Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gender inequality in social class
Gender inequality and society
Gender inequality found in social class
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gender inequality in social class
‘This is in your best interest’ is a saying people always hear, but is it always true? Is it truly worth it to work under stressful conditions for minimum wage? Will staying at home to take care of the kids and cook dinner really benefit you? It is difficult to completely back the claim that these tasks people subject themselves to are really to support themselves. Rather, it is the few in charge, with power, that are the beneficiaries and reap the rewards. These privileged few get what they desire not through force, but through Antonio Gramsci’s idea of hegemony. Hegemony is the “process in which a dominant group gains – for its own interests – the approval of a subordinate class through the use of intellectual, moral, and cultural encouragement” (Mascia-Lees 151). This method does not ensure power to a certain group. Instead, it allows for power shifts between groups. If the current dominant group is not convincing the suppressed, the suppressed shall rise and rebel, giving way to a new dominant group. This paper will explore how this concept came to be, examples of who is affected, where this phenomenon occurs, and current research being carried out today.
Before Gramsci came up with hegemony, he was a Marxist. Marx and Engels “focused on the inequalities brought by the development of capitalism” (Mascia-Less 133), analyzed social relations within societies that had different modes of production, and delved into the superstructure of societies based on its infrastructure. Marx and Engels believed that it was the superstructure that “produces human consciousness, determining the very way people think about the world and themselves” (Mascia-Less 134). They also believed that controlling the means of production was w...
... middle of paper ...
...hat functions in our society today and will continue for future generations. Believe me, it’s for your own good.
Works Cited
Artz, Lee, and Bren O. Murphy. Cultural Hegemony in the United States. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2000. Print.
Holub, Renate. Antonio Gramsci: Beyond Marxism and Postmodernism. London: Routledge, 1992. Print.
Joseph, Jonathan. Hegemony a Realist Analysis. London: Routledge, 2002. Print.
Kupchan, Charles A. "The Decline of the West: Why America Must Prepare for the End of Dominance." The Atlantic. N.p., 20 Mar. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2013.
Lears, T.J J. "The Concept of Cultural Hegemony: Problems and Possibilities." The American Historical Review 90.3 (1985): 567-93. JSTOR. Web. 10 Dec. 2013.
Mascia-Lees, Frances E. Gender & Difference in a Globalizing World: Twenty-first Century Anthropology. Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 2010. Print.
Fiorina, Morris P., and Samuel J. Abrams. Culture war?: The Myth of a Polarized America. 2nd ed. New York: Pearson Education, 2006. Print.
In this book Kotkin discusses the role America can play in the era of Asian dominance.
In The Prison Notebooks (1971) Gramsci does not associate hegemony with the governance of a solitary individual or any structuralist energy phenomena, such as a discourse, collective conscience, deep structure or culture. Instead, hegemony from a Gramscian perspective signifies a variety of different organizations of people and agents in state formations, such as a structure, a practice, an apparatus, a unity of opposing structures or a function of leadership (Gramsci, 1971). Hegemony is always considered to be a process (Gramsci, 1971). In other contexts, hegemony may refer to a level or moment, which is equal to an evolutionary stage of leadership. Hegemony also may refer to a social grouping related to a particular social, political, cultural,
American Cultural Studies: An Introduction to American Culture. New York, NY: Routledge, 1997. Print. The. Marger, Martin N. Race and Ethnic Relations: American and Global Perspectives.
Among the books discussed over the duration of the course, the most recurrent theme has been the dominance of power relationships and the construction of institutions driven by power. The framework for these socially ingrained power relationships that has been transformed over time has been laid out by Michel Foucault in his book Discipline and Punish. According to Foucault, power is everywhere, dispersed in institutions and spread through discourses. The state functions on a number of dispositions which are hierarchical, naturalized and are the modes of power for the power elite. The result of this social and economic control is observed in nations and across nations through the beauty myth, the prison system, the creation of informal systems or the overarching cultural hegemony and attempted reform of the non-western world. The key to the success of this has been through the misrecognition of the constructed systems of power which are instated through very fundamental mediums that they are not questioned. These structures of control by the state are adopted and reproduced from the base of the familiar, through arrangements and dispositions that pose themselves as natural, as they are embodied and programmed in the play of language, in common sense, and in all what is socially taken for granted. In this essay I will examine these above mentioned structures of the power and how these models are used to discipline individuals and states.
