Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?

Sümeyye SAKARYA (Univercity of Leeds, UK)
Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi
10 0
Yıl: 2018 Cilt: 17 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 196 - 209 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.21547/jss.314226 İndeks Tarihi: 28-06-2019

Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?

Öz:
This article aims to bring a new angle to the literature by joining ‘rightful resistance’ of O’Brien and ‘third realm’ of Huang. It questions whether rightful resistance is a third realm or not. The main thesis is that rightful resistance is a discursive third realm. This thesis is expounded in five parts. After the introduction of ‘rightful resistance’ in the first part; in the second part, civil society and public sphere as first alternatives coming to mind are examined in terms of applicability and conceptualization. It is argued that such applications and conceptualizations have some difficulties preventing the accurate grasp of the reality because of the historical baggage and ambivalent definitions of the concepts. In the third part, Huang’s concept of ‘third realm’ is delineated. In the fourth part, it is explained how rightful resistance constructs a third realm. It is claimed that this is a discursive third realm since the construction is realized through the discourse. Besides, feasibility of rightful resistance’s operationalization is discussed. Fragmented authoritarianism is suggested to make an efficient third realm for resisters possible. In the last part, these arguments are demonstrated through the Wukan Incident. In the conclusion, some potential criticisms are handled.
Anahtar Kelime:

Meşru Direniş: Söylemsel Bir Üçüncü Alan?

