Conceptual Recalibration of the Debates on Urban Poverty: Wacquant and Advanced Marginality

Öz

Following the de-industrialization process in advanced countries, the existence of populations which were largely excluded from employment opportunities had become more and more apparent by 1980ies. Urbanization literature tried to understand the ongoing process by using the instruments of American sociology which had an advanced tradition of research on extensive neighborhoods of poverty in the so-called inner city. Discussions on the transformation of urban poverty in European cities had been largely filled with American-originated concepts like ghetto and underclass during the periods when Loic Wacquant started his research on urban poverty. Wacquant offered a comparative perspective and repudiated the arguments which were based on the assumption of the Americanization of European cities. In addition, he argued that conceptualization of urban poverty in American sociology mostly serves for the stigmatization of black ghetto residents. Wacquant’s main contribution is his studies on the black ghetto. Standing against the tendency of the American sociological tradition to strip off the political implications of poverty and presenting it as a technical problem of service provision, Wacquant offers a perspective which focuses on the direct involvement of the state in segregation. According to Wacquant, the state in the US tried to deal with poverty by increasing the concentration of black population who have little or no employment opportunity in the restructured economy in ghettos on the one hand, and extending and tightening the instruments of control and punishment on the other. In this study, Wacquant’s general evaluations on the literature on urbanization and his critique of American sociology’s approach to the ghetto phenomenon will be introduced and his own formulation on this issue will be critically evaluated.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ghetto,advanced marginality,urban poverty,underclass

Kentsel Yoksulluk Tartışmalarının Kavramsal Kalibrasyonu: Wacquant ve İleri Marjinallik

Öz

Gelişmiş ülkelerdeki endüstrisizleşme sürecini takiben metropollerde istihdam imkanına büyük oranda sahip olmayan geniş kitlelerin varlığı 1980’li yıllarla birlikte gözle görünür hale geldi. Kentleşme yazını bu durumu, kent merkezlerinde sıkışmış geniş yoksul mahalleler konusunda gelişmiş bir araştırma geleneğine sahip olan Amerikan sosyolojisinin sunduğu araçlardan faydalanarak çözümleme yoluna gitti. Loic Wacquant’ın kentsel yoksulluk üzerine çalışmaya başladığı dönemlerde Avrupa kentlerinde yoksulluğun dönüşümü büyük oranda getto ve sınıf-altı gibi Amerikan menşeili kavramlar üzerinden tartışılmaktaydı. Wacquant karşılaştırmalı bir bakış açısı önererek gelişmiş ülke kentlerinin Amerikanlaşacağı yönündeki argümanları reddetmiş, ayrıca Amerikan sosyolojisinin kendi içerisinde yoksulluğu kavramsallaştırma tarzının büyük oranda Amerikan siyah gettosunda yaşayanları damgalayıcı bir nitelik taşıdığını ortaya koymaya çalışmıştır. Wacquant’ın kent sosyolojisine yönelik temel katkısı siyah gettosuna dair değerlendirmelerinde ortaya çıkar. Amerikan sosyoloji geleneğinin yoksulluk olgusunu siyasal içerimlerinden sıyırarak teknik bir hizmet sunumu sorunu olarak ele alma alışkanlığı karşısında Wacquant, devletin ayrımcılık olgusuna doğrudan dahlini göstermeyi hedefleyen bir yaklaşım önerir. Wacquant’a göre ABD’de devlet yoksulluk meselesini bir yandan yeni ekonomik yapılanma içerisinde istihdam imkânı bulamayan siyah nüfusun gettolarda daha fazla yoğunlaşmalarına yönelik uygulamalarla, öte yandan denetim ve cezalandırma uygulamalarını daha da genişletip sıkılaştırmak suretiyle ele almıştır. Bu çalışmada Wacquant’ın kentleşme literatürüne dair genel değelendirmeleri ile Amerikan kent sosyolojisinin getto olgusuna bakışına dair eleştirileri ele alınacak, ardından kendi alternatif formülasyonu eleştirel olarak değerlendirilecektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• ileri marjinallik,kentsel yoksulluk,sınıf-altı,Getto,sınıf-altı

