when collective activity is rational (according to group, as per mutual decision) but it may be possible taht a lion share of participants are not in tune with the decision. But for the sake of mutual benefit they put ineffeorts in the action. If it is the way to go about, then sustainability of the action is a matter of concern. How long will it sustain?
Because in West Bengal there are rare examples of successful collective action..
Because in West Bengal there are rare examples of successful collective action..
6 comments:
To answer your question, I will need to bring in two of Giddon's principles:-
1)Binding factors and structural levels(Pg 60,61)
2) Transformative power of agency (Pg 40)
Binding factors evaluated from the context of Significance, Domination and Legitimization will give insights into the concept of power sharing.
Now, as to whether this power has the 'capability' to bring in change (in other words whether it is transformative power) will help in understanding why collective actions have failed in the context of West Bengal...
Again, these are just wild guesses based upon my understanding...
Well Friend,
I would like to confront your notion that no collective action has taken place in West Bengal.
I attract your attention towards the Political movement which is a collective action taken by the people to raise their heads against the injustice done to them by the then ruling party. This event dates back to 1970s.
Even the abolition of Sati pratha and Widow remarriage is a result of collective action of the people from Bengal
No Shakar i have not told that no collective action became successful in West Bengal, but i said that the collective action was not so satisfactory in other sectors like- Agriculture , Dairy, Seed, Fertilizers etc.
could you tell me why Singur project failed if that collective action was sustainable???
I am only talking about the sustainibility....
i dont know how far the concept of multiple publics can be applied here..
during one of the discussions prof. vivek bhandari told that many decisions are taken without the majority agreeing to it..i mean, there are many who say nor for neither against a proposal or decision to be taken..
it is the influential bunch which takes majority decisions..later on that consequences of a decision come to the fore and people start believing or going against it strongly..
example what prof. bhandari gave was that of democracy. when india was thought of to be a democracy, not many indians knew what democracy was. but now many are proud or u can say have some opinion..
finally what i wanted to say is that sustainability is a function of positive outcomes or rather outcomes which are viewed positively by the people.
i think it makes some sense..
please comment on it...
Post a Comment