Political anthropology

29-09-16

Three major themes, firstly, the state. The state is a cultural idea, also a reality. But in the first place a
set of practices. Just like cultures. Then we will focus on violence, important issues in every society,
and also connected to the state (= legitimate monopoly on forces, on violence). Then we will see
local strategies of resistance, for example witchcraft. We can think it’s confined to society in Africa
but we also have here certain forms of it.

Notions of the state are shapes by cultures. See Calendar. One important thing is to problematized
the notion of state, Western hegemony, etc. A more general idea. Next week we will talk about
borders, which are not especially at the outside, but also on the inside, between several class of
citizens. Borders serves to exclude others, refugees, migrants, etc.

And one of the point is that development and the state are different. Only effect that development
results in.

See the paper (see Toledo). Before handing you should give an abstract of what you will do. Send the
abstract before September 8. 2 things you need to do before ending your abstract. Deadline for the
final paper (see Toledo).

2 really important things. Very intolerant to plagiarism. Use three texts from the course. Use a
research question. It means that you must formulate what is your paper going to be about.

The state:
Perhaps a bit strange that anthropologist speaks about the state. Idea to look at “primitives”
societies. But still we have many things to say about how things are going in the West. What we will
see today and next week is how the state will be experienced. Ordinary people do not distinguish
between government or state.

The state is, as such, a very problematic concept, even though it is not often problematized, even in
academic discussions.

Where are the boundaries of the state?

Does the state ends with its citizens? What does that mean? They are entitled.

State as practice, institution, culture, is it universal, see transnationalism. State means different
things. Is the state experienced everywhere the same way? You have to work with traditions, etc. It
results in different effects, etc. It is there to help you, to be part of your education, make sure there
is a healthcare system. But for many people the state is a big source of violence => it doesn’t mean
the same thing for everyone.

See also globalization, increasing flows of people, ideas, etc. People who go to study abroad, or
expatriate, who travels for business, a certain elite group, who celebrate transnationalism. But on the
other side, there are the migrants, who flees from wars, etc. State is present in it. Recent creation
from Europe. 70% or80% of our legislation come from the EU, then why are there still states.

When you bring in the idea of culture, or a more experience oriented perspective, when you want to
take the plane, you have to pass a control, that is the state in practice. It also means different things.
Not the same difficulty for everyone. Old idea of the state tries to perpetuate itself.
Now let’s see a few basic concepts.

Let’s talk about civil society. All institution regulating life but not part of the state, NGO’s churches,
etc. They take sate functions (healthcare, etc.). See labor union, etc.

What remain of the state? Tate is a very fake notion. Usually it is referring as the set of agencies
which make laws, and rules. It’s a fiction. The state is indispensable in our ideology. But see also
anarchist theories. See David Graeber (Occupy movement cost him his job).

See also the notion of Nation state. Problematic for three main reasons. First the concept of nation:
other world for culture, but culture you can’t alleviate. Very strong ideology. Difficult to maintain
practices. Keep the idea of the nation. See migrants, which can have the citizenship, but are still
called migrants because they have a different skin. So it excludes. State can force people to be part
of the nation, with language, etc. It’s questionable. Inn south Afrikaans, nazi means race. The
nationalist problematic. When you take a step back from it and experience 19th and 20th century,
Europe make paint to make sure that people were on their territory,

Tries to keep itself alive. To some extend the idea of the nation state has worked, may be not always
for everybody buy we can still say that it has worked. But also because people were forced to have a
certain ideas of the state. See some countries where there are 300 different groups.

Who says state also says bureaucracy (see rational organization of reality). A certain hierarchy, with
certain criteria. With statistics, etc. Suddenly one needed to count, and to know who was living
where. Such senses of statistics bring a control on population, see the objective data (it’s already an
ideology). But there is also a growing gap between the expert and the people who they have to keep
an eye on. Legislation in Belgium becomes more and more complex. You can’t go to a library and
check out the law, you need to ask some experts, and people are excluded from understanding
everything.

Administrators always come with new ways to become more effective. They create their own jobs.
We’ll talk more about that next week.

Another important topic is ideology. Distinction between ideology and hegemony. Idea that are
made explicit. You can say that I’m a Marxist, or whatever. Hegemony refers to something else.
Refers to things that people do not question, take for granted (there should be a state, there should
be some policemen). It seems logical but what if police make random arrests, and arrest you when
you forget your ID. (<Gramsci)

We know now that everybody always has an ideology. You can choose it to some extend but not
completely. And some ideologists are dominants. If you go have a look to typical things. See work
halftime, often the woman. And women earn less than men, even though everyone says that there
shouldn’t be a difference. We know for a long time what the problem is, but it hasn’t change.
Ideology says it must change, but hegemony in place makes that it doesn’t change.

Next notion : government. Foucault launches the concept of governmentality. Idea that you need to
govern people through technical administration. See Frantz Fanon was a French Algerian writer, who
critic the French occupation, the colonization. Colonization is based on objectives criteria, which
aren’t objectives at all.

Assisting people with technical means, show them how to catch the fish, how to do agricultures, etc.
But when we talk about development, we can see that it isn’t what people want.
Idea to only bring development to regimes who respect development. But isn’t it the countries who
doesn’t respect human rights who need it more. See also the labelling of people as poor, etc. Allow
to make them targets of bureaucracy. But bureaucracy need that to survive, it needs labelling, and
expertise.

And see politicians, they say what we do is not because it’s our ideology, but because it is the best to
do, it’s a very powerful statement. You pretend it’s not political, while everything, everywhere, is
political. Politics does not refer to the state. The state effect is the influence o fhte state on peple.
State is a set of practice, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. On the contrary, it has many
influences, it is very present. One assume that there are representative, who do things that represent
the state. But on the contrary, the state is made by those practices. See the example of war.

Zimbabw: big book. In societies you have judges, who see what is wrong. But what is the power of
judges? Every case is different. Every murder has a story. Can be legitimate defense, can be an
accident, and the punishment must be different in that case than if you want to get rid of someone
who gets into your way.

Every check point you do you are negotiating with the state. If you are white, it will be easier to get
into European Union. Interesting to who is into it. Who is excluded, etc. One of the crucial matter
that you have to face. How do you distinguish citizens and no-citizens? should we make this
difference? See the basic income in Switzerland. Many see that as a utopian idea. But why should it
be. When people talk about the state they often focus on representation, but not on what people
actually do. Difference between what the state pretends and what he does.

People don’t vote with their head, who does really read the political programs, you vote on the basic
your emotions, traditions, etc.