Sociological exclusivism and the marginalization of the global majority
Note: Continuing the Miami Institute’s sociology forum, Rezvan Moghaddam urges readers to appreciate that: “Despite the critique of the nature of Euro-American centric sociology, in the twenty first century, it has not yet been able to eliminate prejudice.” For example, Moghaddam argues that “few places in Western sociology books and works mention the names of Southern theorists, including Asia, Africa, and even Latin America. Likewise, and in many cases, the premise has underpinned the mainstream of racist sociology. It is ‘sociological exclusivism’ that has led to the marginalization of the global majority.”
This article aims to answer briefly the following questions:
Is there discrimination and bias against the Global Majority in the field of sociology? How would we imagine the field of sociology, free of discrimination and bias against the Global Majority?
In the definition of sociology, we could say that it is the knowledge of study of the society (social phenomena). This discipline examines human societies, their interactions, and the processes that keep societies in their current state or change them. (See Heidbaran 1994) In this definition, as we see, the task of sociology is to study human societies, regardless of gender, nationality, race, skin tone, sexual orientation and so on. We now try to answer the questions by citing facts from existing sociology.
Ibn Khaldun, a historian, sociologist, anthropologist, and politician, is one of the pioneers of scientific historiography and one of the pioneers of sociological science, living about 400 years before Auguste Comte. However, the term of sociology was first used in 1837 by the French philosopher Auguste Comte, although he is not considered the founder of the field of sociology. This is because the science of sociology originated in the 18th and 19th centuries. Although it used the existing tradition of rationalism which was originally founded by ancient Greece philosophers, this aspect of sociology was ignored by most mainstream sociologists.
Of course, sociology has had its ups and downs since its inception. Centralized sociology of the West and the North not only despised the South, but also ignored social groups such as Black people, women, sexual and ethnic minorities, even in the West. The combination of such factors has led some sociologists to worry about the future of sociology and to feel responsible for exploring sociology and moving it away from the sequence in which it is caught.
Sociology is connected to popular groups and, in the past, had a special place among the social sciences, so that sociology had gained popularity in the 60s and 70s and most universities since then have had a degree in sociology. Students at the time, seeking social justice and equality often graduated from the school of Social Sciences.
By contrast, the American sociology of the 1980s declined and was less welcomed. So much so that in some universities the field of sociology was closed, and the crisis in sociology intensified. In general Sociology lost its political connection to the people who attracted and motivated students in the 1970s.
Unlike, the appeal of sociology generally declined sharply in the 1980s and beyond. And we have witnessed the negative interference of sociologists and north-centered sociology in political affairs to the detriment of southern countries. For example, the vast majority members of the American Sociological Association voted in favor of the 2003 US-Iraq war (US intervention). In a statement written by a minority of members of the American Sociological Association, only 3% of the members of the association called for an immediate end to the war in Iraq. Interestingly, sociologists and members of the Sociological Association debated whether the American Sociological Association should involve itself on such cases! (See Sally Hillsmann 2003). While this fundamental question had to be answered by the Sociological Association.
Is the role of the sociologist and the sociological association to vote for war? Or is it the duty to examine the effects of the war on the Iraqi people as well as on American society without any bias (based on patriotism)? Shouldn't the Sociological Association analyze whether voting for war is a sociologist's job? ASA has become a toy for politicians Instead of playing its real role. The American Sociological Association and the vast majority of members who voted in favor of the US war against Iraq, as sociologists, what was the main justification for their actions?
It can be said that the emergence of people-centered sociology is a reaction to Western-oriented sociology, a sociology that's excluded from the masses of the world's citizens. As Michael Burawoy puts it in his article entitled “For Public Sociology” (2005), sociology has distanced itself from the world under study.
In this article, Michael Burawoy raises an issue that I also agree with. He rightly states that the initial desire for the establishment of social justice, economic equality, and the attainment of a sustainable environment, or, to put it simply, a better world, which had interested many of us in studying sociology, since the mid-1980s was replaced by documentarianism.
But the sociological crisis goes beyond documentarianism or spending money on custom research for political organizations and government-affiliated institutions, especially in American sociology. Critique of the Euro-American centric nature of sociology is not new.
Moreover even among thinkers living in colonial societies or even some European sociologists, there was concern about the phenomenon of Euro-American centrism in sociology. One of the first to raise the European-centric problem in the social sciences among the Dutch, was Jacob Cornelis van Leur that criticized European-oriented tendencies in Dutch studies in India. Critical sociology was also formed in response to sociology for taking it out of tangible social problems. However, in sociological critiques, the male-centered aspect is less mentioned.
In addition, the Euro-American centrism of sociology’s sociological theories should not be overlooked. Many sociology students, especially those belonging to the global majority, are only exposed to the theories and frameworks that are appropriate for the global minority. Many of these theories and frameworks are the product of white men, whose basic premise often has little to do with the day-to-day realities of the global majority.
