公共多元化:东伦敦社区组织与分形政治

IF 1.1 2区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY
Farhan Samanani
{"title":"公共多元化:东伦敦社区组织与分形政治","authors":"Farhan Samanani","doi":"10.1111/1467-9655.14316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Politics requires collective deliberation, but what happens when people cannot agree on how to deliberate? Anthropologists and other social scientists have urged us to look beyond the hegemonic liberal ideal of public reason, in order to recognize a plurality of publics, each held together by distinctive forms of reason. Yet, the more this plurality comes to the fore, the more we are confronted with questions of how publics might connect and deliberate across their differences. This article draws on work with community organizers in East London, who work with a diverse range of local institutions – from churches to schools to mosques. It traces how organizers respond to the ‘constitutive exclusions’ that delimit different publics. In dialogue with the work of Hannah Arendt – which enables us to recognize the possibilities and limits of different sorts of publics – it explores how community organizers draw together different, incommensurable publics without collapsing these into one another. Working across different communities and collectives, community organizers weave a wider ‘fractal public’, by positioning different publics as emerging out of and dependent on one another. In doing so, they offer a different model for how we might address political and intellectual dilemmas that implicate diverse worlds, publics, and forms of reason, but nonetheless require collective answers.","PeriodicalId":47904,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The public multiple: community organizing and fractal politics in East London\",\"authors\":\"Farhan Samanani\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-9655.14316\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Politics requires collective deliberation, but what happens when people cannot agree on how to deliberate? Anthropologists and other social scientists have urged us to look beyond the hegemonic liberal ideal of public reason, in order to recognize a plurality of publics, each held together by distinctive forms of reason. Yet, the more this plurality comes to the fore, the more we are confronted with questions of how publics might connect and deliberate across their differences. This article draws on work with community organizers in East London, who work with a diverse range of local institutions – from churches to schools to mosques. It traces how organizers respond to the ‘constitutive exclusions’ that delimit different publics. In dialogue with the work of Hannah Arendt – which enables us to recognize the possibilities and limits of different sorts of publics – it explores how community organizers draw together different, incommensurable publics without collapsing these into one another. Working across different communities and collectives, community organizers weave a wider ‘fractal public’, by positioning different publics as emerging out of and dependent on one another. In doing so, they offer a different model for how we might address political and intellectual dilemmas that implicate diverse worlds, publics, and forms of reason, but nonetheless require collective answers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47904,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute\",\"volume\":\"68 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.14316\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.14316","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

政治需要集体商议,但当人们无法就如何商议达成一致时会发生什么?人类学家和其他社会科学家敦促我们超越公共理性的霸权自由主义理想,以认识到公众的多元性,每个公众都由独特的理性形式维系在一起。然而,这种多元性越突出,我们就越要面对公众如何在他们的差异中相互联系和深思熟虑的问题。本文借鉴了与东伦敦社区组织者的合作,他们与从教堂到学校再到清真寺的各种地方机构合作。它追溯了组织者如何应对划分不同公众的“结构性排斥”。在与汉娜·阿伦特(Hannah Arendt)的作品的对话中——它使我们能够认识到不同类型的公众的可能性和局限性——它探索了社区组织者如何将不同的、不可通约性的公众聚集在一起,而不会将它们彼此坍塌。社区组织者在不同的社区和集体中工作,通过将不同的公众定位为相互依存和相互依存,编织了一个更广泛的“分形公众”。在这样做的过程中,他们为我们如何解决涉及不同世界、公众和理性形式的政治和智力困境提供了一种不同的模式,但仍然需要集体的答案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The public multiple: community organizing and fractal politics in East London
Politics requires collective deliberation, but what happens when people cannot agree on how to deliberate? Anthropologists and other social scientists have urged us to look beyond the hegemonic liberal ideal of public reason, in order to recognize a plurality of publics, each held together by distinctive forms of reason. Yet, the more this plurality comes to the fore, the more we are confronted with questions of how publics might connect and deliberate across their differences. This article draws on work with community organizers in East London, who work with a diverse range of local institutions – from churches to schools to mosques. It traces how organizers respond to the ‘constitutive exclusions’ that delimit different publics. In dialogue with the work of Hannah Arendt – which enables us to recognize the possibilities and limits of different sorts of publics – it explores how community organizers draw together different, incommensurable publics without collapsing these into one another. Working across different communities and collectives, community organizers weave a wider ‘fractal public’, by positioning different publics as emerging out of and dependent on one another. In doing so, they offer a different model for how we might address political and intellectual dilemmas that implicate diverse worlds, publics, and forms of reason, but nonetheless require collective answers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
175
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute is the principal journal of the oldest anthropological organization in the world. It has attracted and inspired some of the world"s greatest thinkers. International in scope, it presents accessible papers aimed at a broad anthropological readership. It is also acclaimed for its extensive book review section, and it publishes a bibliography of books received.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信