Il razzismo della prosperità nell’Europa contemporanea - Riflessioni a margine del pensiero antirazzista di Walter Lorenz

Recent publishing on the migration phenomena in the communitarian and globalized Europe, puts in evidence a fundamental racism which is capable of making cultural processes grow and feed both chaos and social disorder. As a matter of fact we are approaching the ending debates on multicultural citizenship as well as on solidary integration and antiracism. Since the appearing of these phenomena, namely the huge post colonial migration in the nineteen-eighties, by which the colonized countries became almost “emigrant nurseries”, one could expect their stabilization. On the contrary, globalization and migration (twin subjects) everywhere still produce, at various levels, social disturbances together with some chauvinistic limitations as an ultimate kind of western prosperity defense. The peculiar European features of this new racism, less than ideological (superiority, homogeneity and civilizing mission), are confined to the concepts of patriotism, inequality and exclusion. In these terms one can understand why the new economic expansionism and the quest for new world markets makes European policies unstable, which remain undecided between conservatism, liberalism and extreme right. All this explains at least two things: the existing ambiguities of some European policies aiming to enhance particular forms of protectionism, and the difficulties in which the antiracist thought seems to be embedded. Indeed, according to what Walter Lorenz has already made clear, by using a well founded methodology, which prevents any fruitless protestations, it is impossible to contrast racism and nationalism. In such context, the educational field should try to use an operative epistemology. In other words the antiracist thought should dispose of competences and skills and, especially, personal and reflective capabilities. All this in order to avoid that which, in different historical scenes, permit the revival of the sense of moral opprobrium could not be identified with the political alibi to maintain privileges as well as advantages for the exclusive benefit of wealthy countries.

What is the Relation between Human Practical Action and an Accompanying Discourse? Discussing the Status of Practical Theory

The article discusses the function of an accompanying discourse in relation to the genesis of human practical action. On the one side, theory cannot be taken as the ground for practical action; practical action is not a realisation of intentions. On the other hand, human practical action is accompanied by series of explanations, justifications, declarations of intent, pre‑ and post-rationalisations, motivations etc. These accompanying discourses seem in one way or the other to be necessary for the actual realisation of human practical action. Following Pierre Bourdieu, it is suggested that an accompanying discourse cannot in a meaningful manner be separated from the human practical action, that practical theory should be regarded not as theory but as part of practice, and that practical theory first of all provides a common language for talking about practice and hence for reproducing a fundamentally arbitrary idea of the genesis of human practical action. Parallels are drawn to the education/formal training of semi-professionals.

Anomic Crime in Post-Welfarist Societies. Cult of the Individual, Integration Patterns and Delinquency

Post-Fordist economies come along with post-welfarist societies marked by intensified cultural individualism and increased structural inequalities. These conditions are commonly held to be conducive to relative deprivation and, thereby, anomic crime. At the same time, post-welfarist societies develop a new ‘balance of power’ between institutions providing for welfare regulation, such as the family, the state and the (labour) market – and also the penal system. These institutions are generally expected to improve social integration, ensure conformity and thus reduce anomic crime. Combining both perspectives, we analyse the effects of moral individualism, social inequality, and different integration strategies on crime rates in contemporary societies through the lenses of anomie theory. To test our hypotheses, we draw on time-series cross-section data compiled from different data sources (OECD, UN, WHO, WDI) for twenty developed countries in the period 1970-2004, and run multiple regressions that control for country-specific effects. Although we find some evidence that the mismatch between cultural ideal (individual inclusion) and structural reality (stratified exclusion) increases the anomic pressure, whereas conservative (i. e. family-based), social-democratic (i. e. state-based) and liberal (i. e. market-based) integration strategies to a certain extent prove effective in controlling the incidence of crime, the results are not very robust. Moreover, reservations have to be made regarding the effects of “market” income inequality as well as familialist, unionist and liberalist employment policies that are shown to have reversed effects in our sample: the former reducing, the latter occasionally increasing anomic crime. As expected, the mismatch between cultural ideal (individual inclusion) and structural reality (stratified exclusion) increases the anomic pressure, whereas conservative (i. e. family-based), social-democratic (i. e. state-based) and liberal (i. e. market-based) integration strategies generally prove effective in controlling the incidence of crime. Nevertheless, we conclude that the new cult of the individual undermines the effectiveness of conservative and social-democratic integration strategies and drives societies towards more “liberal” regimes that build on incentive as well as punitive elements.