Sessiz Sermayeler: Kurumsallaşmış Yeniden Üretim, Maduniyet ve Şehir Hakkı

Öz

Bu makale, kültürel sermaye, kurumsal ve kentsel mekânsal politikanın kesişiminde yer alan yapısal eşitsizliği incelemektedir. Pierre Bourdieu, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak ve Henri Lefebvre’in kuramsal katkılarından hareketle, yükseköğretime erişimde eşitsizlik sorununu bir politika başarısızlığı olarak değil, daha derin bir epistemik sorunun yansıması olarak yeniden çerçeveler. Pek çok analist, özellikle ilk kuşak üniversite öğrencilerine yönelik erişim programları aracılığıyla eşitsizliğe teknik çözümler önermektedir; oysa bu çalışma, bu tür çabaları dışlamanın kurucu mantıklarını görünmez kılan sembolik telafiler olarak sorunsallaştırmaktadır. Eğitimi kapitalist yeniden üretim süreçleri ve sömürgecilik mirası bağlamına yerleştirerek, kurumların eşitsizliği nasıl estetikleştirip kapsayıcıymış gibi sunduğunu eleştiriyoruz. Egemen sınıf yalnızca neyin bilgi sayıldığını tanımlamakla kalmaz; aynı zamanda tanınmanın mümkün olduğu mekânsal ve kurumsal alanları da kontrol eder. Bu bağlamda, madun yalnızca eğitimin dışında bırakılmaz, aynı zamanda onun söylemsel ve mekânsal rejimleri içinde anlaşılmaz kılınır. Reçeteci çözümler önermek yerine, biz, eğitim erişimi sorunlarının nasıl, kimler tarafından ve hangi yapılar aracılığıyla kurulduğunu yeniden düşünme ihtiyacını öne çıkarıyoruz. Bourdieu’nün sermaye kuramı, Spivak’ın toplumsallaştırılmış sermaye kavrayışı ve Lefebvre’in şehir hakkı bu çerçevede birlikte ele alınmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kültürel sermaye
• kurum
• mekânsal adalet
• madun
• şehir hakkı

Silent Capitals: Institutionalized Reproduction, Subalternity and the Right to the City

Öz

This article examines the structural reproduction of inequality by tracing the interplay between cultural capital, institutional and urban spatial politics. Drawing upon the theoretical insights of Pierre Bourdieu, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, and Henri Lefebvre, reframes the problem of unequal access to higher education not as a policy failure, but as a manifestation of deeper epistemic problem. While many analysts propose technical solutions to inequality —particularly through access programs for first-generation students—this study problematizes such efforts as symbolic compensations that obscure the foundational logics of exclusion. By situating education within broader processes of capitalist reproduction and colonial legacies, We critique how institutions aestheticize inequality while presenting themselves as inclusive. We argue that the dominant class not only defines what counts as legitimate knowledge, but also controls the spatial and institutional arenas in which recognition is possible. In this context, the subaltern is not simply excluded from education, but rendered unintelligible within its discursive and spatial regimes. Rather than offering prescriptive solutions, We foreground the need for a rethinking of how educational access problems are framed, by whom, and through which structures. Through the triangulation of Bourdieu’s theory of capital, Spivak’s conception of socialized capital and Lefebvre’s right to the city, the study offers a critical lens through which to reconsider the limits of educational justice under conditions of institutionalized inequality.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Institution
• cultural capital
• subalternity
• right to the city
• educational inequality

Kaynakça

1. Bourdieu, Pierre. The Forms of Capital. Bourdieu, P. (1986), “The Forms of Capital.” in J.G. google scholar
2. Brenner, Neil. “Geographies of Globalization.” Public Culture 10.1. (1997): 135-167. google scholar
3. Richardson (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. google scholar
4. Don, Mitchell. The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space. New York City: Guilford Press, 2003. google scholar
5. Fernandes, Edésio. “Constructing the Right to the City'in Brazil.” Social & Legal Studies 16.2. (2007): 201-219. google scholar
6. Gramsci, Antonio. Prison Notebooks. Vol. II, Translated Joesph A. Buttigieg, New York: Columbia University Press, 1996. google scholar
7. Harvey, David. “The Right to The City.” In: Citizenship Rights. Routledge. (2017): 465-482. google scholar
8. Heineck, Guido; Riphahn, Regina T. "Intergenerational transmission of educational attainment in Germany–the last five decades." Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik 229.1 (2009): 36-60. google scholar

9. Lefebvre, Henri; Donald, Nicholson-Smith. The Production of Space. vol. 142. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991. google scholar
10. Lefebvre, Henri. Writings on Cities, Translated Eleonore Kofman and Elizabeth. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996. google scholar
11. Leone, Tharcisio. “Intergenerational mobility in education: Estimates of the worldwide variation.” No. 2. UNRISD Occasional PaperOvercoming Inequalities in a Fractured World: Between Elite Power and Social Mobilization, 2019. google scholar
12. Marx, Karl. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy. Vol. I. Translated Samuel Moore and Edward Aveling. New York: Random House, 1906. google scholar
13. Martins, Mario Rui. “The Theory of Social Space in the Work of Henri Lefebvre.” Forrest, R., Hendersen,[19], 1982. google scholar
14. Marcuse, Peter. “From Critical Urban Theory to the Right to the City.” City 13.2-3. (2009): 185-197. google scholar
15. Middleton, Sue. Henri Lefebvre on Education: Critique and Pedagogy, Policy Futures in Education, 2017, 15.4: 410-426. google scholar
16. Mirashrafi, Seyed Bagher, Georg Bol, and Gholamreza Nakhaiezadeh. "The Effect of Family Background, Socioeconomic Status and Individual Factors on University Admission in Iran." International journal for cross-disciplinary subjects in education 4.2, 2013. google scholar
17. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. Can the Subaltern Speak? Refections on the History of an Idea (eds Morris, R. C.). Columbia University Press, 2010. google scholar
18. Tansel, Aysıt. "Intergenerational educational mobility in Turkey." IZA Discussion Paper Series No. 9590. google scholar