Scientism and instrumentalism After the Bomb: Dr Strangelove, End Zone, Crash and The Wire

This thesis argues that through the prism of America’s Cold War, scientism has emerged as the metanarrative of the postnuclear age. The advent of the bomb brought about a new primacy for mechanical and hyperrational thinking in the corridors of power not just in terms of managing the bomb itself but diffusing this ideology throughout the culture in social sciences, economics and other such institutional systems. The human need to mitigate or ameliorate against the chaos of the universe lies at the heart of not just religious faith but in the desire for perfect control. Thus there has been a transference of power from religious faith to the apparent material power of science and technology and the terra firma these supposedly objective means supply. The Cold War, however was a highly ideologically charged opposition between the two superpowers, and the scientific methodology that sprang forth to manage the Cold War and the bomb, in the United States, was not an objective scientific system divorced from the paranoia and dogma but a system that assumed a radically fundamentalist idea of capitalism. This is apparent in the widespread diffusion of game theory throughout Western postindustrial institutions. The inquiry of the thesis thus examines the texts that engage and criticise American Cold War methodology, beginning with the nuclear moment, so to speak, and Dr Strangelove’s incisive satire of moral abdication to machine processes. Moving on chronologically, the thesis examines the diffusion of particular kinds of masculinity and sexuality in postnuclear culture in Crash and End Zone and finishing up its analysis with the ethnographic portrayal of a modern American city in The Wire. More than anything else, the thesis wishes to reveal to what extent this technocratic consciousness puts pressure on language and on binding narratives.

The relationship between rural livelihoods and livestock keeping: the case of Sidama Zone, Southern Ethiopia

This study examines the relationship between rural livelihoods and livestock keeping in Sidama Zones, southern Ethiopia. The livelihood context, assets and strategies of households are the key features of rural livelihoods considered in the study; while households’ livestock ownership, dependence on livestock and livestock management are the main aspects of livestock keeping examined. The study used the sustainable livelihood approach as a framework for data collection and analysis. Describing the main features of rural livelihoods and livestock keeping, and the general pattern of relationship between them, this study mainly aims at identifying the main livelihood factors that determine livestock keeping in the study area. Descriptive statistics, pair wise correlations, mean comparisons and analysis of variance were used to describe rural livelihoods and livestock keeping as well as the relationship between them. Tobit regressions were used to examine the effect of the various livelihood factors on households’ livestock ownership and dependence; Poisson regressions are used to investigate the factors that influence the intensity of livestock management measured by the use of different technologies and inputs. The findings indicated that a number of livelihood factors - assets, livelihood strategies, livelihood shocks and institutional supports - significantly determine the different aspects of livestock keeping. These include: human assets such as age, education and family size; social assets such as membership to social groups; financial assets such as credit; natural assets such as land, and household physical assets; and livelihood strategies such as diversification into farm and nonfarm activities, and coping mechanisms. In addition the livelihood vulnerability context such as shocks and institutional support are among the main determinants of livestock keeping. The results, by and large, matched the findings of previous studies, and it is concluded that households livestock keeping depends on their livelihoods. Accordingly, it is recommended that policies aiming at livestock asset building and productivity improvement should take the livelihoods of rural households in to consideration. As such the study contribute to scholarly works in the area of rural livelihoods, in general, and livestock keeping, in particular. It also contributes to a better understanding of the problems of livestock keeping within the context of rural livelihoods in the country and to the formulation of appropriate policy for the development of the sector.