reviving public sociology in post-apartheid south africa: conversations between the ivory tower, the...
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
1/83
1
Title:
Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa:Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and the
Shack
Master`s Thesis
submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Masters of Arts (M.A)
awarded by the Philosophical Faculty of Albert-Ludwigs- Universitt Freiburg
i. Br. (Germany) and the Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales
FLACSO- Buenos Aires (Argentina)
Submitted by
Carrie Leigh Byrne
from Johannesburg, South Africa
Wintersemester 2009/2010
Social Sciences
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
2/83
2
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisors, Prof. Dr Hermann
Schwengel, Dr. Alejandro Pelfini and Ercment elik for your support and valuable
insights.
To my parents for making the past two years possible. Thank You.
To all my friends in GSP, thank you for the support and good times. It's been an
amazing ride.
Lastly, to Christian for your patience and tolerance. And for keeping me sane.
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
3/83
3
Abstract
This paper examines the possibilities for the reinvigoration of the discipline of
sociology through bolstering public sociology, as proposed by Michael Burawoy in
his 2004 address for the American Sociological association (ASA). The study
concentrates specifically on the possibilities for this in present day South Africa. This
paper comes at a time when debates about public sociology are lively. Many
sociologists stress the urgency of this project as the social sciences have become
increasingly disengaged from and accountable to 'publics':
The study examines, firstly, the current status of sociology in South Africa.Thereafter, a specific case - Living Learning, where public sociology is being
practiced is offered in order to reflect on some of the constraints and possibilities for
public sociology in South Africa today.
The study proposes that, despite a multitude of material and political constraints to the
project, spaces for the reinvigoration of public sociology are available through the
reconnection to 'publics' in the form of social movements provided that the connection
is premised on collaborative engagement.
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
4/83
4
Contents
1.1. 1.2. 1.. 101.. 11.. 1
2.1. 12.2. 12.. 211.. 22.. 2
.1. .2.
.1. 1.2.
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
5/83
5
.1. .2. & 0
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
6/83
6
Abbreviations
ABM Abahlali baseMjondolo
ANC African National Congress
ASA American Sociological Association
BCM Black Consciousness Movement
CBO Community Based Organisation
COSATU Congress of South African Trade Unions
GEAR Growth, Employment and Redistribution programme
LPM Landless Peoples Movement
NDA National Development Agency
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
Nedlac National Economic Development and Labour Council
SANCO South African National civic Organisation
UDF United Democratic Front
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
7/83
7
Chapter One: Introduction and Methodology
1.1. Setting the scene
I write this paper at a time when evidence suggests that South African social science
is in crisis. The dynamic process of collaboration between the academy, unions and
social movements that played a significant role in the overthrow of apartheid has been
replaced with a social science dominated by neoliberal managerialism and an
orientation toward policy, promising development through the trickle-down effect.
(Vale & Jacklin, 2009) In and out of the academy, the notion of development has
been watered down, to a narrow focus on economic growth and service delivery.
Thinking on radical alternatives seem to have all but vanished from mainstream social
theory and practice. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the growing body of
literature on the possibilities for strengthening the discipline of sociology through
bolstering the field of public sociology1.
The importance of a robust public sociology for the discipline in general was
highlighted by Michael Burawoy, the then president of the American Sociological
Assocation (ASA) whose name has now become synonymous with the term, in his2004 presidential address. Burawoys proposal has attracted attention within the
academy and has stimulated debates on the possibilities for opening up new spaces of
academic engagement within the discipline of sociology, as well as in other fields.
Central to Burawoys thesis is that sociology, especially American sociology, has lost
its moral fibre (Burawoy et al, 2004). Thus, public sociology seeks to extend the
reach of sociology by reconnecting with publics in explicitly political ways. Many
advocates of the project recognise its emancipatory potential. Burawoy himself draws
attention to the potential role of public sociology in liberatory projects, citing the
example of the crucial role that public sociologists played during the 1980s in the
liberation struggle against apartheid in South Africa (Burawoy et al, 2004).
1According to Burawoy et al (2004:104), public sociology is defined as, a sociology that seeks to
bring sociology to publics beyond the academy, promoting dialogue about issues that affect the fate of
society, placing the values to which we adhere under a microscope.
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
8/83
8
Many authors assume that the potential for public sociology today lies in the ability of
the discipline to forge connections with new social movements to form relations that
foster dialogue and develop strategies to resist neoliberalism and its destructive
effects (Katz-Fishmann & Scott, 2005, Brewer, 2006). These authors posit that the
role of the sociologist is to, immerse themselves in struggles for social justice
beyond the university (Burawoy, 2005d: 388). For Burawoy, the term to describe
this type of engagement is organic public sociology.
The nature of engagement that does/should exist between these social movement
publics and academics has been hotly debated. Similarly, academics have grappled
with and often diverged on the possibility that organic public sociologyand organic
public intellectuals can and do exist within the ranks of these movements. In fact,
Eddie Webster, one of the (academic) public sociologists involved in the struggle
against apartheid has pointed out that, first and foremost, public sociology implies a
recognition of the fact that movement intellectuals are the drivers of social
movements (Webster, 2004). Thus, pivotal questions about the potential role of the
academic within these settings arise.
One strategy advocated by some from within the critical school is to view public
sociology as possible through two distinct strategies (Katz-Fishmann & Scott, 2005).
The first, being an active pursuit by sociologists to forge links with movements from
above. In this instance, sociology precedes publics. However, a second type exists
that evolves out of social struggle. In this case, the impetus is on the movements
themselves and the public sociology pursued is one that is both practiced and
thought from below. This form of engagement necessitates the acceptance of public
sociology as co-creation between sociologists and their publics. In this view, it is
within these spaces, and not in academic spheres, that the emancipatory project
against neoliberalism and towards socialism is viewed as most promising. (ibid,
Brewer, 2005) For Burawoy this strategy involves positioning oneself within, the
rising tide of social movements and then hoping that the tide will flood back into
the academy (Burawoy, 2005d: 388).
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
9/83
9
Burawoy himself recognises the potential of public sociology of this nature. In fact,
referring to a specific case, Project South2, where this type of public sociology is
being undertaken, Burawoy (2005d) posits:
Id like to hear more concrete analysis of the successes and failure, limits and
obstacles of the political engagements of Project South, how sociology may be of
relevance to popular movements and how sociology may itself change as a result. We
desperately need case studies of public sociology and in this regard Project South
could become an important laboratory of organic public sociology (p. 388).
1.2. Research Problem
This papers aims to investigate the possibilities and constraints to a project of public
sociology in the current South African context. Thus, the main research question to be
answered is:
What are the possibilities of and limitations to the practice of public sociology in
South Africa today?
The sub-questions that I seek to answer will be answered on two different levels and
will involve two different approaches.
The first three sub-questions to be answered are:
1) Under what conditions has public sociology been an active field inSouth Africa and what have been the implications of this?
2) Under what conditions has public sociology been weak in SouthAfrica and what have been the implications of this?
3)
What is the current status of public sociology in South Africa?
2According to their own website, Project South is a grassroots organization based in the US South.
For over 23 years, we have created critical spaces for movement building. We work with communities
pushed forward by the struggle to strengthen leadership for long-term transformation. Our programs
focus on communities of colour affected by social control and economic degradation created by
historic and current trends of privatisation, exploitation, and structural racism in the US. For more
information visit www.projectsouth.org
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
10/83
10
To answer these questions, an investigation into the history of South African
sociology with a specific focus on the practice of public sociology is undertaken. An
in-depth and exhaustive literature review of secondary material is conducted to
answer these three questions.
