Anthropological Perspectives of Solidarity and Reciprocity
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES OF SOLIDARITY AND RECIPROCITY Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity_FINAL.indd 1 14.1.2019 12:55:26 Anthropological perspectives of Založila/Published by solidarity and reciprocity Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakul- tete Univerze v Ljubljani (Ljubljana Uredil/Edited by University Press, Faculty of Arts) Peter Simonič Izdal/Issued by Recenzenta/Reviewers Oddelek za etnologijo in kulturno Olivier Givre antropologijo (Department of Ljupčo Risteski Ethnology and Cultural Anthropology) Zbirka/Book series Zupaničeva knjižnica, št. 47/ Za založbo/For the publisher Zupanič's collection no. 47 Roman Kuhar, dekan Filozofske ISSN 1855-671X fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani/The e-ISSN 2630-3922 dean of the Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana Lektorica/Proofreading Heather Pirjevec Ljubljana, 2019 Odgovorni urednik zbirke/ Naklada/Number of copies printed Editor in chief 300 izvodov Boštjan Kravanja Oblikovna zasnova zbirke in prelom/ Uredniški odbor zbirke/ Design and layout Editorial board Vasja Cenčič Bojan Baskar, Mateja Habinc, Vito Hazler, Jože Hudales, Božidar Jezernik, Tisk/Printed by Miha Kozorog, Boštjan Kravanja, Birografika Bori, d. o. o. Uršula Lipovec Čebron, Ana Sarah Lunaček Brumen, Mirjam Mencej, Cena Rajko Muršič, Jaka Repič, 20,00 Peter Simonič Knjiga je izšla s podporo Javne agencije za raziskovalno dejavnost RS./ The book was Fotografija na naslovnici/Cover photo published with support from the Slovenian Urška Repar Research Agency. Raziskovalni program (P6-0187) je sofinancirala Javna agencija za raziskovalno dejavnost Republike Slovenije iz državnega proračuna./The To delo je ponujeno pod licenco Creative authors acknowledge the financial support from Commons Priznanje avtorstva-Deljenje pod the Slovenian Research Agency (research core enakimi pogoji 4.0 Mednarodna licenca. / funding No. P6-0187). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 Prva e-izdaja. Publikacija je v digitalni obliki International License. prosto dostopna na https://e-knjige.ff.uni-lj.si/ DOI: 10.4312/9789610601463 Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity_FINAL.indd 2 14.1.2019 12:55:27 Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity Edited by Peter Simonič Ljubljana 2019 Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity_FINAL.indd 3 14.1.2019 12:55:27 Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity_FINAL.indd 4 14.1.2019 12:55:27 Table of Content Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity_FINAL.indd 5 14.1.2019 12:55:27 Peter Simonič Alter Political Economy 9 Jadran Kale Komunjsko, Skupno, and 19 Seljansko - Legacy of Eastern Adriatic Commons Peter Simonič Communitarian Institutions 31 in Trenta Valley Silvia Contessi, Co-Producing Participatory 45 Cristina Grasseni Guarantee Systems – Limits and Potentials HOSARALMO Cooperative Practices: Survival 57 Collective Strategies, “Aternative” Movements or Capitalism Re-Embedding? Valentina New Transition: Community 69 Gulin Zrnić, Gardens and Civic Engagement Tihana Rubić in the City of Zagreb Irene Sabaté Reciprocity and Solidarity 83 in the Face of the Spanish Home Repossessions Crisis Cirila Toplak For a New Social Order. 95 A Genealogy of Self-Management in SFRY Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity_FINAL.indd 6 14.1.2019 12:55:27 Nina Vodopivec Solidarity and the Feelings of 113 Belonging: Textile Industrial Workers in the Socialist and Post socialist Slovenia Gorazd Kovačič Trade Unions Fragmentation 131 in Slovenia. Causes and Lessons Tanja Ahlin 'Repaying the Suffering' 145 in Transnational Families from Kerala, South India Eugene Richard Looking for a City with 159 Sensenig Foundations: Intentional Urban Communities as a Christian Response to Justice and Power Boštjan Kravanja The Spirit of Social Cohesion 173 and Sharing in Relation to Dance Consumption Practices in Contemporary Swing Dance Communities Dan Podjed, Orgunity as a New Form of 189 Daša Ličen Cooperation: Case Studies of Two Environmental NGOs Name Index 209 Summaries 215 About the Authors 221 Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity_FINAL.indd 7 14.1.2019 12:55:27 Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity_FINAL.indd 8 14.1.2019 12:55:27 Alter Political Economy Peter Simonič Sociologists such as Simmel, Tönnies, Durkheim, or Weber defined various kinds of solidarity: national, religious, guild, and kinship. In the 19th and 20th century, their ideas and identifications competed in the political arenas across Europe and USA (Stjernø 2004). In their theories, the economy as social process was identified with the econom- ics as (socially conditioned) theory (Hopkins 