Kaynakça

1. Allmendiger, P. ve Thomas, H. (Der.) (1998). Urban planning and the British new right. Londra: Routledge.
2. Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the Street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. New York: W. W. Norton.
3. Aponte, R. (1990). Definitions of the underclass: A critical analysis. H. J. Gans (Der.), Sociology in America içinde (ss. 117-137). California: Sage.
4. Arlı, A. ve Göker, E. (2014). Kent sosyolojisini Bourdieu ve Wacquant ile dü-şünmek. Cogito, 76, 121-138.
5. Bagnasco, A. ve LeGalés, P. (Der.) (2000). Cities in contemporary Europe. Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Barnekov, T., Boyle, R. ve Rich, D. (1989). Privatism and urban policy in Britain and the United States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Bauman, Z. ve May, T. (2001). Thinking sociologically. Oxford: Blackwell (Oriji-nal eserin yayın tarihi 1990).
8. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Acts of resistance: Against the new myths of our time (R. Nice, Çev.). Cambridge: Polity Press.

9. Bourdieu, P. (2004). Science of science and reflexivity. (R. Nice Çev.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (Orijinal eserin yayın tarihi 2001).
10. Bourdieu, P. ve Wacquant L. (2001). NewLiberalSpeak: Notes on the new planetary vulgate. Radical Philosophy, 105, 2-5.
11. Burgess, E. W. (1967). Can neighborhood work have a scientific basis? R. E. Park, E. W. Burgess ve R. D. McKezie (Der.), The City. Chicago: The Uni-versity of Chicago Press. (Orijinal eserin yayın tarihi 1925).
12. Castells, M. (1977). The urban question: A Marxist approach. (A. Sheridan, Çev.). Londra: Edward Arnold. (Orijinal eserin yayın tarihi 1972).
13. Duneier, M. (1999). Sidewalk. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
14. Fainstein, S. S., Gordon, I. ve Harloe, M. (Der.) (1992). Divided cities: New York and London in the contemporary world. Oxford: Blackwell.
15. Flanagan, W. G. (1993). Contemporary urban sociology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Gans, H. J. (1993). From ‘Underclass’ to ‘undercaste’: Some observations about the future of the postindustrtial economy and its major victims’. Interna-tional Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 17 (3), 327-335.
17. Gans, H. J. (1994). Positive functions of the undeserving poor: Uses of under-class in America. Politics and Society, 22 (3), 269-283.
18. Gans, H. J. (1997). Uses and misuses of concepts in American social science research: Variations on Loic Wacquant’s theme of ‘Three pernicious premises in the study of the American ghetto’. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 21 (3), 504-507.
19. Hall, S. (1985). Signification, representation, ideology: Althusser and the post-structuralist debates. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 2 (2), ss. 91-114.
20. Harloe, M. (1978). Introduction. M. Harloe (Der.), Captive cities: Studies in the political economy of cities and regions. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
21. Hamnett, C. (2003). Unequal city: London in the global arena. Londra: Routledge.
22. Haussmann, H. ve Sackman, R. (1994). Changes in Berlin: The emergence of an underclass?. Built Envronment, 20 (3), 231-241.
23. Hirst, P. ve Zeitlin, J. (1991). Flexible specialization versus post-Fordism: The-ory, evidence and policy implications. Economy and Society, 20 (1), 1-56.
24. Hunter, M. A. (2014). Ecologies, post-modern urbanisms, and symbolic econ-omies: A comparative assessment of American urban sociology. Com-parative Sociology, 13, 185-214.
25. Imrie, R. ve Thomas, H. (Der.) (1999). British urban policy: An evaluation of the urban development corporations. Londra: Sage.
26. Jessop, B. (1990). Regulation theories in retrospect and prospect. Economy and Society, 19 (2), 153-216.
27. Kesteloot, C. (1994). Three levels of socio-spatial polarization in Brussels. Built Envronment, 20 (3), 204-217.
28. LeGalés, P. (2002) European cities: Social conflicts and governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29. Lovering, J. (1990). Fordism’s unknown successor: A comment on Scott’s theo-ry of flexible accumulation and the re-emergence of regional economies. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 14 (1), 159-174.
30. Magnicol, J. (1987). In pursuit of the underclass. Journal of Social Policy, 16 (3), 293-318.
31. Massey, D. S. ve Denton, N. A. (1993). American apartheid: Segregation and the making of the underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32. Marshall, M. G. (1999). Flexible specialization, supply-side institutionalism, and the nature of work systems’. Review of Social Economy, 57 (2), 199-219.