The first question is answered through an investigation of the role of public sociology
in South Africa during the liberation struggle against apartheid. I have limited my
investigation to this period due to the vibrancy of the engagement of sociology with
publics3. Furthermore, this period in South Africas history has become a common
referent and benchmark in Burawoys proposals for a reinvigoration of the field4.
Thereafter, question two and three are answered thorough an investigation into the
current status of the discipline with a specific focus on the implications of this for
the project of public sociology. Again, secondary literature is consulted in order to
address the issue at hand. Specific attention is paid to the opportunities and constraints
to the project of public sociology in South Africa today.
The second part of my analysis aims to answer these next three questions:
4) How can the field of public sociology be strengthened?
5) What is the role of the academic in strengthening public sociology?6) What contribution can public sociology make to the realisation of
emancipatory goals of new social movements in South Africa?
1.3. Methodology
To answer these questions, I employ an exploratory case study approach. The
motivation for this comes from Burawoys suggestion that case studies of public
sociology from below deserve attention and have been under- researched. This is
relevant when exploring the possibilities of these sites for building public sociology
grounded in emancipatory politics. As Burawoy (2005d)points out, there is a need for
an analysis of case studies that can provide concrete examples that help to broaden
understandings of some of the successes and failures, limits and obstacles as well
3For an in-depth account of a broader history of South African sociology, see Hugo (1998)
4See Burawoy (2005d) for further explanations
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
11/83
11
as how, sociology may be of relevance to popular movements and how sociology
may change itself as a result (pp.388).
The case study I have chosen to explore some possibilities of public sociology in
South Africa is a booklet that developed out of a year long series of discussions
between social movement members from the shackdwellers5 movements, Abahlali
baseMjondolo and the Rural Network, both based in the province of KwaZulu-Natal
in South Africa.
Abahlali baseMjondolo (AbM) is a radical shackdwellers movement located in and
around the city of Durban and spans over several informal settlements. It was formed
in 2005. The movement is the largest shackdwellers movement in South Africa today
(Saunders, 2009). The movement represents the urban poor living in informal
settlements. In 2008, the AbM joined with other radical grassroots movements across
the country to form the Poor Peoples Alliance. The Rural Network is part of this Poor
Peoples Alliance. The Network and other alliance partners have united with the Rural
Network in attempts to resist farm evictions and in struggles over land rights6.
The booklet was published in 2009 by the Church Land Programme and is entitled
Living Learning. Therefore, the specific case study is limited to the analysis of thisdocument. However, the document is a written record of a broader set of discussions
and interactions throughout the time-span of approximately one year (Figlan et al,
2009).
The context of the discussions is that the participants had become students at the
University of KwaZulu-Natal, studying towards a certificate in Education
5Shack is an informal term often used in the South African context. It roughly translates to informal
settlement.
6Strategic segregation and dispossession under colonial rule and apartheid has shaped the
contemporary division of land in South Africa. Land reform has been undertaken in the country, post-
apartheid, under three banners: land redistribution, land restitution & tenure reform. Many South
Africans live on farms under fragile tenure arrangements with little or no rights to the land on which
they have lived. The process has been riddled with inefficiencies and impediments and the process has
been criticised for its slow delivery and inability to secure tenure rights for farm dwellers. Thus, farm
evictions (like shack evictions) are a common feature in South Africas rural areas. For a detailed
account of South African land reform, see Ntsebeza, L & Hall, R. (2007)
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
12/83
12
(Participatory Development) with the Centre for Adult Education (Ntseng & Philpott,
2009:1). The aim of the discussions were to open up a space for the participants to
reflect on and grapple with ideas about the relationship between knowledge gained
in the university courses as opposed to that from within the movements. (ibid) Of
specific interest to the movements was how to engage with academia, academics and
the modes of knowledge within those spheres in a way that could be mutually
beneficial. Ultimately, the goal of the process was to see how best to combine the two
forms of knowledge that they had encountered that of experience and that of
academia, in order to strengthen their struggles at the grassroots (ibid.).
The booklet contains a summary of these discussions. An additional chapter at the end
allows three academics involved with the movement but not involved in the Living
Learning process to comment.
The booklet reflects a unique opportunity to glean insights into a broad array of topics
and stakeholders, all relevant to the project of public sociology. It is characterised by
the involvement of three separate groups of stakeholders- all with existent or potential
roles to play in strengthening the field. These stakeholders include academics and
academia within the university setting, academics involved with social movements
outside the university setting, as well as movement participants themselves.
Therefore, it was felt that limiting the study to this booklet alone would allow for an
in-depth analysis of a unique process that can be seen as a demonstration of a possible
mode of public engagement relevant to the project of public sociology.
The approach that is adopted is a , qualitative case study. According to Babbie &
Mouton (2006), This approach is more adept to the research as the emphasis in
qualitative methodology strives for a rich detailed description of specifics in an
attempt to understand actions within a specific context (p. 272). This case was
chosen based on its exemplary characteristic. According to Bryman (2004)
exemplary cases are chosen because of their, suitable context for certain research
questions to be answered and the case provides an, apt context for the working
through of the research questions (p. 51).
The booklet allows for a three-fold investigation. Firstly, this case study can be seen
as an example of public sociology at the grassroots. Secondly, it allows for some
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
13/83
13
insight into the limitations and possibilities for public sociology under certain
conditions. What is especially of use here is that the process allows one to evaluate
the possibilities based on the level of legitimacy in the eyes of the publics it is meant
to serve, i.e.: acceptance/resistance that public sociology and public sociologists could
encounter. Lastly, it can be seen as a working model of possible modes of
engagement between academics and publics.
The Results and Analysis of the case study were ordered according to two broad
headings, namely:
1) Form of Intellectual engagement2) Style of sociology
Approaching the text with these two broad categories is adopted to focus the research.
The research questions are answered by focusing on, firstly, the form of intellectual
engagement adopted within the movements- i.e.: the actors involved, secondly,
attention is paid to the form of intellectual engagement that the actors adopt.
1.4. Reflections on the Methodology
According to Mariampolski and Hughes (1978), the major constraint in using primarydata sources is that data collection and transmission procedures are beyond the
control of the researcher, and that the materials available are not a matter of
choice(p. 110). Due to the fact that I was not present and did not engage directly with
the participants made it impossible for me to guide the process or ask specific
questions relevant to my research question. This omission seems even more glaring
when considering that public sociology as well as the content of so much of the
living learning process centres on the idea that knowledge production should occurthrough dialogue and collaboration rather than in a situation where the researcher is
neutral and disengaged. This seems even more ironic given that the shackdwellers
movement, Abahlali baseMjondolo have adopted the slogan: Talk with us, not about
us (Birkenshaw, 2009:5).
However, I feel that given the aim of my study: to reflect on a process of public
sociology where the case in its entirety is the living learning process and the
reflections of the participants within it, this could also be seen as an advantage.
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
14/83
14
Especially given the proposition that public sociology can and does happen regardless
of academics. The case study has the advantage of studying social processes in a
particular social setting (Bryman, 2004). Through access to the content of the social
process through the Living Learning booklet, I am able to examine and reflect on the
process. Furthermore, other advantages of using this method are that documents are
non-reactive, and verifiable by others, while being relatively easy to access and
inexpensive to obtain (Greenstein, 2003).
I would now like to reflect on the issue of generalisability for mine, and other case
study research. According to Bryman (2004), one question on which a great deal of
discussion has centred concerns the external validity or generalizability of case study
research (p.51). In my case, as in other case studies it is not possible to view the
case as an example of a general trend. In fact, Bryman points out, it is important to
appreciate that case study researchers do not delude themselves that it is possible to
identify typical cases that can be used to represent a certain class of objects
(Bryman, 2004:51).
