Module 2: Reading Response 2

“Dependence”

In Keir Martin’s article “Dependence”, he seeks to find out how anthropologists can add
to or explain the 21st century phenomenon of Western society’s hysteria over the fear of
economic dependence. Martin describes how the concept of personal independence has become a
key component in both politics and economics. This discourse is relatively new, as for most of
humanity, people appear to be relatively dependent, at least according to Marx. Based on his
writings and several political theorists after, the “ideology of possessive individualism” came
about during the 17th century and accelerated in the Victorian era. Anthropologists understand
this perspective but point out that dependence is not viewed the same everywhere or universally
came from Western attitudes. Interdependence, they believe, is far more important to discuss, as
it is part of being human and key to survival. The politics regarding the positives and negatives
in dependency and independence should only be looked at while considering the cultures and
communities those relationships are found.
Anthropologists utilize ethnographic analysis when attempting to understand how
dependency has become associated with certain demographics. Dependency has always been a
part of history. Humans have relied on nature or on their neighbours for centuries. Gift
exchanges and systems of kinship in many cultures often have an aspect of making one party
dependent on the other. In the 20th century, dependency theory was developed by some scholars.
Using a Marxist point of view, this theory claimed that Western powers kept nations in the
Global South economically dependent by draining them of their natural resources in order to
maintain an environment perfect for exploitation. This theory, though useful in pointing out some
inequalities, did generalize the actions of capitalist nations and characterized them as always
negative. Criticism on this led to the development of world systems theory, which examined
more closely the one-sided relationships between different parts of the world.
More recent research has focused on the lives of the urban poor in capitalist societies that
villainize them for their alleged dependency. These studies argue that growing inequality is what
is detrimental to these countries, not the families that have only resorted to welfare due to their
financial situations. Martin mentions that although these projects are good at combatting
conservative viewpoints, they remain shortsighted and limited. Like welfare, attitudes toward
wage labor have changed over time. Until the 19th century, it was looked down upon as a form
of dependency. Eventually, wage labor became known as a potential way for the poor to achieve
independence. Those unable to work became targets of the newer middle class, who with the
upper classes sought successfully to take away public relief. By the 21st century, an idea
developed that all would be able to achieve independence through available wage labor
universally. Yet, this has not yet proven to be the case, nor does it make complete sense, as not
everyone equates the two. A 2015 article written by James Ferguson is brought up by Martin. In
it, Ferguson contrasted the concept of dependency in Western societies with that in Southern
Africa, where it is viewed as an opposite to freedom. Here, power was derived from the number
of a person’s dependents or followers (and their land), not individual wealth.
A problem with some theories is that they generalize specific areas (Global South,
Southern Africa, etc.), often ignoring border cultures or those altered by colonialism.
Additionally, it eliminates the possibility of any exception. In some places, NGOs have given
villagers a distorted view on dependency as the companies use their children to ensure aid, while
in others locals that achieve more wealth have begun to separate themselves from the rest of their
poorer family. Because of these varying results, Martin expresses a need for comparative
ethnographic analyses that do not start with the idea that dependency is all negative and actively
trying to be eliminated.
The Module 2 lecture focused on development and underdevelopment and introduced the
dependency theory. This theory is discussed in detail by Martin, who critiques it in addition to
several other theories that branched off of it, such as world systems theories. The lecture explains
that Andre Gunder Frank established the difference between the terms developed, undeveloped,
and underdeveloped. In the article, countries belonging to the Global South are mostly kept in the
underdeveloped category when using the Marxist lens, which states that Western powers actively
work to keep these countries from being independent.

“Social Reproduction”

​ In the article “Social Reproduction” by Hadas Weiss, the definition of social reproduction
is analyzed as well as its role in academia over time. Social reproduction is described as a lens
through which the relationship between logic and survival are examined. Logic and survival
through biological reproduction allow the persistence of all societies, but are most apparent in
those that are capitalist. The earliest anthropologists to look at social reproduction were inspired
by the writings of Karl Marx and his ideas regarding compulsion and accumulation. By doing
this, social reproduction incorporated the relationship between production and distribution in
continuing the manufacturing process. Marx believed that one of the core relations in a capitalist
society was the (unbalanced) interdependence between capital investment and the labor force.
Capitalists have the means to produce. Workers do not, and thus sell their ability to work for a
salary to buy what they need to live. Structures, mainly the market, control the population by
making anything produced sellable. Capitalists and workers both need the market to survive and
continue social reproduction.
The use of Marx exclusively has been critiqued multiple times, especially by feminist
scholars. When discussing the purpose of wages and products that maintain the labor force, Marx
left out the labor given by women. Women provide the market with another generation of
workers by giving birth. They typically raise and educate their children in addition to
maintaining the household and cooking the meals necessary for survival. All of this domestic
work is usually never done for wages. Feminists argue that capitalism oppresses women by
making them tied to its continuation. Although companies may lose potential output from not
hiring female laborers, they use the biological abilities of women as a type of insurance for
having access to potential employees in the future through their descendents. By affecting their
reproduction, men are given new levels of power as breadwinners, even if it is temporary.
Capitalism has recently commodified domestic labor. To decrease its costs, there have been
attempts to socialize it, yet the corporate sector is still usually involved. Migrant labor has also
been imported to reduce costs.
Compared to now, many people in the past could afford to have a family and household
with their jobs. Today, however, many of the well paying jobs people used to have are now
unavailable. Manufacturing has either been outsourced or relocated to be staffed with migrant
labor who do not have to be paid as much, resulting in job shortages. In families with children,
both parents typically work, placing even more stress on domestic duties. Social programs such
as free or low cost healthcare, daycare, and schooling have been pulled back in many instances,
worsening debt. Capitalists seek to boost socially reproductive labor while not providing the
resources the labor populations need to continue to survive and thus work.
Modern social reproduction theory looks at the inequalities created by the way society
functions. In capitalist societies, the capitalists depend on the laborers to create their product. In
turn, the laborers rely on their employers to obtain money to survive. This relationship allows
capitalist societies to continue and function, even if it is to the detriment of one of the parties.
Weiss’s article connects with Martins in its discussions on Marx and interdependency. It is
difficult to be fully independent financially, despite that being what is expected. Wage labor,
once looked at disapprovingly, is now a core part of social reproduction. Those who do not work
and receive public assistance are scorned for their supposed dependency. This sentiment extends
to single mothers on welfare, even with all of their domestic labor that they never receive
compensation for.
 References

Martin K. (2021). Dependence. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Anthropology.

Weiss, Hadas. (2021). Social reproduction. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Anthropology.