1957), and their habitus was nation-state (Graeber 2004; comp. Smith 2010 [1876]). Taking into account the diversity of human natural and cultural environ- ments, and historical shifts in the political and economic conditions, we realize that the phenomenon of stress and group forming, belong- ing and sharing must be much older and more diverse than the idea of solidarity, the promise of the French Revolution. The concept of solidarity is ambiguous: it includes mecha- nisms of taxes and redistribution, charity, altruistic contributions 9 Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity_FINAL.indd 9 14.1.2019 12:55:27 and political support, social policy, concessions, grants, funds, food, clothes, social entrepreneurship, sponsorship, NGOS, etc. Communi- tarianism, equality and progress are their ideological pillars. Solidar- ity in mass culture is a form of ideational and tangible redistribution. Sociology based on the Marxist tradition has been rejecting perpetu- ation and masking of fundamental economic, social and political ine- qualities, but their classless society remained attached to nation-states. Following the game theory in the late 20th century, sociological and economic solidarity became a matter of rational choice among alterna- tives of group belonging (intentional communities) that could bring the greatest “profit” to an individual (Komter 2005). Anthropology initially used the expertise of European sociol- ogy, political science, law and economics. Anthropologists have re- ported about internal balance, "social security" and cooperation in a number of non-European and preindustrial communities, which have been by default referred in the west as archaic. In the 20th century, anthropology and ethnology remained on the imperial and heritage margins of culture and science. When Garrett Hardin declared the tragedy of commons (1968), the divide between mainstream sociology, economics and anthropology in the American west seemed to be sealed. His writing was an application of the game theory, with separated, misinformed and mistrusted members of society (methodological individualism). In his view, neither socialist state nor commons were suitable as prop- erty owners for environmental challenges of the global future. In time of cold war, such an announcement looked quite logical to western readers and became a common sense among many students and future scholars in ecology and economics. Persistence of economic and environmental anthropologist at small-scale, face-to-face communities and ethnographic research has reversibly influenced political and economic thought. Elinor Ostrom (2003, 2009), accepted Robert Netting’s stance from his book Bal- ancing on an Alp (1981), that it is possible and sustainable to practice common (pool) management, especially in areas with small communi- ties. In short, I see at least four aspects of Ostrom’s communitarian intervention, important for our understanding of mainstream west- ern political economy. First, Ostrom also used the game theory, but this time to prove quite the opposite as Hardin. Second, she explicitly used Netting’s description of management in an (Alpine) community to reintroduce an alternative to mainstream economics, but she barely mentioned anthropology in her book (2003). Third, she became and remained the only woman to win the Nobel Prize in economics (2009). Peter Simonič 10 Anthropological perspectives of solidarity and reciprocity_FINAL.indd 10 14.1.2019 12:55:27 Fourth, western economic theories (mercantilism, classical and politi- cal economy) have been standing on influx of various (“unlimited”) riches coming from the newly established colonies, emerging world trade system and church-like organisations. Alternative models (her- esies) in economics gather momentum and recognition only in times of perceived environmental and social crises. To overcome subsistential problems after the global financial crisis in 2008, many people recalled and established different com- munitarian models of production, exchange, distribution, and con- sumption. The mainstream theory and media called them “alternative economic practices”: cooperatives, agrarian commons, immediate sup- ply networks, social enterprises, housing communities, etc. (Simonič 2014a). The recent reinvention and reinforcement of community and resilience in the USA and (southern) Europe pulled anthropological methodology close to this kind of public discussions (Graeber 2011). Anthropology never definitively adopted the concept of soli- darity, at least not in the same manner as sociology and economics. For Mauss (1966 [1925]), solidarity was an ideological side of established social order. Solidarity can arise from either contractual arrangements of individualised types of society and market exchange or through gift-giving of mainly