Given this, then, it is not viable to infer the possibilities and constraints to public
sociology unpacked through my analysis on a wider scale. However, as Chima (2005)
points out, there is significant scope for, the utility of the case-study method for
theory-building and theory reconstruction (p.2). Rather than viewing this case study
as representative of a general trend (which it is not), I would like the reader to see it as
a deep-investigation into a particular and unique process whereby public sociology
is being practiced and reflected on. Through a detailed thick description and
evaluation, the study aims to demonstrate how a process of public sociology could be
conducted whilst also focusing on possible impediments and constraints. This
motivation, backed up by Burawoys assertion that interrogations into real-world
case-studies can help to strengthen knowledge on the possibilities and constraints to
the project of public sociology.
Ultimately, the aim of this paper is to outline and reflect on the broader project of
public sociology in the South African case, before embarking on a more in-depth,
qualitative case study of a real-world example of where public sociology is being
practiced. In this way, this paper contributes to and expands on the body of literature
already existing in the field of public sociology.
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
15/83
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
16/83
16
Thereafter, a more narrow focus on the mode of intellectual engagement of the
movements is offered by reflecting on the University of Abahlali baseMjondolo.
This I an attempt by AbM to document the intellectual currents within Abahlali
baseMjdondolo (AbM) and its alliance partners including contributions from Rural
Network members. Thus the University of AbM represents intellectual currents from
both movements taking part in the Living Learning process.
Chapter Five is dedicated to the case study. First, the Living Learning process is
introduced. This is followed by a section of results. In this section, the process and
the insights from it are broken down into two categories, namely:
1) Form of intellectual engagement2) Style of sociology.
Each section is followed by an analysis through reflecting on the implications of the
results for the possibilities for public sociology.
Chapter Six covers the conclusion and the recommendations for further research.
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
17/83
17
Chapter Two: Conceptual Framework & Literature Review
2.1. Introduction
Appeals for a (re)turn to public sociology8 by Michael Burawoy in his 2004
presidential address for the American Sociological Association, has elevated the
notion of public sociology to the forefront of the sociological agenda.For Burawoy
there is a renewed interest in public sociology amongst social scientists. This is
related to an increasingly left leaning academy located within a global trend toward
inequality and domination through neoliberalism. Burawoy (2005d) refers to this as
the scissors movement where, Sociology has moved left and the world has moved
right.(p.5) The shift has, prompted critical sociologists to shift away from the
transformation of sociology to tackling the world a more daunting enterprise that I
call public sociology (Burawoy, 2005d). For Burawoy, the much needed
reinvigoration of the public face of sociology is critical and necessary both as a
moral agenda and for reinvigorating the discipline as a whole (Burawoy, 2005b).
Burawoys 2004 ASA address highlights the necessity of addressing the neglected
sphere of public sociology, specifically in the United States. However, he also
recognises that public sociology has been subordinated to the agenda of professional
sociology in other settings.
Burawoys critique of academic sociology frequently point to the fact that the
historical subordination of public sociology in the American context can be set in
direct opposition to the South African case which Burawoy presents as an ideal
type where public sociology has had a strong tradition and forms an integral
component of the discipline itself (Burawoy, 2004, 2005a, 2005b).Thus the term
public sociology is an American invention whereas, in countries such as South Africa,
it forms the basis of the discipline. Burawoy (2005b) states:
When I travel to South Africa, however, to talk about public sociology and this
would be true of many countries in the world my audiences look at me nonplussed.
What else would sociology be, if not an engagement with diverse publics about
public issues (p. 20).
8Burawoy defines public sociology as: A sociology that seeks to bring sociology to publics beyond
the academy, promoting dialogue about issues that affect the fate of society, placing the values to
which we adhere under a microscope (Burawoy et al 2004: 104).
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
18/83
18
However, in South Africa public sociology has declined. I therefore agree with
Burawoys urgent call for a reinvigoration of public sociology (which, as I will
show later has receded from its vibrancy during the liberation struggle period).
Many authors have documented this demise of public sociology in South Africa
9and it is my belief and argument, that the opportunity now exists for its
reinvigoration not from within the labour movement and in the field of labour
studies where it has traditionally been practiced, but rather by focusing on the
concept in relation to South Africas new social movements, especially within poor
people's movements10
.
My analysis will be grounded in the notion of public sociology coined by Burawoy
the appeal for which I find applicable and useful given the state of the discipline
globally and in South Africa. My theoretical slant will be fine tuned, however,
through extensions on Burawoys thesis by drawing from other authors in areas where
I feel his thesis lacks critical edge or where a more specific focus on the particularities
of my case are necessary.
2.2. The state of Sociology according to Burawoy
For reasons beyond the scope of this paper, Burawoy argues that sociology has
abandoned its moral fibre11
(Burawoy 2005b). For Burawoy this can be linked to
9See Buhlungu (2009) & Webster (2004)
10Neocosmos (2009: 268) suggests that historically, trade unions have constituted the typical
organisation of civil society. However, given the particularities of the current period, it is doubtful that
trade unions can continue to play this role given the different forms of capital accumulation which,
particularly, but not exclusively in the South, assume large numbers of unemployed, subcontracted,
casualisation, increased insecurity and so on. Buhlungu in Neocosmos (2009) has outlined how the
trade union movement in was at the forefront of the liberation struggle in South Africa, but too has lost
much of its vibrancy due to liberalisation and its alignment with the ruling party the ANC. During the
current phase civil society has been hailed as the key to an emancipatory future. However, much of
what is considered civil society under the neoliberal post-apartheid regime is too intimately linked to
private or state interests. Thus, For Neocosmos, and also the stance I will take in this paper, South
Africas new social movements (often poor peoples movements) are the key to an emancipatory future
and thus the domain from within which public sociology of an emancipatory type should be situated.
11In his 2004 ASA address, Burawoy addresses the idea that the origins of sociology can be linked to
its rootedness in and moral commitment to society. However, due to the desire within the discipline
towards scientism and objectivism, sociology has become professionalised and deeply disconnected
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
19/83
19
the elevation of Professional Sociology (rooted in the building of professional,
objective, scientific knowledge , a dialectic of progress) above other forms of
knowledge within the discipline. Important to Burawoy is that Sociology has
become more about academic credentials and the building of a professional career
than about issues (such as social justice, equality, human rights) that originally
concerned social scientists. The solution is not a return to a more public sociology
but rather the recognition of the merits of this form of knowledge within the
professional academy and more dialogue between sociologies that recognise and
draw from the strengths of other sociologies. In other words all forms of
sociologies have their distinct methods and merits and to subordinate any one form is
to harm others as all sociologies rely on the existence and vigour of the other
forms.(ibid)
At the centre of Burawoys thesis is that the discipline of Sociology can be roughly
divided into four quadrants (what he calls a division of sociological labour) four
distinct fields of sociology. By asking two simple questions namely, Sociology for
whom? And Sociology for What?, Burawoy asserts that it is possible to distinguish
these four distinct strands Professional Sociology, Policy Sociology, Critical
Sociology and Public Sociology. Whilst it is important to understand the relationshipsand difference between these four sociologies, my focus is on the possibility of
reinvigorating specifically public sociology due to its decline in South Africa.
