Intro to Cultural Anthropology Notes 4/7/10

Outsourcing Phone Services Facilitated by modern communication networks (ability to perform consumer functions from remote locations) Why India? High literacy rate Good command of English (colonial legacy) Technological (computer) skills Relatively cheap labor Globalization of Labor Taking jobs from some (US loses jobs) giving jobs to others (India gains jobs) Phone Centers – sweatshops? Good pay, good incentives, good working environment Sought after, prestigious jobs Veiling Differences Key to success – customer thinks she/he is talking to an American Dialectical training (Midwestern US vernacular) English aliases (Toby Smith, Carol Jones) Schedule accordingly with time zone changes Downside - temporal inversion Health consequences Psychological stresses Poor eating habits Sleep deprivation Social consequences Decoupling individual from family routines, obligations and networks Placing women in hazardous situations

A collective phenomenon shaped by interface of individual intentions, local worlds and global flows

· An ideological justification to guide native peoples in specific directions. “White Man’s Burden” – to bring civilization to people around the globe, moral philosophy – because we are civilized and they are not, rational for taking over politics, society, subjugating people · Today’s intervention philosophy = development. · Guiding Principles: industrialization, modernization, Westernization, and individualism are desirable advances (“progress”).
Categorizing Nations an Intervention Philosophy · Third World (Underdeveloped), Second World (Developing), First World (Developed) · They can only progress through intervention of the West (former colonialists)

· Began at the end of colonialism (post WWII). · New form of political-economic interaction between core and periphery. · Like colonialists, developers envision themselves not as exploiters of poor places and peoples, but as agents of progress.

Defining political divide within the worldMany parts of the world characterized by huge inequities.Fear of peasant movements and Communism.Solution = development: bring people into capitalist system; develop industries and markets; make friends through development Cold War Development Philosophy Harry Truman – envisioned program of development based on concepts of democratic fair dealing Science/Technology = Productivity = Peace MAD – Mutually assured destruction – mutually destructive, no one would benefit Ideological Question with Political Implications Communism or Capitalism? Two Competing Philosophies Cold Wars become hot wars in some places

Developed due to the desire to gain friends and allies throughout the world · Major growth since 1950s · National organizations (USAID, AUSAID, GTZ); Multinational organizations (UNDP); Non-Governmental Organizations (Gates Foundation); Missionary Organizations · Dissemination of capital and technical knowledge: Flow from “Developed” to “Underdeveloped” · But who determines how to develop? Who measures success of development? Who really benefits from development?

· Previous Consensus: Role is to understand and describe other societies. · We have no business changing them. · Today’s Consensus: Anthropologists have the skills and knowledge to help solve problems - if we have the skills to help people who are poor and marginalized we should help them · We have a moral obligation to reciprocate.

1. Academic Dimension (Anthropology of Development): Critiquing assumptions and discourses of development – theoretical critique of development 2. Applied Dimensions (Applied Anthropology): Identifying needs for change that local people perceive, working with local people to design culturally appropriate and socially sensitive projects - engaging with it

· International development seen as extension of colonialism. · Intervention philosophy (“improve standards of living”) to ensure continuing dependency (think World Systems Theory). · Laden with ethnocentric assumptions (“they need to be more like us.”)

According to Kottak...To maximize social and economic benefits, [development] projects must..."-be culturally compatible; respond to locally perceived needs; involve men and women in planning and carrying out the changes that affect them; harness traditional organizations; be flexible.

Over-InnovationUnder-Differentiation

· Projects may fail because they are not economically or culturally compatible. · Can’t assume people are willing to make dramatic lifestyle changes for sake of “efficiency”. · Central American country example – river through village, women wash clothing in river, not terribly clean, not just about washing about socializing – got them out of the domestic realm, developers decided to build a system that allowed the women to wash clothes sanitarily, women didn’t want to use it because eliminated social aspect · Developers = washing = practical chore (design based on efficiency) · Targeted women · Washing = practical chore plus social interaction · Over-innovation – failed to consider social side of practical chore

· Neglects cultural variability and differences: “Developing countries are all the same” · Uniform approach to problem solving: “What works in Botswana must work in Bolivia.” · Bride burning – think that all burns are related to this practice, when really people can get burned from cooking around open fires, just the way the house is set up

· Because of their fieldwork, anthropologists are socially close to those they seek to benefit. · Development officials are often socially distant from those they seek to benefit. · World Bank guy – considers major obstacle to health care is bribery, was staying in very swanky hotel – people intending to help others might not be in a position to help them because they don’t know what their life conditions are like Development as colonial legacy? (Idea that only we have the power, knowledge and resources to make you better)

· Ethnocentrism = “The tendency to view one’s own culture as best and to judge the behavior and beliefs of culturally different people by one’s own standards. · Development = economic and social engineering. · Change people “for their own good.” · But change determined by Western (“developed nations”) views of what is “for their own good” (ethnocentrism). · Power is with the wealthy