Despite the critique of the nature of Euro-American centric Sociology, in the twenty first century, it has not yet been able to eliminate prejudice. Even in the field of education, the resources considered are mainly those of European and American theorists. To address this contradiction, some critics have called for fundamental changes in sociological theory curricula. (Alatas and Sinha 2001).
This is because few places in Western sociology books and works mention the names of Southern theorists, including Asia, Africa, and even Latin America. Likewise, and in many cases, the premise has underpinned the mainstream of racist sociology. It is "sociological exclusivism" that has led to the marginalization of the global majority.
The sociology of the Nordic countries, with a strong tendency to exercise its authority and hegemony over the South. Problems such as poverty, injustice, environmental degradation, gender inequality, etc. in Asia, Africa, and Latin America are still of little interest to northern sociology, especially the United States, and this is a challenge that development anthropologists and non-Western sociologists may address.
Despite, the tendency of southern people to move forward on issues such as social justice and gender justice (especially in societies where women live under Islamic rule), North-centered sociology is indifferent to the demands of civil society. Gender bias, especially the issues of women and the LGBTQ community race, and the neglect of southern countries are evident in north-centered sociology.
Abbott and Wallace (1995) also emphasize that sociology marginalizes women's issues and, at best, closes its eyes to gender issues. And in the worst case, it had a kind of sexism. If the sociology of the twentieth century in the 70s and 80s and until recently considered the southern countries as barbarians and considered modernity as the product of Western sociology, today they see the southern countries as inferior in different ways, because of the view of the objective superiority of European civilization.
Even now, with the theory of cultural relativity, any violence, especially against women in the south, is justified, and both are on the same coin. The theory of cultural relativity has in its heart the negation of the civilization of southern societies. However, Franz Boas, a German-American anthropologist, and his students (especially Edward Sapphire and Benjamin Wurf) introduced the concept of cultural relativism into anthropology and sought to expand it. This seems to be a benevolent idea, however, this theory has become a tool for repression.
Euro-American centric Sociology has used this theory to its advantage. While women in southern countries struggle for equal rights, in Western sociology, political and social science analysts justify the cultural backwardness of repressive governments under the guise of cultural relativism, or in a silly way sympathize with the humiliation of women under Islamic rule. However, some relativists believe that "the globalization of norms destroys the diversity of cultures and is merely the opening of another path for the unification of cultures in the modern world," on the one hand, they fall into a deeper well and the work of others. Fighting anti-feminist culture has become more difficult.
While women under Islamic governments do not need compassion, they need to be understood. They need the hijab imposed on them not to be confirmed by a false hypothesis. For example, Has European sociology been critical of the behavior of Western women politicians who, in meeting with their male counterparts in Islamic countries, wear the Islamic veil? While women in Islamic countries are fighting for their most basic rights, and in Iran women are fighting against forced hijab more than four decades, Western women politicians wear the hijab and prefer economic interests to human rights.
Recently in Germany, the mayor of Cologne decided to allow the Muslims of the city to play the call to prayer five times a day through the loudspeakers of mosques! They call it democracy! Without paying attention to the point that, for many Iranians who have taken refuge in Europe from the Islamic government, the call to prayer is reminiscent of prison torture. For the strong opposition to the broadcast of the call to prayer, I refer you to the various demonstrations and the statement of 500 intellectuals who were published in Germany in response to this wrong decision. Why should religious people take privileges and spread the call to prayer for those who are not Muslims or do not believe in any other religion or who are basically disbelievers in God? Why do European sociologists not warn Western politicians? Why don't they say religion is a personal matter? Western sociologists are silent because it is political to broadcast the call to prayer in mosques before it is a religious act. Because, in principle, Islamic leaders have repeatedly and explicitly stated in their sermons and Islamic propaganda that: "Friday prayer has the mission of explaining and analyzing political issues."
The undemocratic legitimation or justification of this decision in Germany seeks to trample on the rights of other citizens for fear of being accused of Islamophobia. In Persian, there is a proverb that says: Fear of heights causes us to go so far back that we fall from the other side of the roof. This reflects the current state of Western-oriented sociology, which has made a serious mistake in analyzing colonialism and inducing its superiority and bias in analyzing the culture and social situation of the South, and has led to the production of unstable (weak) social theories. What has been said is just a few cases that describe the behavior of the West towards the countries of the South.
Based on this, it could be said that in the last three decades, sociology has failed to understand and explain political Islam. What has comprehensive scientific research done to trace the growth of fundamentalist forces that are growing like mushrooms from the ground?
This shortcoming is largely due to the nature of mainstream of sociology. Perhaps the sociology centered on the north owes itself to the funds it has received from the political currents and is willing to remain silent on the matter, or to suffice with a few short articles. Is it due to being in the service of power? Unfortunately, sociology and political science in recent decades have not been successful and move very slowly and hesitantly—in analyzing and understanding the phenomenon of Islamism and the coercive nature of the Islamic state.
Of course, one of the reasons for this lack of attention to what is happening to women in Islamic countries is that, in addition to being Western-oriented, sociology is still male-centered. Thus, male-dominated and racist research, along with how hypotheses are formulated, has biased the theorists' assumptions.