Thus, Table 1 is attached in order to show, briefly, how Burawoy conceptualises the
four types of sociology and the manner that each differs from and relates to the other
forms.
from its rootedness in a primary commitment to civil society. For a detailed account see Burawoy
(2005 b)
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
20/83
20
In the case of public sociology knowledge centres on communicative knowledge
between sociologists and publics and that knowledge is based on consensus
between sociologists and their publics. (Burawoy, 2005b) It is thus that knowledge
production within this sphere is not contingent on ideas around active academic
conveying knowledge, and passive (lay) recipient. Legitimacy within this sphere can
be claimed based on, relevance, being ultimately accountable to designated publics
and underpinned by a politics based upon democratic public dialogue. (Fuller, 2008:
836) The implications here are that public sociology, then, involves the engagement
of individuals outside academia (the university) through an array of approaches
which need to, ultimately, engage with their intended audience, which, in turn should
simultaneously place the role of academics and the values within which
academics/intellectuals operate, under a microscope. Important to Burawoys
assumption is that, whilst he calls for a wider audience through extending sociology
more broadly to incorporate its public face, it does not discredit or negate the need
for forms that interact with a more narrow academic audience. In fact, Burawoy(2005c) states:
This division between academic audiences and extra-academic audiences implies that
sociology cannot be reduced to its activist or pragmatic moment, but has an
indispensable scholarly moment, requiring its own relative autonomy. Equally, the
necessity for such autonomy does not gainsay our responsibility for taking our
research, or the implications of our research, to constituencies beyond the academy,
constituencies that would benefit from sociological knowledge. Their responses in
turn become a living laboratory for our research programmes ( p. 2).
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
21/83
21
In Burawoys understanding, public sociology should involve multiple publics- in
this sense, he refers to public sociologies different sociologies that address
different publics. Burawoy et al ( 2004) assert:
What is important here is the multiplicity of public sociologies, reflecting the
multiplicity of publics visible and invisible, thick and thin active and passive local,
national and even global, dominant and counter publics. The variety of publics
stretches from our students to the readers of our books, from newspaper columns to
interviews, from audiences in local civic groups such as churches or neighbourhoods
to social movements we facilitate. The possibilities are endless (p.104)
For Burawoy, public sociology can be divided into two categories: traditional
public sociology and organic public sociology.
2.3. Public Sociology
Traditional public sociology
Within the realm of traditional public sociology exist those sociologists who assist
in shifting academic research into the public realm. Thus, for Burawoy, this includes
those writing books read beyond the academy that become a catalyst for critical
public discussion about the nature of society as well as those, writing in the opinion
pages of national newspapers. (Burawoy, 2005b: 7) In this sphere can be included
newspaper and column writing (journalists) where issues of public importance are
discussed and debated. Burawoy (2005b) summarises this neatly:
Within the traditional public sociology camp, can be placed those sociologists
whose, publics being addressed are generally invisible in that they cannot be seen,
thin in that they do not generate much internal interaction, passive in that they do not
constitute a movement or organization, and they are usually mainstream. The
traditional public sociologist instigates debates within or between publics, although
he or she might not actually participate in them. (p.7)
Organic Public Sociology
The organic public sociologist works directly, often face-to-face with publics in the
trenches of civil society. (Burawoy 2005c: 4)
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
22/83
22
For Burawoy the primary role of organic public sociology is to foster a process of
mutual education outside of the ivory tower. More specifically, this mutual
education that Burawoy envisages is based on his idea for mechanisms to resist the
destructive effects (at the global as well as local level) of Third-wave marketisation
or neoliberalism. Thus, primary to his vision, is the idea that the role of the organic
public intellectual is to, find their niche as interpreters, communicators and
intermediaries, tying together local movements across national boundaries
(Burawoy, 2008: 357). The role of the sociologist here, is to articulate to publics
that local conditions are intimately tied to this global phenomenon.
Organic public sociologyrepresents a different (but complementary) face of public
sociology to that of traditional public sociology. Burawoys ideas about organic
public sociologists (and intellectuals) have strong connections to Gramscis notion of
the organic intellectual.12
For Burawoy (2005b), the sociologist works in close
connection with a visible, thick, active, local and often counter-public(p.7). It is
through extending the reach of sociology through organic public sociology, that
sociology (as a discipline) will manage to foster greater public currency. (Boyns &
Fletcher, 2006) This is an important proposition. Burawoy posits that the ideal-type
public sociology would ultimately be one whereby there exists a dialogue betweensociologists and lay-people about the values and goals of their communities.
(Burawoy, 2005c: 4) For Burawoy, one of the reasons for the marginality of public
sociology is that, in the case of organic public sociology the field is often
separated from the professional lives of sociologists and thus connections are not
forged between professional and public aspects (between the activist and academic).
Thus, for Burawoy, a central task of public sociology is, to make visible the invisible
to make private public, to validate these organic connections as part of our
sociological life (Burawoy, 2005b: 8). From these assesments, it is clear that public
sociology often has an undeniably normative and political character.
12Gramsci felt it crucial to foster organic intellectuals from within the working class as well as to
win over traditional intellectuals to assist with the revolutionary cause. (Mayo 1999)
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
23/83
23
Relationship of Public Sociology to Other Sociologies
For Burawoy (2005b) , professional sociology provides the conceptual framework
and bodies of knowledge without which public sociology and policy sociology could
not function. For critical sociology professional sociology is the fiber from
which it exists without a professional sociology to critique, critical sociology
would not exist. Professional sociology is restricted to an academic audience, which
can be entered after one is trained in the discipline, thus professional sociologists do
not interact directly with the public. For Burawoy (2005b), professional sociology is
concerned primarily with , multiple intersecting research programs, each with their
own assumptions, exemplars, defining questions, conceptuals apparatuses and
evolving theores (p.10).
Whilst it is not necessary to explain the role and scope of policy sociology beyond
what is explained in Table 1, I would like to point out that an important role of public
sociology is to, problematize the goals taken for granted by policy science, and to do
so by heightening the self-consciousness of publics through broad converstations
about values (Burawoy, 2005c:3).
The primary role of critical sociology is to examine and reflect on the foundations and
assumptions (both normative and descriptive) of the research programmes of
professional sociology. Burawoy asserts the importance of critical sociology in posing
the two questions mentioned before namely, Sociology for Whom? And Sociology
for What? In this case , rather critical sociology offers a mirror on other forms of
sociology by addressing these aims in a reflexive manner. Firstly it poses the
questions of who is (or should be) the audience for sociology. Thus, although the
audience of critical sociology does not (usually) extend beyond the scope of academic
audiences, it is shining the light in the face of professional sociology and
questioning its narrow academic audience.
Instrumental versus Reflexive Knowledge
For Burawoy the four strands of sociology can be divided up between those
employing instrumental knowledge and those employing reflexive knowledge.13
13Burawoy points out that the question of reflexive knowledge versus instrumental knowledge can be
traced back to Max Webers discussion of technical and value rationality. Burawoy points out that
questions raised by Weber and, following him, the Frankfurt school show that concerns around the fact
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
24/83
24
Burawoys, central distinction between the two forms of revolves around the notions
of the ends of society versus the means for achieving those ends (Burawoy,
2005b:11). For Burawoy professional and policy sociology are concerned with
questions about means or how to achieve goals. It is from this overt focus on
means that an overtly positivist emphasis on value free methods arises. In contrast
critical and public sociology employ reflexive knowledge (where dialogue centres
around questions of ends). Reflexive knowledge, embraces not detachment but
engagement as the road to knowledge (Burawoy, 1998: 5). A neutral approach to
science is not intended. Central to a reflexive engagement is the acknowledgement
that , power and context need to be at the core of scientific investigation (Sinwell,
2009:30). In fact, for Burawoy (1998), reflexive science thrives on context and seeks
to reduce the effects of power-domination, silencing, objectification and
normalization. Reflexive science realises itself with the elimination of power effects,
with the emanipation of the lifeworld (p.33). Sinwell (2009) asserts that Burawoys
propositions suggest the necessity of social scientific engagement that seeks to
address (and alter) opressive power relations. For Burawoy (2005b) therefore,
reflexive knowledge , questions the value premises of society as well as our
profession (p.11). Approaching theory and research with either reflexive or
instrumental premises entails different ideas about knowledge. For Burawoy, this
explains why different sociologies talk past each other with the result of talking
down to other forms of sociology instead of partaking in constuctive engagement
with each other (see Table 1).