It is the belief that America expresses its cultural superiority through its wealth and dominance, and its superiority is measured in military strength. Using the appeal of logos, he states, “to the idea that its power is a sign of God 's favor, conferring upon it a special responsibility for other nations— to make them richer and happier and wiser, to remake them, that is, in its own shining image” (Fulbright 1). This belief that “the United States has a divinely ordained role to play in the sacred drama of the world history” (Lears 33) is one that Fulbright argues must not succeed. According to “The Arrogance of Power Revisited” by Jackson Lears, Fulbright was concerned that “America was losing its perspective on what was within its capacity to control and what was beyond it”
In the text, “The American Cultural Configuration” the authors express the desire of anthropologists to study their own culture despite the difficulty that one faces attempting to subjectively analyze their own society. Holmes and Holmes (2002), use the adage “not being able to see the forest through the trees” (p. 5) to refer to how hard it is for someone to study something they have largely taken for granted. The Holmes' article focuses predominately on paradoxes within our own culture, many of which we don't notice. In a paradox, two contradicting statements can appear to be true at the same time. This essay looks at two paradoxes commonly found in everyday life: the individual versus the family and religion.
After the civil war, United States took a turn that led them to solidify as the world power. From the late 1800s, as the US began to collect power through Cuba, Hawaii, and the Philippines, debate arose among historians about American imperialism and its behavior. Historians such as William A. Williams, Arthur Schlesinger, and Stephen Kinzer provides their own vision and how America ought to be through ideas centered around economics, power, and racial superiority.
Gailey, Christine Ward. “Feminist Methods” Ch. 6 in Bernard, H. Russell Ed. Handbook of Methods In Cultural Anthropology. London: A Division of Sage Pub, Inc.
McNeill, William H., 1998. How the West Won. New York: The New York Review of Books, 2-4
Abstract: Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has been the world’s only unquestioned superpower. How the United States evaluates its position as global hegemon has important consequences for American foreign policy, particularly with regards to the potential for future policy constraints. Thus, this paper seeks to consider the question: How durable is American hegemony? The paper first defines the state of American hegemony and then considers the primary challengers: Europe, Russia, China, Japan and imperial overstretch. It will conclude that in the long-term, East Asian geopolitical instability poses the greatest threat to American hegemony, but that in the short-term, the hegemony will prove to be quite durable as long as the United States can counteract the phenomenon of imperial overstretch. In order to diffuse both internal and international threats to hegemony, American leaders should work to pursue national interests within a framework of consensus and legitimacy as much as possible.
Powercube.net. 2014. Hegemony and invisible power | Understanding power for social change | powercube.net | IDS at Sussex University. [online] Available at: http://www.powercube.net/other-forms-of-power/hegemony-and-invisible-power/ [Accessed: 23 Mar 2014].
Hegemony was derived from the Greek word "egemonia," meaning leader or ruler, often in the sense of a state other than his own (Williams 144). Although the base of this definition remains true, the word has evolved to much more. Hegemony is defined by Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought as "Political and economical control exercised by a dominant class, and its success in projecting its own way of seeing the world, human and social relationships as 'common sense' and part of the natural order by those who are, in fact, subordinated to it." Hegemony is defined as a predominant influence or leadership of a dominant class or institution over a subordinate class; the question is are the "subordinates" forced to follow the beliefs, or do they agree with them?
In this paper, I will argue that the current system is hegemonial. My explanation to hegemony will then be centered on the sources of the United States as a hegemonial power. Furthermore, I will state the different primary implications associated with the rise of China and what the Roman Empire offers for understanding the United Sta...
Childress, Diana, and Bruce Watson. "The fall of the west." Calliope 11, no. 5 (January 2001): 27.