...
首页> 外文期刊>Erdkunde >'WE MAY BE IN THE SLUM, BUT THE SLUM IS NOT IN US!') ZUR KRITIK KULTURALISTISCHER ARGUMENTATIONEN AM BEISPIEL DER UNDERCLASS-DEBATTE
【24h】

'WE MAY BE IN THE SLUM, BUT THE SLUM IS NOT IN US!') ZUR KRITIK KULTURALISTISCHER ARGUMENTATIONEN AM BEISPIEL DER UNDERCLASS-DEBATTE

机译:“我们可能在贫民窟,但我们不在贫民窟!”)关于使用下层辩论对文化主义者论点的批评

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

"We may be in the slum, but the slum is not in us!" Culturalism and the underclass-debate: a critique. 'Culture' is back on the agenda in German geography. Although this development was partly triggered by the import of concepts from Anglo-American 'new cultural geography', one of the most important strands of this literature is practically absent from the debate: the contributions of radical geographers grounded in historical-materialist social theory. As a consequence, it is argued that a fundamental critique of the ideological functioning of culturalist argumentations is still missing. The article proposes such a critique in two parts. First, the structure of culturalism is criticized for being both tautological, explaining 'cultural phenomena' with 'culture', and ideological in that it abstracts from the political nature of social phenomena by treating them as 'cultural'. The task of a radical cultural geography that follows from this critique is to ask: who argues culturalistically and why? Second, the functioning of the culturalist ideology is illustrated by revisiting the contributions by MURRAY (1984), WILSON (1987) and ANDERSON (1999) to the US-American 'underclass-debate'. All three approaches, it is argued, abstract from the socioeconomic reasons for the existence of Afro-American ghettos in US cities by treating them, in different ways, as 'cultural' phenomena. In doing so, all three authors play into the hands, willingly or not, of neoliberal pauperization policies.
机译:“我们可能在贫民窟里,但贫民窟不在我们里面!”文化主义与下层阶级的辩论:一种批评。 “文化”又回到了德国地理学的议程。尽管这种发展在一定程度上是由英美“新文化地理”概念的引入所引发的,但实际上,辩论中却缺少该文学最重要的一环:基于历史唯物主义社会理论的激进地理学家的贡献。结果,有人认为对文化主义论证的意识形态功能的基本批判仍然缺失。本文分两部分提出了这样的批评。首先,批评文化主义的结构既是重言式的,用“文化”解释“文化现象”,又是意识形态的结构,因为它通过将社会现象视为“文化”而从社会现象的政治本质中抽象出来。源自这种批评的激进文化地理学的任务是要问:谁在文化上争论,为什么?第二,重新审视了文化主义意识形态的功能,这是MURRAY(1984),WILSON(1987)和ANDERSON(1999)对美式“下层阶级辩论”的贡献。有人认为,这三种方法都是通过以不同的方式将它们视为“文化”现象来抽象化美国城市中存在非裔美国人居住的贫民窟的社会经济原因。这样,所有三位作者都愿意或不愿意参与新自由主义的减贫政策。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号