As previously mentioned the real worry for Burawoy is the hegemonic position of
professional sociology and the sidelining of public sociology which has resulted in
the professionalisation and alienation of the discipline as a whole. My stance in this
paper (which I will back up through outlining the decline of public sociology,
public intellectuals and civil society) is in support of Burawoys thesis.
that technical concerns serve to rule out discussions around values. Burawoy points out that these
questions were central concerns for Adorno and Horkheimer or what the former referred to as the
dialectic of enlightenment and what the later referred to as the eclipse of reason (Burawoy 2005b:
11).
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
25/83
25
My main aim is not in debating whether , in fact, public sociology has declined, but
rather to take it as given ( through providing some evidence) and then moving onto
my point of departure which is in exploring the possibilities for the reinvigoration of
public sociology (as defined by Burawoy) . I believe that, despite institutional and
political impediments, opportunities exist for this in contemporary South Africa. His
proposition has come at a time when bottom-up movement building has come to
inhabit an important place both in theory and practice within the discipline. (Katz-
Fishmann & Scott, 2005) For Burawoy, the site of this reinvigoration is from within
civil society. In my opinion, Burawoys optimism in civil society is too broad.I
believe that many organs of what is today considered civil society such as many
NGOs, trade unions etc are not possible sights for the reinvigoration of public
sociology. Rather, the sites for this revival are from within South African social
movements (specifically its new social movements)14
.
1.4. Reflections on Burawoys Public Sociology
Certain limitations are apparent in Burawoys account of public sociology especially
when applied to the South African context. This next section reflects on the
suggestions and insights gleaned from the critiques of Burawoys public sociology
by others. I will now turn to outlining some relevent critiques.
Critical-Public Sociology
Burawoy proposes conflating some of the functions, forms and commitments of
public and critical sociology. This calls for critical sociologists to break free of the
academic setting in order to engage directly with publics. The aim of this
engagement is, not to control them but to expand their powers of self-determination
(Burawoy 2005 in Baiocchi, 2005: 341). Baiocchi (2005) suggests that this
proposition by Burawoy firmly suggests a public sociology (of a specific type) that is
more obviously normative and counter-hegemonic (engaging directly with publics
such as the poor, delinquents, incarcerated individuals in order to expand their
potential for self determination) he thus calls this specific type critical-public
sociology. As Katz-Fishmann & Scott (2005) assert, Burawoys call is for a critical
and transformative public sociology whose goal is realising the real utopia of
socialism (p.371).
14(See footnote 2)
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
26/83
26
Baiocchi (2005) points out that, what is being suggested is, a sociology that is more
political and harkens back more to Paulo Freire and Gramsci (p.341). Importantly,
this specific form of public sociology lacks (historical) working models for reference.
Baiocchi (2005) undertakes the task of starting off where Burawoy left off by
investigating in more depth the possibilities of a critical-public sociology.
At the crux of Baiocchis (2005) argument is that calls for a public sociology (in
general) are unlikely to engender much opposition from multiple stakeholders (but
especially universities) when the call is for participation and public debate.
However, the author argues that, when a critical-sociology is proposed, the
implications are that it entails an overt political programme that is normative. In other
words, it clearly adopts the stance that, in the words of Schatzki, is a resounding
affirmation of the desirability of normative investigation (Vale & Jacklin, 2009: 13).
These projects are thus much more likely to engender opposition. The author
recognises that power plays occur both within civil society and
universities/between academics. This is an important point. Whilst Burawoy argues
for more collaboration with civil society this term is employed broadly. This relates
to the definition of civil society employed by Burawoy (2005b), which he defines
as:
a product of late 19th century Western capitalism that produced associations,
movements and publics that were outside both state and economy political parties,
trade unions, schooling, communities of faith, print media and a variety of voluntary
organizations (p.24).
This is problematic in the South African context. The autonomy of civil society in the
African (and South African context) has been debated at length. What is important to
note here, though, is that many organisations (mainly poor peoples movements) that
operate with radical (critical) programmes are excluded from what is considered civil
society. For Pithouse (2009), there are interesting theoretical debates on the nature
of civil society but in the general practice of the media, politicians and most non-
governmental organisations (NGOs), the term is most often assumed to refer to
donor-funded NGOs rather than popular politics (p.145). It is thus, that Chatterjees
distinction between civil society and political society is important in this context
where those operating within the popular sphere are, largely, excluded from the
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
27/83
27
sphere of civil society and lack the benefits afforded by the legitimacy gained by
being part of it. (Pithouse 2009) Much of what is considered civil society is, in fact,
intimately tied to the state (and its political and economic programmes) especially in
the case of the poor.15
In the South African context sociologists linked with more
radical movements often come up against strong opposition both from the state and
academia where political work is frowned upon and where political neutrality is
expected (Baiocchi, 2005).
For Baiocchi (2005) engagement between academics and civil society (under the
guise of participation) instead, involves the university as a patron offering assistance
and knowledge to those needing it. Thus, the idea of public sociology in itself does
not challenge directly ideas about the necessity of academic expertise, does not
question social change and is, neutral enough to be palatable to mainstream liberals
and conservatives (p. 343). For Baiocchi however, when critical sociology is
coupled with public sociology the result would be resistance from multiple camps
state, academia, and civil society16
.
What are the Ends of Public Sociology?
Through engaging with a multitude of texts by Burawoy, I was struck by the
ambiguity and sometimes contradictory message with regards to exactly what his
political objectives with the project of public sociology are. When addressing a
wider academic audience during his ASA presidential address, the project seems to
imply little more than a call for public participation17
. Yet, when addressing critical
audiences, Burawoys project seems to take on a more radial socialist agenda.
15See Pithouse 2009 for an in-depth explanation
16Baiocchi (2005) offers a fascinating example to demonstrate the difficulties facing critical-public
sociologies within the university setting. The author points out how, during the 1970s, a number of
ethnic studies departments in the USA attempted to challenge eurocentric pedagogy and to foster
community connections and social change. The first Chicano studies department was modelled on
ideas about Chicano liberation and employed means that called for a dialogue where academic
knowledge be subordinated to ethnic knowledge. The demand was not for the people to work for the
university, but rather for the university to work for the people. The author points out that all
departments that have attempted to foster critical publics have come under strong opposition and
repression.
17See Burawoy (2005b)
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
28/83
28
Regardless, critical sociologists have criticized the project in that it is felt that too
many compromises with professional sociology are made (Burawoy, 2005d).