Öz:
Bu çalışma, O’Brien’in Çin’deki bazı toplumsal hareketleri anlamak için ürettiği “meşru direniş” kavramıyla, Huang’ın yine Çin’deki kamusal alan tartışmalarında yeni bir yaklaşım olarak ortaya çıkardığı “üçüncü alan” kavramlarını beraber okuyarak literatüre yeni bir bakış açısı getirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu bağlamda makale, meşru direnişin bir üçüncü alan olup olmadığını sorgulamaktadır. Makalenin temel tezi, meşru direnişin söylemsel bir üçüncü alan olduğudur. Bu argüman, makalede beş bölümde ele alınmaktadır. Girişten sonraki ilk bölümde “meşru direniş” kavramı sunulmaktadır. İkinci bölümde sivil toplum ve kamusal alan -akla ilk gelen alternatifler olarak- uygulanabilirlikleri ve kavramsallaştırmaları açısından tartışılmaktadır. Bu bölümdeki temel iddia bu tarz kavramsallaştırmaların ve uygulanmaların tarihi mirasları ve net olmayan tanımlarından dolayı gerçeği anlamayı zorlaştıracaklarıdır. Üçüncü bölümde, Huang’ın “üçüncü alan” kavramı ele alınmaktadır. Dördüncü bölümdeyse meşru direnişin üçüncü alanı nasıl inşa ettiği izah edilmektedir. Bu inşa söylem yoluyla gerçekleştirildiği için meşru direnişin söylemsel bir üçüncü alan yarattığı iddia edilmektedir. Bunlara ek olarak, meşru direnişin işlevselliğinin mümkünatı da tartışılmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, Çin’deki bölünmüş otoriterliğin direnişçiler için işlevsel bir üçüncü alanı mümkün kıldığı iddia edilmiştir. Son bölümde de bu argümanlar Wukan Vakasıyla örneklendirilmiştir. Makalenin sonuç kısmındaysa bazı muhtemel eleştiriler ele alınmıştır.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Bayat, A. (2013). Areas and Ideas. Comparative studies of south Asia, Africa and the middle east, 33(3), 260-3.
  • Beyeler, M., & Rucht, D. (2010). political opportunity structures and progressive movement Sectors. In S. Walgrave & D. Rucht (Eds.), The world says no to war: demonstrations against war to Iraq. University of Minnesota Press, 20-42.
  • Comaroff, J.L. & Comaroff, J. (Eds.). (1999). Civil Society and the critical imagination in Africa: critical perspectives. University of Chicago Press.
  • Bohman, J. (2004). Expanding Dialogue: the internet, the public sphere and prospects for transnational democracy. The Sociological Review, 52(1), 131-55.
  • Brandtstӓdter, S. (2006). Book review of ‘rightful resistance in rural China’. Journal of Peasant Studies, 33(4), 710-2.
  • Calhoun, C. (1998). Community without Propinquity revisited: communications technology and the transformation of the urban public sphere. Sociological Inquiry, 68(3), 373-97.
  • Chakrabarty, D. (2009). Provincializing europe: postcolonial thought and historical difference:postcolonial thought and historical difference. Princeton University Press.
  • Chuang, J. (2014). China's rural land politics: bureaucratic absorption and the muting of rightful resistance. The China Quarterly, 219, 649-69.
  • Dirlik, A. (2013). Thinking modernity historically: is ‘alternative modernity’ the answer. The Asian Review of World Histories, 1(1), 5-44.
  • Ferguson, J. (1998). Transnational Topographies of power: beyond ‘the state’ and ‘civil society’ in the study of African politics. Draft mimeo, department of anthropology, University of California, Irvine
  • Ferree, M. M. (2003). Resonance and radicalism: feminist framing in the abortion debates of the united states and Germany. American Journal of Sociology, 109, 304-44.
  • Gramsci, A. (2011). Prison notebooks. Columbia University Press.
  • Hann, C. & Dunn, E. (1996). Civil society: challenging western models. Routledge,
  • Hooghe, M. (2005). Ethnic organisations and social movement theory: The political Opportunity Structure for Ethnic Mobilisation in Flanders. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 31(5), 975–990.
  • Hua, R., Yuxin H., & Deng, G. (2015). Instrumental civil rights and institutionalized participation in China: A Case Study of Protest in Wukan Village.VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 1-19.
  • Huang, P. CC.(1993a). Between informal mediation and formal adjudication: the third realm of qing civil justice. Modern China, 19(2), 251-98.
  • Huang, P. CC.(1993b). ‘Public sphere’/ ‘civil society’ in China? : The Third Realm between State and Society. Modern China, 19(2),216-40.
  • Junghans, T. (2001). Marketing Selves: constructing civil society and selfhood in post-socialist hungary. critique of anthropology 21, 383-400.
  • Keane, J. (1998). Civil society: old ımages, new visions. Polity Press.
  • Koopmans R., & Statham, P. (1999). Ethnic and civic conceptions of nationhood and the differential success of the extreme right in Germany and Italy. In M. Giugni, D. McAdam & C. Tilly (Eds,), How Social Movements Matter. University of Minnesota Press, 225-51.
  • Koopmans, R., & Olzak, S. (2004). Discursive Opportunities and the evolution of right-wing violence in Germany. American Journal of Sociology, 110(1), 198–230.
  • Kumar, K. (2007). Global civil society.European Journal of Sociology, 48, 413-34.
  • Lagerkvist, J. (2015). The unknown terrain of social protests in China: ‘Exit’, ‘Voice’, ‘Loyalty’, and ‘Shadow’. Journal of Civil Society, 11(2), 137-53. Lee, C. K. (2007). Against the law: labor protests in China's rustbelt and sunbelt. University of California Press.
  • Lewis, D. (2001). Civil society in non-western contexts: reflections on the ‘usefulness’ of a concept. centre for civil society, London School of Economics and Political Science.
  • Li, Lianjiang. (2010). Rights consciousness and rules consciousness in contemporary China. The China Journal, 64, 47-68.
  • Lie, A. C. (2014). Rethinking Rural Resistance in China: A Case Study of the 2011 Wukan Incident in Guandong Province, MA. thesis, University of Oslo.
  • Lieberthal, K. (1992). Introduction: the ‘fragmented authoritarianism’ model and its limitations. in k. lieberthal & d. lampton (eds,), bureaucracy, politics, and decision making in post- mao China. University of California Press, 1-30.