33. Marwel, N. P. (2016). Rethinking the state in urban outcasts. Urban Studies, 53 (6), 1095-1098.
34. Mingione, E. (1993). The new urban poverty and the underclass: Introduction. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 17 (3), 324-326.
35. Mollenkopf, J. H. ve Castells, M. (1991). Dual City: Restructuring New York. Ru-sell Sage Foundation, New York
36. Morris, M. (1989). From the culture of poverty to the underclass: An analysis of a shift in public language. The American Sociologist, 20 (2), 123-133.
37. Musterd, S. ve Ostendorf, W. (1994). Affluence, Access to jobs, and ethnicity in the Dutch welfare state: The case of Amsterdam. Built Envronment, 20 (3), 242-253.
38. Newman, K. (1999). No shame in my game: The working poor in the inner city. New York: Russel Sage Foundation and Knopf.
39. Newman, P. ve Thornley, A. (1996). Urban planning in Europe. Londra: Routledge.
40. Oatley, N. (Der.) (1998). Cities, economic competition and urban policy. Londra: Paul Chapman.
41. Peterson, P. E. (1991-1992). The urban underclass and the poverty paradox. Political Science Quarterly, 106 (4), 617-637.
42. Robinson, F. ve Gregson, N. (1992). The underclass: A class apart? Critical Social Policy, 12 (34), 38-51.
43. Sassen, S. (1991). Global city: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
44. Scott, A. J. (1988). Flexible production systems and regional development: The rise of new industrial spaces in North America and western Europe. In-ternational Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 12 (2), 171-186.
45. Silver, H. (1993). National conceptions of the new urban poverty: Social struc-tural change in Britain, France and the United States. International Jour-nal of Urban and Regional Research, 17 (3), 336-354.
46. Smith, N. (1996). The new urban frontier: Gentrification and the revanchist city. Londra: Routledge.
47. Szelenyi, I. (Der.) (1984). Cities in recession: Critical response to the urban policies of the new right. Londra: Sage.
48. Tickell, A. ve Peck, J. A. (1992). Accumulation, regulation and the geographies of post-Fordism: Missing links in regulationist research. Progress in Human Geography, 16 (2), 190-218.
49. Wacquant, L. (1992). Toward a social praxeology: The structure and logic of Bourdieu’s sociology. P. Bourdieu ve L. Wacquant, An invitation to re-flexive sociology içinde (ss. 1-59). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
50. Wacquant, L. (1993). Urban outcasts: Stigma and division in the black Ameri-can ghetto and the French urban periphery. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 17 (3), 366-383.
51. Wacquant, L. (1997). Three pernicious premises in the study of the American ghetto. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 21 (2), 341-353.
52. Wacquant, L. (2001). Deadly symbiosis: When ghetto and prison meet and mesh. Punishment and Society, 3 (1), ss. 95-133.
53. Wacquant, L. (2002a). The rise of advanced marginality: Notes on its nature and implications. P. Marcuse ve R.v. Kempen (Der.), Of states and cities: The partitioning of urban space içinde (ss. 221-239). New York: Oxford University Press.
54. Wacquant, L. (2002b). Scrutinizing the Street: Poverty, morality, and the pit-falls of urban ethnography. American Journal of Sociology, 107 (6), 1468-1532.
55. Wacquant, L. (2007). Territorial stigmatization in the age of advanced mar-ginality. Thesis Eleven, 91, 66-77.
56. Wacquant, L. (2008). Ghettos and anti-ghettos: An anatomy of the new urban poverty. Thesis Eleven, 94, ss. 113-118.
57. Wacquant, L. (2009). Punishing the poor: The neoliberal government of social inse-curity. Durham: Duke University Press.
58. Wacquant, L. (2010a). Kent paryaları: İleri marjinalliğin karşılaştırmalı sosyolojisi. (M. Doğan Çev.). İstanbul: Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınları. (Orijinal ese-rin yayın tarihi 2008).
59. Wacquant, L. (2010b). Class, race and hyperincarceration in revanchist Amer-ica. Daedalus, 139 (3), 74-90.
60. Wacquant, L. ve Akçaoğlu, A. (2017). Practice and symbolic power in Bour-dieu: The view from Berkeley. Journal of Classical Sociology, 17 (1), 55-69.
61. Wilson, W. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and public policy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
62. Yılmaz, B. (2008). Türkiye’de sınıf-altı: Nöbetleşe yoksulluktan müebbet yok-sulluğa. Toplum ve Bilim, 113, 127-145.