Embedded Files
This term refers to the ideology of the Other (or the outsider) in which human beings of a different skin color, or gender, or class, or nationality, or culture (understood in the broadest sense to include everything about human existence that is learned and not biologically inherited, ranging from food to music to politics to religion to economics, etc.) are consistently portrayed/treated as inferior beings for the purpose of dehumanizing them—as a device for their “erasure” or exclusion from the mainstream of society (marginalization) for the purposes of exploitation or dispossession or the political expediency of scapegoating, the extreme form of which can even culminate in genocide.
This term refers to the ideology of the Other (or the outsider) in which human beings of a different skin color, or gender, or class, or nationality, or culture (understood in the broadest sense to include everything about human existence that is learned and not biologically inherited, ranging from food to music to politics to religion to economics, etc.) are consistently portrayed/treated as inferior beings for the purpose of dehumanizing them—as a device for their “erasure” or exclusion from the mainstream of society (marginalization) for the purposes of exploitation or dispossession or the political expediency of scapegoating, the extreme form of which can even culminate in genocide.
This ideology can only emerge in the context of a hierarchic notion of “us” versus “them” (in other words, otherness requires a dyadic sense of a self: one that is incapable of standing alone but must permanently stand in opposition to someone else). Among the key instruments behind the manufacture of this ideology is essentialism, while at the same time otherness itself is an important weapon in the arsenal of the racist, the sexist, the “classist,” and so on. Question: but what comes first: the ideology of otherness or whatever nefarious project (exclusion, dispossession, etc.) it serves? The answer is that both come first: that is, each is bound to the other dialectically but always against the backdrop of power (the power to dominate, exploit, vilify, etc.)
This ideology can only emerge in the context of a hierarchic notion of “us” versus “them” (in other words, otherness requires a dyadic sense of a self: one that is incapable of standing alone but must permanently stand in opposition to someone else). Among the key instruments behind the manufacture of this ideology is essentialism, while at the same time otherness itself is an important weapon in the arsenal of the racist, the sexist, the “classist,” and so on. Question: but what comes first: the ideology of otherness or whatever nefarious project (exclusion, dispossession, etc.) it serves? The answer is that both come first: that is, each is bound to the other dialectically but always against the backdrop of power (the power to dominate, exploit, vilify, etc.)
Note: essentialism as part of the ideological mechanism that facilitates marginality operates thusly: essentialism --> stereotypes --> otherness --> marginality. (Yes, you must know these concepts as well.)
Note: essentialism as part of the ideological mechanism that facilitates marginality operates thusly: essentialism --> stereotypes --> otherness --> marginality. (Yes, you must know these concepts as well.)
Google Sites
Report abuse