  • Lieberthal, K., & Oksenberg, M. (1988). Policy making in China: leaders, structures, and processes. Princeton University Press.
  • Ma, Shu-Yun. (1994). The chinese discourse on civil society. The China Quarterly,137, 180- 93.
  • Madsen, R. (1993). The public sphere, civil society and moral community: a research agenda for contemporary China studies. Modern China, 19(2), 183-98.
  • Maina, W. (1998). Kenya: The state, donors and the politics of democratization. ın a. van Rooy (ed.), Civil Society and the Aid Industry. Earthscan.
  • McAdam, D. (1996). Conceptual origins, current problems, future directions. In D.
  • McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M.N. Zald (Eds,), Comparative perspectives on social movements. Cambridge University Press, 23-40.
  • McAdam, D. (1999). Political process and the development of black insurgency 1930-1970. University of Chicago Press.
  • Mertha, A. (2009). ‘Fragmented authoritarianism 2.0’: political pluralization in the chinese policy process. The China Quarterly,200, 995-1012.
  • Metzger, T. A. (1998). The western concept of a civil society in the context of chinese history. Hoover Press.
  • Meyer, D. S., & Minkoff, D. C. (2004). Conceptualizing political opportunity. Social Forces, 82(4), 1457– 1492.
  • Michelson, E. (2008). Justice from above or below? Popular strategies for resolving grievances in rural China. The China Quarterly,193, 43-64.
  • O'brien, K. (1996). Rightful resistance. World Politics,49(1), 31-55.
  • O'Brien, K. (2013). Rightful resistance revisited. Journal of Peasant Studies,40(6), 1051-62.
  • O'Brien, K., & Li, L. (2006). Rightful resistance in rural China. Cambridge University Press.
  • Perry, E. (2010). Popular protest: playing by the rules. In J. Fewsmith (Ed,), China Today, China Tomorrow: Domestic Politics, Economy, and Society, 11-28.
  • Qian, G., & Bandurski, D. L. (2011). China's emerging public sphere: the impact of media commercialization, professionalism, and the internet in an era of transition. In S. Shirk (Ed,), Changing Media, Changing China, 38-76.
  • Sima, Y. (2011). Grassroots environmental activism and the internet: constructing a green public sphere in China. Asian Studies Review, 35(4), 477-97.
  • Sogge, D. (1997). Mozambique: perspectives on aid and the civic sector. Gemeenschappelijk Overleg Medefinanciering,
  • Tarrow, S. (1994). Power in movement: social movements, collective action and politics. Cambridge University Press.
  • Tria Kerkvliet, B. (2014). Protests over land in vietnam: rightful resistance and more. Journal of Vietnamese Studies, 9(3), 19-54.
  • Vukovich, D. (2015). Illiberal China and global convergence: thinking through Wukan and Hong Kong. Third World Quarterly, 36(11), 2130-47. Walker, K. L. M. (2008). From covert to overt: everyday peasant politics in China and the Implications for Transnational Agrarian Movements. Journal of Agrarian Change, 8(2‐ 3), 462-88.
  • Weintraub, J., & Krishan, K. (1997). Public and private in thought and practice. The University of Chicago Press.
  • Wu, F. (2013). Environmental activism in provincial China. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning,15(1), 89-108.
  • Yang, G. (2002). Civil society in China: a dynamic field of study. China Review International, 9(1), 1-16.
  • Yang, G. (2003). The co-evolution of the internet and civil society in China. Asian Survey,43(3), 405-22.
  • Yang, G. (2010). Brokering environment and health in China: issue entrepreneurs of the public sphere. Journal of Contemporary China, 19(63), 101-18.
  • Yang, G., & Calhoun, C. (2007). Media, civil society, and the rise of a green public sphere in China. China Information, 21(2), 211-36.
  • Zakaria, F. (1994). A conversation with lee kuan yew. Foreign Affairs, 73(2), 109-26. Zeng, Z. (2013). Wukan: the whole story. The China Nonprofit Review, 5(1), 17-101.
APA Sakarya S (2018). Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?. , 196 - 209. 10.21547/jss.314226
Chicago Sakarya Sümeyye Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?. (2018): 196 - 209. 10.21547/jss.314226
MLA Sakarya Sümeyye Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?. , 2018, ss.196 - 209. 10.21547/jss.314226
AMA Sakarya S Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?. . 2018; 196 - 209. 10.21547/jss.314226
Vancouver Sakarya S Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?. . 2018; 196 - 209. 10.21547/jss.314226
IEEE Sakarya S "Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?." , ss.196 - 209, 2018. 10.21547/jss.314226
ISNAD Sakarya, Sümeyye. "Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?". (2018), 196-209. https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.314226
APA Sakarya S (2018). Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 17(1), 196 - 209. 10.21547/jss.314226
Chicago Sakarya Sümeyye Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 17, no.1 (2018): 196 - 209. 10.21547/jss.314226
MLA Sakarya Sümeyye Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, vol.17, no.1, 2018, ss.196 - 209. 10.21547/jss.314226
AMA Sakarya S Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2018; 17(1): 196 - 209. 10.21547/jss.314226
Vancouver Sakarya S Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2018; 17(1): 196 - 209. 10.21547/jss.314226
IEEE Sakarya S "Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?." Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 17, ss.196 - 209, 2018. 10.21547/jss.314226
ISNAD Sakarya, Sümeyye. "Rightful Resistance: A Discursive Third Realm?". Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 17/1 (2018), 196-209. https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.314226
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
26-04-2024 14:18

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları