User:Phil from somewhere/Oppressors–oppressed distinction
Oppressors–oppressed distinction or dominant–dominated opposition is a political and sociological concept that divides groups of individuals into two fundamental social class categories of oppressor and oppressed, a key distinction of the oppressor class being the social class that benefits most from the coercive imposition of a regulatory or taxation regime.
Karl Marx made the concept very influential, and it is often considered a fundamental element of Marxist analysis.[1]
Contexts[edit]
Many authors have adapted it to other contexts, including Marx, Friedrich Engels, Vladimir Lenin, Antonio Gramsci, Simone Weil, Jean-Paul Sartre,[2] Patricia Hill Collins in Matrix of domination[3] and Paulo Freire in his Pedagogy of the Oppressed.[4] It has been used in a variety of contexts, including discussions of the bourgeoisie and proletariat, imperialism, self-determination,[5] caste,[6] pedagogy[4] and climate change denial.[7]
Imperialism and self-determination[edit]
The theory of oppressor and oppressed nations has been part of Vladimir Lenin's thought on imperialism, self-determination and criticisms of Social Democrats.[8] Lenin wrote:
That is why the focal point in the Social-Democratic programme must be that division of nations into oppressor and oppressed which forms the essence of imperialism, and is deceitfully evaded by the social-chauvinists and Kautsky. This division is not significant from the angle of bourgeois pacifism or the philistine Utopia of peaceful competition among independent nations under capitalism, but it is most significant from the angle of the revolutionary struggle against imperialism.[8]
Other contexts[edit]
The oppressors–oppressed dichotomy has gained more interest in recent years since the rise of social justice movements, including Black Lives Matter[2] and the MeToo movement.[9]
The distinction was a substantial part of Khomeinism.[10] Scholars argue that Ruhollah Khomeini "came to power by openly exploiting class antagonisms," disproving the theory that class analysis is mainly applicable to western society.[11]
Criticism[edit]
Derrida judged the "opposition of dominant and dominated" as simplistic, given the conflicts between forces that are fighting for the control of the hegemony are more complicated than the idea that "force is always stronger than weakness".[12]
The political philosopher Kenneth Minogue provides a criticism[further explanation needed] of the oppressors–oppressed distinction in his work Alien Powers: The Pure Theory of Ideology.[13]
References[edit]
Footnotes[edit]
- ^ Derrida 1994, p. 55 sfnm error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFDerrida1994 (help); Kauppi 1996, p. 61.
- ^ a b "KENNETH MINOGUE'S 'ALIEN POWERS' REVISITED | Hungarian Review". hungarianreview.com. Retrieved 2024-02-05.
- ^ Hein, Lindsay. "Black Feminist Thought and why it Matters Today". Virginia Tech University Libraries. Retrieved 2024-02-05.
- ^ a b "Pedagogy of the Oppressed | Development Education Review". www.developmenteducationreview.com. Retrieved 2024-02-05.
- ^ Gordon & Gordon 1991, p. 145; Halabi, Sonnenschein & Friedman 2004, pp. 59, 74–76.
- ^ Wabuke, Hope (2020-08-10). "'Caste' Argues its Most Violent Manifestation Is In Treatment Of Black Americans". NPR. Retrieved 2024-02-05.
- ^ Rasulo, Margaret (2022-02-01). "Dialogic patterns of the oppressor-oppressed dynamic in climate change denial". Journal of Pragmatics. 189: 147–159. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2021.12.007. ISSN 0378-2166. S2CID 246259190.
- ^ a b Lenin 1927.
- ^ Donegan, Moira (2018-05-11). "How #MeToo revealed the central rift within feminism today". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2024-02-05.
- ^ Aarabi, Kasra (2019-02-11). "The Fundamentals of Iran's Islamic Revolution" (PDF). Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. Retrieved 2024-01-05.
- ^ Abrahamian, Ervand (1993). Khomeinism: essays on the Islamic Republic. Internet Archive. Berkeley : University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-91466-7.
- ^ Derrida, Jacques (1994). Specters of Marx : the state of the debt, the work of mourning, and the New international. Internet Archive. New York : Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-91044-6.
- ^ Minogue 1985.
Bibliography[edit]
- Derrida, Jacques (1994). Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning and the New International.
- Gordon, Ḥayim; Gordon, Rivca, eds. (1991). Israel/Palestine: The Quest for Dialogue. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books. ISBN 978-0-88344-731-4.
- Halabi, Rabah; Sonnenschein, Nava; Friedman, Ariella (2004). "Liberate the Oppressed and Their Oppressors: Encounters Between University Students". In Halabi, Rabah (ed.). Israeli and Palestinian Identities in Dialogue: The School for Peace Approach. Translated by Reich, Deb. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press. pp. 59–78. ISBN 978-0-8135-3415-2.
- Hegel, G. W. F. (1999). "The German Constitution (1798–1802)". In Dickey, Lawrence; Nisbet, H. B. (eds.). Hegel: Political Writings. Translated by Nisbet, H. B. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. pp. 6–101. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511808029.006. ISBN 978-0-511-80802-9.
- Lenin, V. I. (1927). "The Revolutionary Proletariat and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination". Lenin Miscellany VI.
- Minogue, Kenneth (1985). Alien Powers: The Pure Theory of Ideology. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. ISBN 978-0-297-78426-5.
- Kauppi, Niilo (1996). French Intellectual Nobility: Institutional and Symbolic Transformations in the Post-Sartrian Era. Albany, New York: State University Press of New York. ISBN 978-0-7914-3143-6.