Garantie de satisfaction à 100% Disponible immédiatement après paiement En ligne et en PDF Tu n'es attaché à rien
logo-home
The Politics of Difference Readings Summary €6,99   Ajouter au panier

Resume

The Politics of Difference Readings Summary

 58 vues  4 achats
  • Cours
  • Établissement

Extensive summary of all readings of the course alongside a summarizing table of all authors and their main topic/arguement for the Politics of Difference UvA course

Aperçu 2 sur 10  pages

  • 19 mars 2023
  • 10
  • 2022/2023
  • Resume
avatar-seller

Questions d'entraînement disponibles

Fiches 31 Fiches
€5,49 0 vendus

Quelques exemples de cette série de questions pratiques

1.

The politics of difference

Réponse: How power and political institutions categorize people into groups and how this generates inequality

2.

The public sphere

Réponse: A communicative realm to discuss and the debate common interest and government where the force of the better argument wins (coercion is absent), participants need to leave their status and identities behind to discuss as equals

3.

Confirmation Bias

Réponse: Tendency to privilege new information that aligns with priorly held beliefs

4.

Communicative Public Sphere

Réponse: Adds to the public sphere discourse (practical purpose, logic, manner) aspects that make it possible to include groups which traditionally speak in a less “pure objectivity” manner (greeting, rhetoric, storytelling). Difference is at the center of the democratic debate

5.

Functionalist account of the State

Réponse: Focus on the role the state plays/has (policy, wars, health care..), defines the state as the actor with the monopoly of violence

6.

Migration

Réponse: Any person who changes his or her country of usual residence (excludes rural-urban migrants, tourism, business travel, repatriation, pilgrimage)

7.

Integration

Réponse: A dynamic, two-way process of mutual accommodation by all immigrants and residents of EU member states (excludes nationals of other member states, rural-urban migrants, political and cultural extremists)

8.

Return

Réponse: The movement of a person going from a host country back to a country of origin, nationality or habitual residence. Usually after spending a significant period of time in the host country whether voluntary, forced, assisted or spontaneous. This includes children born in the host state, refugees from countries now deemed safe and stateless people.

9.

r greater than g

Réponse: Return on capital is greater than growth in output, the capital owner will get richer as wealth reproduces itself thus widening income inequality

10.

Race in Quijano

Réponse: A mental category, product of colonialism, created to explain the relationship between conquering and conquered populations. It is composed of biology + culture, and is inherently hierarchical

Young (1996) Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy
Deliberative democracy is a model usually proposed against an interest-based model of
democracy. Young critiques deliberative democracy and proposes an expanded conception
of democratic communication.

Interest-based democracy model: democracy is considered primarily as a process of
expressing one’s preferences and demands, and registering them in a vote. The goal of
democratic decision making is to decide what leaders, rules, and policies will best serve the
greatest number of people and the individual’s personal interests.

Deliberative democracy model: democracy is conceived as a process that creates a public,
where citizens come together to discuss collective problems, goals, ideals and actions.
Instead of being from the point of view of the private utility maximizer, citizens transform their
preferences according to public-minded ends through public deliberation.

Young’s critique of deliberative democracy
1. Democratic discussion is seen only as “critical argument”, thus assuming a culturally
biased conception of discussions that silences and devalues certain people and
groups who do not conform traditionally to that form of argument-making
2. Deliberative theorists assume that processes of discussion that aim to reach
understanding must either begin with shared understandings or take common good
as their goal.

Young’s proposal for an expanded conception of democratic communication inserts new
components to argumentation in the public sphere:
1. Greeting
2. Rhetoric
3. Storytelling
Difference is a resource for polities and narrative communication helps foster it more than
pure objectivity.


Bennet and Livingston (2020) A brief history of disinformation age
Disinformation: intentional falsehoods or distortions, often spread as news, to advance
political goals such as discrediting opponents, disrupting policy debates, influencing voters,
inflaming existing social conflicts, or creating a general backdrop of confusion and
informational paralysis.
Disinformation has become a growingly important problem in the public sphere both for
democracies and illiberal democracies as well as many other nations.