Academics from the critical school have asserted that Burawoys four-pronged model
for the sociologies is irrevocably tainted (Burawoy 2005d). These authors posit that,
professional sociologies instrumental knowledge is incompatible with the reflexive
knowledge of public sociology. (ibid) Furthermore, The praxis of public sociology
cannot be based on concepts and classifications produced in professional sociology
(Ghamari-Tabrizi in Burawoy, 2005d: 387). Burawoys (2005d) response to these
claims is that both professional and critical-public sociologists should unite over the
common threat that neoliberalism poses to each. For professional sociology, the threat
is that the privatising mechanism of neoliberalism could, strip the university of its
public role (p.388). Whilst, for critical-public sociology, the struggle over the effects
of neoliberalism is playing out in communities. Thus Burawoys main justification for
collaboration, in this sense is that, both the university and the public sphere are
subject to the colonizing pressures of states and markets and it is at this level that the
contradiction between publics and professions sublate into a potentially common
front. (ibid: 389). Here, Burawoys vision for public sociology is posited directly
toward its emancipatory potential. During the anti-apartheid struggle emancipationmeant liberation, whilst, today, For Burawoy and others that advocate public
sociology, emancipation is though against the economic and political forces of
neoliberalism. This is, ultimately, the ends that are imagined in Burawoys public
sociology. It is an end that both Burawoy and his critics from within critical circles
agree on.
What is an issue, then, is the compatibility of other forms of sociology with these
emancipatory goals of public sociology as well as its focus on praxis. Despite the
grounds for common struggle that Burawoy proposes, the fact remains that some of
the central premises of the two forms of sociology are at odds with each other. Some
of these difficulties will become evident through my case study in a later section.
Why Sociology?
It is important to address Burawoys insistence that organic, public engagement is
best located within the field of sociology. For Burawoy, social sciences are not a
melting pot of disciplines but rather each specific strand aims, primarily to,
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
29/83
29
preserve the grounds on which their knowledge stands (Burawoy, 2005b: 24). For
Burawoy the central tenet of Sociology is that it is focuses on civil society and the
expansion of social issues. The fact that this sphere has been systematically
encroached and threatened by both markets (which is the focus of economics) and
states (the main focus of political science) is the reason that public sociology is
offered in order to bolster a threatened civil society. It is thus that the objectives
(and interest) of both civil society and sociology are (by the very nature of both)
to, keep at bay both state despotism and market tyranny (Burawoy, 2005b: 24). In
the South African case, certainly, official accounts of what can be seen as organic
public sociology has largely occurred between sociologists (sociology of labour) and
civil society in the form of civics and trade unions (Buhlungu, 2009).
To me, however, the necessity of limiting the scope and prospects of public sociology
(or social science) to sociology is short sighted. Numerous examples of other
(smaller) disciplines exploring the possibilities of a more public-academic
engagement exist. In fact, Bacciochi (2005) points out that, often smaller disciplines
without the same focus on science and objectivity have better dealt with expanding
their scope to deal with publics for example cultural studies. Furthermore, Fuller
& Askins (2010) show that the scope for public geography and publicanthropology is enormous and already underway. It is thus that, although I will still
refer to public sociology, I would like the reader to understand the term in a more
loose sense not ruling out the possibility for other social sciences and social
scientists to be understood as practicing public sociology.
Sociology OF or Sociology FOR Publics?
Whilst Burawoys notion of a public sociology certainly pushes the boundaries (and
probably some buttons) within the discipline, it is clear that his conception indicates
an insistence on the central role and importance of the intellectual/academic
(specifically the sociologist). In addressing his (academic) audience, Burawoy
acknowledges that there are risks in bringing sociology to a wider non-academic
audience (although he does not specify what these dangers are). Presumably the risks
alluded to have something to do with the dilution of academic and scientific
credentials of the discipline but stresses that, nevertheless, public sociology is an
important and timely pursuit where the benefits are potentially great both for the
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
30/83
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
31/83
31
organisations and movements who are analytical in their perspective and engaged in a
process of social change and social transformation. (ibid). For these authors, there
are two paths to organic public sociology with location as the decisive factor.
The first path is through the academy and involves the search for relevance and
audience. Thus the process is one where sociology precedes publics. The second
type evolves out of social struggle and involves bringing, activists, organisations
and movements to social analysis and social theory out of their social practice and as
a necessity for social transformation. (Katz-Fishmann & Scott, 2005: 372). This
assertion implies that the tools for social analysis are not the exclusive property of
academics and the academy. For these authors organic public sociology occurs when
radicals attach themselves to movements during periods of social struggle thus
suggesting that, the impulse is from the outside in (ibid). The renewed desire for
public sociology, during the first decade of the 21stcentury can thus be explained by
the fact that, we find ourselves in another period of growing social motion; and
radical sociologists are seeking once more to connect to the movement that is arising
in local, national and global civil society. (ibid).
Brewer (2005: 356) points out Burawoys failure to address the question, Whose
knowledge is a public sociology? For Brewer, Burawoys vision of public sociology
assumes the primacy and legitimacy of dominant left discourses and fails to leave
open the space for the possibility of a public-sociology, not only practiced, but also
thought from below. Brewer (2005) posits, here sociology isnt brought to the
public ala the assumption of Burawoys Public Sociology but new societies are co-
creations. (p. 357). For Brewer, sociology is yet to create this deep dialogue that
transcends difference and power and is required for a meaningful and
emancipatory project of public sociology. (ibid: 358) Instead, the seeds for a united
struggle across borders, is being articulated from within these spaces, rather than
within sociology with the ability to confront and challenge, neoliberalism and
global capitalism and empire.
Regardless of these critiques, for Katz-Fishman & Scott (2005), Burawoys naming of
public sociology is important. This is because it helps to set it apart from
professional sociology and assert clearly, public sociologies aim -which, is
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
32/83
32
ultimately, the revolutionary transformation of society socialism and communism.
(Ibid: 373).
The questioning of the role of the public sociologist by Fuller & Askins as well as the
(re) definition of public sociology and public sociologist by Katz-Fishman & Scott
and Brewer are important. What these authors have suggested is that sociology
cannot be considered the exclusive domain of the academy especially if the notion
of public sociology continues to gain legitimacy within that academy. The real
challenge for public sociologists is whether they can remain connected to and
approach as equals the publics involved in social movements as well as remaining
committed to ideas about popular education without retreating into the academy
(ibid).
Public Sociologist as puppet?
It is important to scrutinise the role expected of intellectuals by those who they
represent beyond the academy. Baviskar (2008) addresses the notion that many
organisations (such as social movements) seek out sociologists to champion their
cause rather than to engage critically with them. It is thus that academics adopting
this role garner praise for these groups while, at the same time, recognition for
themselves. Whilst this engagement with publics beyond the academy is necessary,
it does raise questions about the danger of uncritical engagement on the part of the
intellectual. In other words, as Baviskar (2008) states, engagement on these terms
may entail suppressing critical issues, steering clear of questions about internal
democracy, ideological contradictions or long term strategy (p.431). Similarly,
Habib (2008) points out that concerns surface about Burawoys, idealized advocacy
of the public sociologists engagement in public discourse in the service of the
subaltern, which may lead her or him to lose the ability to be the scientist, which
involves in part the ability to critique the common sense of the subaltern (p.390).
Under this scenario then, uncritical engagement by academics with publics (social
movements) could lead to a situation that, ultimately does not serve either social
movements or sociology.
2.5. Conclusion
I take up Burawoys proposition that public forms of sociology have been
marginalized globally and in South Africa. Furthermore, I adopt Burawoys call for
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
33/83
33
the urgent bolstering of public sociology. However, like some critical theorists, I
remain hesitant about the extent to which reflexive and instrumental knowledge can
engage and benefit from one another or more specifically, the possible mutual
engagement between professional and critical-public sociology. This is an issue that
will be explored within this paper. Ultimately my analysis will explore the
possibilities of and reflect on the obstacles to reinvigorating public sociology in
South Africa.