Even more, Sociology in general and North-centered sociology in particular were once indifferent to sexual minorities. Many societies also considered homosexuality ugly, shameful, and reprehensible, while today it is almost accepted by some societies. But how has sociology responded? I would say that sexual minorities accepted themselves into the academic community through civil struggle, until finally a field called gender studies was created. It was feminism’s and the LGBTQ’s movements that were able to make significant influences on sociology and create the sociology of gender.
However, despite the fact that Black sociologists, women, and LGBTQ groups have been able to influence sociology in recent years by making their own demands, Sociology still has a long way to go to consider all members of society, regardless of any bias. It still has a long way to go towards becoming a field that does not exclude or marginalize any social group from its studies, and does not exclude or marginalize any social group from its studies. Sociology must constantly keep in mind this question: To what extent is the production of sociological content devoted to the issues of Southern countries, Black people, women and marginalized groups?
This article can only offer initial thoughts and directions for future discussion, research, and action.
-Rezvan Moghaddam
Rezvan Moghaddam is a lecturer, scholar and women’s rights activist with over 40 years of experience in social change. She has been an active member of the Iranian women’s rights movement and has founded/co-founded various associations, groups and committees to empower women on issues of peace, environment, health and gender issues such as violence against women. Moghaddam is one of the founding member of the “One Million Signatures” campaign in Iran, which aimed to collect one million signatures in support of changing discriminatory laws against women in the country.
As a result of her social activities, she was deprived of teaching. Since Moghaddam left Iran, she has published regularly in domestic and international journals. She also speaks regularly at international conferences and seminars pertaining to women’s rights and Iran. In Germany, she pursued her research work further and gained her PhD in Sociology at the Freie Universität Berlin (FU), focusing on the impact of new media platforms on the women’s movement in Iran. She also holds a Master's degree in Pure Mathematical Statistics and a Master's degree in Educational Psychology. She continued her struggle to end violence and discrimination against women abroad by launching numerous campaigns, such as the “All against Acid Attack” Campaign in 2015.She launched a campaign to stop "honor" killings. By bringing discussion to the community about so called "honor" killings, the Campaign was able to draw the attention of sociologists, social psychologists and human rights activists to this social problem. In 2009, she received the Quadriga Award for One Million Signatures campaign and her Nonviolent Struggle.
References:
Heydebrand, W. (1994) Sociological Writings. Max Weber (German Library) 1st Edition. Continuum; 1st edition
Hillsman. S.T. Sociologists as Scientists Engaged in Civic Discourse, 2003
https://www.asanet.org/sites/default/files/savvy/footnotes/apr03/exec.html , Review January 22, 2022
Burawoy. M,2004 American sociological Association presidential Address .For Public Sociology AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW , VOL. 70 ,No 1(2005) ;:4–28)
Alatas, F. & Sinha, V. (2001) Teaching Classical Sociological Theory in Singapore: The Context of Eurocentrism. Teaching Sociology 29(3): pp. 316-331
Abbott. P, & Wallace. C. 1995. An introduction to Sociology, Feminist Perspective, London, Routledge.
Szelenyi. I. The Triple Crisis of US Sociology, April 30, 2015
https://globaldialogue.isa-sociology.org/articles/the-triple-crisis-of-us-sociology, Review January 21, 2022
For information on the extent of opposition to the broadcast of the call to prayer from the mosques of Cologne, refer to the links:
Necla Kelek, “500 Intellektuelle - Das falsche Zeichen,” Cicero: Magazin für politische kultur (January 24, 2022).
“Azan broadcast from mosques in Cologne; Tolerance or opening the doors of fundamentalism?,” Deutsche Welle (DW) (November 4, 2021).
Kommentar von Ahmad Mansour, “Ich bin Muslim und will keine Muezzin-Rufe in Deutschland – weil ich weiß, wohin das führt” (October 18, 2021).
RUF DES MUEZZIN: Islamischer Gebetsruf sorgt in Köln für Aufregung | WELT Thema | Kritik von Necla Kleck Islamwissenschaftlerin (2021).
Lale Akgün, “Der Muezzinruf aus Köln ist ein Ruf des politischen Islam, “ Humanistischer Pressedienst (October 12, 2021).
Lale Akgün, [untitled post], Facebook (October 9, 2021).
“Video report of the protest against the broadcast of the call to prayers (Azan) in front of the Cologne Mosque, Akhtar Ghasemi,” Akhtarnews Social Networks (October 16, 2021).
More links to the protests against the decision of the mayor of Cologne to broadcast the call to prayer from mosques:
https://t.me/dw_farsi/61545
https://www.cicero.de/innenpolitik/koln-erlaubt-muezzin-ruf-das-falsche-zeichen-reke
https://jungle.world/artikel/2021/45/die-drohgebaerden-der-islamfaschisten
https://www.ruhrbarone.de/kritikerin-des-koelner-muezzin-rufs-erhaelt-
Morddrohungen/202969
https://hpd.de/artikel/islamkrikerin-erhaelt-morddrohungen-19810