The paper argues that at the core of the current disinformation disorder lies a crisis of
legitimacy of authoritative institutions. Systemic crises have created an opportunity for
radical ideas to enter politics and create issues in the public sphere and information.
These issues are:
- Confirmation Bias: tendency to privilege information aligned with prior beliefs
- Disconfirmation bias: same idea, but from the other direction

, - People are not isolated information processors: they look for trusted information from
their social networks and participate in the production of large volumes of disruptive
content as they exist within a community
- We cannot fit old political communication model to the current technological era
The solution is: repairing the basic functioning of democratic institutions themselves by
finding ways to restore more representative and responsive parties, elections and
government, and to reinvent a press that could aid this goal.


Habermas and Taylor (2011) Dialogue
This paper is a debate between the two authors on the topic of religion within the public
sphere.
Habermas believes in translation
● Religious speech and religious arguments are not admissible in the political sphere
unless they can be translated into secular terms. Otherwise, they are inaccessible.
Religious thinking is
○ Exclusive/Difficult to rely: it makes it hard to have a communicative dialogue
○ Uses Allegorical reasoning: X is good because this story says it is, thus you
need to believe in the story to get to the point
○ Uses Ritual reasoning: X is good because my community says it is. This
makes it inaccessible to those not members of the faith. It requires a
conversation that can be had only by individuals who are committed to the
community.
● The public sphere is a constructed realm where people should leave their identities
behind before entering discussion

Taylor believes in shared spirituality and finds a place for religion in the public sphere
● Spirituality and religion is relevant, thus there is a need for it to have a space in the
public sphere


Mahmood (2001) Feminist Theory, Embodiment, and the docile agent: some
reflections on the Egyptian islamic revival.
From a case study of muslim women in egypt, the paper argues for an emic approach to
religion in the public sphere (Emic: from the inside)



Malkki (1992) “National Geographic: the rooting of peoples and the territorialization of
national identity among scholars and refugees”
How did we come to think of the world’s population as divided into national populations
which are bound to specific territorial units?
● The category of refugees and their displacement is constructed differently from the
way people construct their idea of homeland and nation.
● Space and Place are sociopolitical constructions.
Metaphorically, people are rooted like trees
● Arborescent roots metaphor to describe belonging to a country/nation

Les avantages d'acheter des résumés chez Stuvia:

Qualité garantie par les avis des clients

Qualité garantie par les avis des clients

Les clients de Stuvia ont évalués plus de 700 000 résumés. C'est comme ça que vous savez que vous achetez les meilleurs documents.

L’achat facile et rapide

L’achat facile et rapide

Vous pouvez payer rapidement avec iDeal, carte de crédit ou Stuvia-crédit pour les résumés. Il n'y a pas d'adhésion nécessaire.

Focus sur l’essentiel

Focus sur l’essentiel

Vos camarades écrivent eux-mêmes les notes d’étude, c’est pourquoi les documents sont toujours fiables et à jour. Cela garantit que vous arrivez rapidement au coeur du matériel.

Foire aux questions

Qu'est-ce que j'obtiens en achetant ce document ?

Vous obtenez un PDF, disponible immédiatement après votre achat. Le document acheté est accessible à tout moment, n'importe où et indéfiniment via votre profil.

Garantie de remboursement : comment ça marche ?

Notre garantie de satisfaction garantit que vous trouverez toujours un document d'étude qui vous convient. Vous remplissez un formulaire et notre équipe du service client s'occupe du reste.

Auprès de qui est-ce que j'achète ce résumé ?

Stuvia est une place de marché. Alors, vous n'achetez donc pas ce document chez nous, mais auprès du vendeur cremalkiacremalkia. Stuvia facilite les paiements au vendeur.

Est-ce que j'aurai un abonnement?

Non, vous n'achetez ce résumé que pour €6,99. Vous n'êtes lié à rien après votre achat.

Peut-on faire confiance à Stuvia ?

4.6 étoiles sur Google & Trustpilot (+1000 avis)

73314 résumés ont été vendus ces 30 derniers jours

Fondée en 2010, la référence pour acheter des résumés depuis déjà 14 ans

Commencez à vendre!
€6,99  4x  vendu
  • (0)
  Ajouter