RC:
Given the extent of Vandana Shiva's influence across the global environmental movement it is critical to subject her ideas to ruthless criticism, especially when serious concerns have already been raised about the political implications of her work. Fundamentally, fellow feminist Professor Regina Cochrane takes issue with Shiva's "left" populist notion of "culturally-perceived" poverty, which she argues "is not only elitist but also complicit with globalized capitalism and reactionary currents that are on the rise worldwide." According to Cochrane, as a highly regarded subsistence ecofeminist, Shiva attempts to make the case "that much of what is thought to be rural poverty is not poverty at all, but simply manifestations of culturally 'other' forms of 'difference'." Within feminist literature this notion was "first employed" by Shiva in her book Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development, and is now "widely used" by various ecofeminists and post-development thinkers aligned with the so-called anti-globalization movement.
After providing a brief summary of Shiva's ideas vis-à-vis poverty, Cochrane highlights how her work "contains many overt references that are in keeping with a post-development framework." A framework that not only provides a useful critique of capitalist development theory, but "goes far beyond a critique to insist, as Shiva does, upon a 'total rejection of development' without offering any alternative other than the revival of 'surviving [subsistence] economies' and local traditions." Such an approach presents a problematic and highly romantic view of the real - the existing poverty of subsistence economies.
In staking out a populist position, Shiva is following the well-worn path of privileged 'Third World scholars abroad' who, upon graduating from metropolitan capitalist universities -- and sometimes even obtaining positions there -- become the voice for Third World nationalism. Fuelled by a 'radicalism cut off from the real struggles of ordinary people' and thus identifying nation rather than class as the victim of a globalizing capitalism, this scholarly elite reject a socialism that is internationalist in scope for a nationalist capitalism 'with a human face'. In so doing, they end up 'adopting the standpoint of traditional elites who feel threatened by the new cultural attitudes and the demands of their traditional subordinates'. Given the prevalence of liberal guilt and the hegemonic identity politics of the metropolis, the 'local knowledges' of this scholarly elite are readily validated, explains Meera Nanda as "epistemologies of the oppressed" ...[rather than as]... part of the ruling ideologies in many non-Western societies'. Challenging this view, she insists instead that 'Western friends of the Third World have an obligation to understand the complete social history of ideas in situ in other cultures'.
Shiva's sloppy scholarship may be considered de rigueur in the corporate world, but for a radical critic of the status quo it is highly troublesome to say the least. Unfortunately this is not a one-off complaint, and Cochrane further illustrates Shiva's "lack of intellectual rigour" by citing Richard Lewontin's cutting criticisms of her book Stolen Harvest: The Hijacking of the Global Food Supply. Furthermore, on a more fundamental level Tina Roy and Craig Borowiak take Shiva to task for "'remain[ing] willfully uncritical of the economic, social, and political cleavages within and across rural communities' and of the continuities between her views and agrarian populism." Cochrane, however, points out that a "more basic problem... is the unquestioning manner in which academic feminists and others in the West have made Shiva into the global celebrity she is while ignoring the excellent work of other Indian feminists." Yet the "situation gets considerably more complicated" when the thesis of "culturally-perceived" poverty. . . . . . .
is examined in relation to the current historical conjuncture of neo-liberalism and rising fundamentalist and right-wing nationalist currents, North and South. Hence the concept of poverty as 'culturally-perceived', together with its populist baggage, readily lends itself to complicity with contemporary globalized capitalism in a number of significant ways. Moreover, in terms of political practice, Shiva and the main populist currents/mentors feeding into her thesis of 'culturally-perceived' poverty have all ended up moving onto the same ground as Hindu fundamentalism, nationalism, and/or the European New Right.
Moreover, drawing upon the work of James Overton, Cochrane adds:
In both North and South, populist ideas like 'culturally-perceived' poverty can also have the unintended consequence of justifying the wage cuts associated with neo-liberalism and of helping legitimate neo-liberal discourses focusing on the issue of 'dependency.' All in all, by pushing most of the responsibility for solving social issues back onto the rural poor themselves, subsistence strategies can end up serving as a political safety-valve for the crises and unrest generated by neo-liberalism.
The primary purpose of the passage is to
a)gain a better understanding of the evolution of Shiva's ideas on culturally perceived poverty.
b)determine the prefiguring sources that provide Shiva the general foundation of her work on global environment issues.
c)outline a strong critique of Shiva's concept of culturally perceived poverty.
d)contest Shiva's claim that post development populism reduces capitalist-oriented cultural identities.
Which of the following best represents the key argument made by Cochrane?
a)It is distasteful to hear well-fed people extolling the virtues of peoples that suffer from poverty.
b)The rich are simply culturally different from the poor and the economic difference of the latter is much rather a form of empowerment.
c)Shiva's rejection of capitalist development and dramatization of endogeneous development ignores other experiences and possibilities.
d)The populist argument of culturally-perceived poverty lends itself to complicity with neoliberalism and with fundamentalist currents.
By the expression "in situ" the author refers to the research of
a)ordinary peoples in the context of class.
b)ordinary peoples in their natural surroundings.
c)subalterns in a nationalist context.
d)subalterns from the epistemologies of leading scholars.
Which of the following statements is most likely to strengthen Cochrane's argument?
a)A poetic idealizing of poverty has been widely used to justify exploitation of the underprivileged.
b)It is not clear whether Cochrane has even read the book "Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development."
c)Shiva has worked closely with nationalist groups in India and favours uniting left and right in a movement against globalization.
d)Shiva portrays her mythical account of India's Chipko or tree hugging movement endorsingly as having Gandhian roots.
The author proposes to interview Cochrane on TV, and has asked readers to send in questions that they would like posed to Cochrane - questions that raise points not sufficiently addressed in the passage or which would provoke thought and response from Cochrane. They should not be irrelevant, or repeat points already discussed.
Which one of the following queries would meet the criteria and could be posed to Cochrane?
a)Should questions be raised about Shiva's so-called progressive credentials?
b)Are there circumstances in which Shiva's views would be of relevance, even if only limited?
c)Would many other marginalized writers and spokespeople be better placed than Shiva to do justice to subsistence movements?
d)All of the above
-AIMCAT