Denaturalizing Dispossession: Critical Ethnography in the Age of Resurgent Imperialism
Denaturalizing Dispossession: Critical Ethnography in the Age of Resurgent Imperialism
复制标题
非自然化的剥夺：帝国主义复兴时代的批判民族志
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
G. Hart
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
G. Hart
批判民族志和关系比较的方法为重新配置区域研究以挑战帝国主义的世界观提供了工具;为阐明宪法，连接和断开的权力负载过程提供了工具;并为识别滑动，开口，矛盾和联盟的可能性提供了工具。对这个项目至关重要的是列斐伏烈的空间生产概念。在发展这些论点时，本文还介入了最近关于所谓的“原始积累”是一个持续过程的讨论。它通过研究南非和东亚之间的联系来做到这一点，并利用这些关系比较来强调具体种族化形式的剥夺及其对南非目前正在进行的斗争的重要性。这些例子强调了批判性民族志和关系比较是如何为“走向具体”提供了一种至关重要的手段--在这个意义上，具体的概念足以应对他们试图解决的复杂性。
Critical ethnographies and methods of relational comparison provide tools for reconfiguring area studies to challenge imperial visions of the world; for illuminating power-laden processes of constitution, connection, and disconnection; and for identifying slippages, openings, contradictions, and possibilities for alliances. Crucial to this project are Lefebvrian conceptions of the production of space. In developing these arguments, this essay also intervenes in recent discussions of so-called “primitive accumulation” as an ongoing process. It does so by drawing on research into connections between South Africa and East Asia, and using these relational comparisons to highlight the significance of specifically racialized forms of dispossession and their salience to struggles currently underway in South Africa. These examples underscore how critical ethnography and relational comparison provide a crucial means for “advancing to the concrete”—in the sense of concrete concepts that are adequate to the complexity with which they are seeking to grapple.