Fuller & Askins (2010) questioning of the role of the academic will be central to my
analysis as well as questions about participation and mutual determination by
reflecting on a concrete example to tackle Baviskar (2008) assumptions. It is thus that
I accept the argument that public sociology cannot be the exclusive domain of
academic intellectuals but can (and is) practiced by individuals and groups outside of
academia.
I feel that Katz-Fitchmann & Scotts (2005) contribution, that of viewing public
sociology as coming from two very different positions one outside academia and
the other from within the academy, is useful. In fact, Burawoy recognises the merits
in the strategies of some academics that are, immersing themselves in struggles for
social justice beyond the university (Burawoy 2005d: 388). For Burawoy this
strategy involves positioning oneself within, the rising tide of social movements and
then hoping that the tide will flood back into the academy. (ibid) For him, this is a
valid approach and deserves further investigation. Here, Burawoy (2005d) cites the
example of Katz-Fitchmann & Scotts Project South:
Id like to hear more concrete analysis of the successes and failure, limits and
obstacles of the political engagements of Project South how sociology may be of
relevance to popular movements and how sociology may itself change as a result. We
desperately need case studies of public sociology and in this regard Project South
could become an important laboratory of organic public sociology. (p.388)
This statement by Burawoy summarises the aim of this paper. I too seek to grapple
with the notion of public sociology and to explore the opportunities and limitations of
it. The next two chapters aim to explore this problematic. Firstly, I will investigate
more carefully the particularities of the South African situation through a reflection
on both its past and present and the implications of these for the practice of public
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
34/83
34
sociology today. Thereafter, I introduce my case study as a real-world South
African case where organic public sociology is being practiced. The next two chapters
of this study aim to further reflect on the possibilities and constraints to a project of
public sociology.
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
35/83
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
36/83
36
with other actors. For Buhlungu (2009), intellectuals showed not only a dedication to
scholarship, but also to ideas of social justice and equality. Intellectuals and activists
within the trade unions and social movements collaborated with university-based
intellectuals and also undertook active collaboration with publics (ibid.)19
.
Buhlungu (2009) points out that collaboration was not a one-way street especially
after 1985 when COSATU was formed and the labour movement began to find its
own voice. The concepts presented by public sociology during this period were often
appropriated by these groups and given new meanings that were more in tune with the
lived experiences of members of the public. (ibid) Importantly, this period signalled a
shift, whereby unions began to develop their own intellectual capacity and their
dependence on university-based intellectuals waned, increasingly causing the retreat
of the public-intellectual with a reduced role to play within the struggle as civil
society was mobilising and strengthening its ability to fight its own struggle.
Nzimande (2005) points out:
The South African liberation struggle has thrown up thousands of organic
intellectuals, many of whom cannot even write, and who are hardly quoted in what
we sometimes regard as platforms for public intellectuals (e.g. media, journals etc).
These are neither accredited with the status of being intellectuals, let alone public
intellectuals. Yet they play their role of public intellectuals, within the public that is
the mass of people of our country on the ground and in their respective organisations
(p. 2).
This was a period of strong critical organic engagement that epitomises Burawoys
ideal-type of public sociology where organic intellectuals engaged reflexively with
civil society in theorising and actively pursuing the goal of liberation. In fact, it was
during this period (the early 1990s) that Burawoy was struck by the stark contrast
19During this period, public sociology was primarily carried out by labour sociologists and within
labour studies departments within the universities. The growth of labour studies in South Africa is
rooted primarily in events linked to the 1973 strikes in Durban, South Africa with African workers
demanding wage increases. Later the interest of labour sociologists shifted to a preoccupation with
formulating, a response by helping Black workers in general to form their own movements and
organizations and by providing them with ideas and concepts to make sense of their circumstances.
(Buhlungu 2009: 146)
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
37/83
37
between South African sociology and the, hyper-professionalized American
sociology (Burawoy, 2004: 11).
Burawoy warns that, given global forces and trends within the field of sociology
towards professional and policy sociology, South Africa may be under considerable
pressure to shift its focus towards these fields and away from its strong tradition of
public sociology.
3.2. South African Sociology in the Post-Apartheid Period
The post-apartheid statehas little patience for public and critical sociologies that
articulate the disparate interests to be found in society. The assault on sociology
becomes part of a broader offensive against an active society.
Burawoy quoted in Webster (2004:27)
For many authors, the post-apartheid period has signalled a decline, not only for
public sociology, but also for the social sciences in general.20
The decline of public
sociology in post-apartheid South Africa is a complex issue. Opinions vary according
to vantage point. Burawoy (2005c) opines that public sociology is inimical to South
African Sociology and, despite several impediments, still shows promise. Others
lament its decline. The issue is complex. When the decline of public sociology is
specifically tackled, it is largely attributed to the downswing of labour studies in the
country as the sphere where public sociology formally defined, has historically
been most active (Buhlungu, 2009, Webster, 2004).
In the previous section, I posited that sociology not be considered in a vacuum - and
that the possibility of organic public (sociological) engagement does not have to be
within the exclusive domain of sociology and sociologists. When Burawoy tackles the
issue, he speaks of broader issues that are affecting the academy, but with a direct
focus on the erosion of the autonomy of sociology. I will tackle this section with a
broader focus on the effects on critical and public engagement within the humanities
and on intellectuals in general.
20For example, Sitas (1997) & Buhlungu (2009)
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
38/83
38
Considerable literature on the retreat of intellectuals in South Africa is available.21
At
the centre of current debates is the issue of a perceived erosion of academic freedom-
especially with regards to dissent with state policies and politics. The decline of a
critical-public academia is intimately tangled with shifts occurring at the level of the
post-apartheid state as well as in civil society. The shifts are both structural and
social. At the crux of the shifts within civil society and academia, is the fact of co-
option of these structures and aversion of dissent by South Africas new democratic
state. Neoliberalism has also played a pivotal role. This is linked to the post-apartheid
States developmental agenda as well as its adoption of the Growth, Employment and
Redistribution strategy (GEAR) in 1996 - a broad based neoliberal macro-economic
strategy. Burawoy (2004) summarises the effects that these shifts have had on
sociology:
The cornerstone of anti-apartheid sociology was its public face that depended on
close engagement with burgeoning civic organizations and trade unions. Whether the
result of the upward mobility of leaders or of the neoliberal offensive, South Africa
has witnessed the demobilization of civics and trade unions, rendering sociology
increasingly rudderless. (Burawoy, p.23)
The current state of the academy is important for this paper. Its interrogation helpsto understand both the opportunities for and impediments to a reinvigorated South
African public sociology. It is beyond the scope of this paper to cover the vast
literature on the topic. The line of analysis I follow is primarily the possibilities for
critical-public engagement within the field in present day South Africa with an eye
toward emancipatory politics. These are the visions alluded to by Burawoy (2005d)
and further expanded on and commented on by authors such as Katz-Fishman & Scott
(2005), Brewer (2005) as well as Fuller & Askins (2010). Here, I fine tune these
visions by focusing specifically on the South African case in terms of the possibilities
for critical reflection, public engagement and also the mixture of the two in the form
of critical-public sociology. Special focus will be given to the possibility of critical
public engagement from within the university - as this is, ultimately, Burawoy's
grand vision.
21See Pithouse (2006), Gumede & Dikeni (2009) & Jacklin & Vale (2009)
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
39/83
39
I will begin by outlining what Webster & Adler (1999) call South Africas double
transition with a specific emphasis on its implications for critical-public engagement
in South Africa. Thereafter, I will turn to the possibilities for and channels that are
most likely to facilitate a critical-public sociology in South Africa today.
