparked debates concerning the meaning of resilience and how scholars should go about studying it. Scholars attuned to Michel Foucault's governmentality thesis argue that resilience is a product of contemporary neoliberalism and constitutes a strategy permitting states to abdicate responsibility in times of crisis. The overarching objective of this article is to tell a different sociopolitical story of the connections between resilience and international politics. In mapping International Relations (IR) scholars working on resilience, the gist of the argument presented here is that although resilience may be in some instances a neoliberal device for governance, it has a wider range of meanings as well. By setting out a different narrative of resilience, this article opens the possibility of an analysis that sees the emergence of resilience in international politics holding great promise for renewing and deepening current IR debates, including securitization, international interventions, vulnerability, resistance, and the political use of myth.

show abstract

Responses to Discrimination and Social Resilience Under Neoliberalism

Cited by 43 publications

References 38 publications

Reflections inspired byEthnic Boundary Making: Institutions, Power, Networksby Andreas Wimmer

Reflections inspired byEthnic Boundary Making: Institutions, Power, Networksby Andreas Wimmer

Economic Outcomes of Social Movements

Resilience and International Politics: Premises, Debates, Agenda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About