South Africas Double Transition
Critical thinking and its language have been flattened by the combined effects of the
marketisation of the academy, on the one hand, and the greed and avarice of South
Africas political class who have benefited from the closing down of critical space, on
the other hand. (Vale & Jacklin 2009: 11)
The early 1990s were a period of significant uncertainty for the future of South
Africa. During this period, the country underwent what Webster & Adler (1999) call a
double transition. On the political front, the shift was towards democracy.
Economically, an agenda of market liberalism, or neoliberalism, was pursued. The
adoption of a broad-based neoliberal macro-economic programme (GEAR) in South
Africa in 1996 was a far cry from the socialist visions of the liberation struggle. Thus,
Bond (2005) calls it the, betrayal of the liberation struggle (p.3).
The Post-apartheid State,The University, Sociology and Intellectuals
The democratic transition dramatically altered state/civil society/intellectual relations
(Habib, 2005: 677). Ballard et al (2006) point out that this moment in South Africas
history signifies the moment when the leaders of South Africas anti-apartheid social
movements entered the corridors of political power and that, the euphoria of the
political transition led many to expect that the need for adversarial social struggle
with the state was over22
(p.1). This period became primarily considered one
whereby state-civil society relations were, and should be, primarily collaborative23
.
22The role of civil society in the overthrow of apartheid is frequently outlined. For the sake of brevity,
I will not outline the vibrant civil society that existed in South Africa during the 1970s and 1980s,
leading up to the end of apartheid in 1994. For a detailed account of this, see Bond in Gibson (2006)
and Bond (2005) as well as Neocosmos (2009)
23This is not to say that all state-civil society relations during apartheid were, necessarily antagonistic-
there was a significant portion of what was then conceptualised as legitimate civil society that worked
largely with/within the domain of the state what can now be referred to as white civil society. See
Habib (2005) for further explanations.
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
40/83
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
41/83
41
and function of South African civil society during the post-apartheid period
necessarily signalled similar shifts in the role of the organic intellectuals working with
civil society during the liberation struggle. (Gumede, 2009). Gumede (2009) points
out, after 1994, many progressive intellectuals in South Africa were demobilised,
by being offered jobs in government, often on condition that they did not speak
against the government or party (p.29). Many intellectuals joined either government
or NGOs designated the task of helping the post-apartheid state with its agenda for
development. The effect has been the demobilisation of public engagement from
within the social sciences.
Civil Society , Academia and Intellectuals under Neoliberalism in Post-apartheid
South Africa
One distinctive feature of the South African case is that the globalisation process was
simultaneously accompanied by a political transition from apartheid to a democratic
order. The substantive compromise of this transition was the incoming regimes
support for neo-liberal economic policies in exchange for capitals acceptance of
black economic empowerment and some affirmative action.
(Ballard et al in Ballard et al 2006:12)
Globalisation has been described in both horizontal as well as in vertical terms.26It is
the vertical dimension of globalisation that concerns us here (neo-liberal
globalisation). (Alexander in Alexander, 2006) Since the 1980s a liberalizing trend
was set in motion in South Africa, and, during the shift from apartheid to democracy
was fully realised with the implementation of GEAR. Thus, the aim of integrating
South Africa into the global economy was solidified. The effect on the economic and
social realities of many South Africans has been devastating. Fiscal austerity
measures and practices of cost-recovery have cut off access to basic services for many
poor communities; others have faced home repossessions and rent evictions
(McDonald & Pape, 2002). In a nutshell, the major impact has been an increase in
inequality as well as poverty in the country (Habib, 2005). Furthermore, neoliberalism
26According to Alexander in Alexander (2006:14), it was during the 1990s that globalisation was
viewed in more horizontal terms. This is evident in many different dimensions of conceptualising
globalisation , as time-space compression (Harvey 1989), intensification of worldwide social
relations (Giddens 1990), an integrated world economy (Harris 1983) and an information
technology' revolution (Castells 1997).
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
42/83
42
has complicated and divided various organs within the sphere of civil society.
According to Esteves et al (2009):
This situation (neoliberalism) has led to an increasing tension between, on one hand,
officially-approved versions of popular participation in politics geared towards the
mobilization of consent for neo-liberalism through institutional channels the world
of "consultation", NGOs and civil society - and, on the other hand, the less polite and
polished world of people's attempts to participate in politics on their own terms, in
their own forms and for their own purposes social movements, popular protest,
direct action, and so on what Sen (2005), and Piotrowski (2009) distinguish as civil
and incivil society (p.1).
Within the academy, neoliberalism has had distinct ideological as well as structuraleffects. Firstly, the adoption of neoliberalism and its promise of redistribution through
the trickle-down effect stamped out the possibility of imagining radical
alternatives such as those envisaged during the liberation struggle period. (Jacklin &
Vale 2009) Furthermore, structural shifts in line with neoliberal guidelines have
inhibited critical currents within the academy in general, but especially in the social
sciences, where critical thought and a focus on social issues predominate. Burawoy
(2004) maintains, following the lead of the World Bank disquisitions on higher
education, the government has imposed a structural adjustment on the social
sciences, demanding that they be cost-effective, by turning to vocational education
and supplying specific skills rather than critical intelligence. (p.23) This reform of
higher education was advertised as the globalisation of higher education and were
meant to align the universities in South Africa with the, instrumental routines of
neoliberal thinking. (Jacklin & Vale, 2009: 5). The preoccupation was with
producing world class universities (Gumede, 2009).
This restructuring has had the effect of exposing higher education institutions to the
dominant values of the market. The language of efficiency has thus infiltrated the
ideological and practical activities within these settings and, increasingly, the
academic output and structures have come to be evaluated in quantitative terms. It is
beyond the scope of this paper to explore the effects of the marketisation of the
academy in detail. The effects of neoliberalism have been felt in campuses across the
country - including student fee hikes, sub-contracting of staff, downsizing or
-
8/12/2019 Reviving Public Sociology in Post-Apartheid South Africa: Conversations between the Ivory Tower, the Farm and th
43/83
43
eradicating inefficient departments etc. All of these shifts have been strongly
protested across campuses in South Africa27
.
The result of the changes, relevant to this paper is that, ultimately, the purpose of
education has been narrowed to one where market logic predominates and that, as
Jacklin and Vale (2009) call them, education customers (often the state) want a
more, practical outcome to their investment. (p. 5). In the case of the social
sciences, the value of the discipline has been questioned because its outcomes are
not quantifiable in terms of its direct contribution to employment or industry. The
social sciences have thus been remoulded in line with the dictates of the market (ibid).
In a nutshell, social scientists are geared toward the job market and toward
fulfilling positions within the field of policy or in NGOs aligned with the states
market driven development. Social science has become an area, enmeshed in the
technocratic world of policy and the intricacies of its making, both of which were
embedded in a depoliticised and technicist discourse (ibid: 7).
In step with the market-model, an increased focus on measuring the academic output
of individual academics and institutions has been undertaken (Nash 2006:9). In this
way, research becomes driven by financial rather than intellectual concerns.
(Pendlebury & van der Walt, 2006). This necessitates that the end goal of research
becomes publishing in presitigious journals and that the content of academic output
be aligned with the prescriptions of these (often international) journals (ibid). The
focus, then, is on specialisation. Thus wide-ranging and critical engagement with
subject matter becomes less important and is seldom rewarded.
The marketisation of the academy has produced an environment where, the critical
project of the social sciences has faded (Jacklin & Vale, 2009: 6). For Neocosmos
(2009b), the humanities have lost their emancipatory focus, and instead, dedicate
themselves either to technical policy endeavours or to uncritical praise singing of the
state.
27See Khan (2006) for a detailed account