Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T09:36:35.378Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Politics of Sight: Revisiting Timothy Pachirat’s Every Twelve Seconds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 November 2021

JASMINE ENGLISH Open the ORCID record for JASMINE ENGLISH [Opens in a new window]  and
BERNARDO ZACKA Open the ORCID record for BERNARDO ZACKA [Opens in a new window]
JASMINE ENGLISH*
Affiliation:
MIT, United States
BERNARDO ZACKA*
Affiliation:
MIT, United States
*
Jasmine English, Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Political Science, MIT, United States, [email protected].
Bernardo Zacka, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, MIT, United States, [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In his ethnography of industrialized slaughter, Every Twelve Seconds, Timothy Pachirat coins a label to describe political interventions that use visibility as a catalyst for reform—the “politics of sight.” We argue that the politics of sight rests on three premises that are all mistaken or misspecified: (1) that exposing morally repugnant practices will make us see them, (2) that seeing such practices will stop us from acquiescing to them, and (3) that owning up to such practices is preferable to keeping them concealed. To develop our argument, we propose an alternative interpretation of Pachirat’s own ethnographic material informed by theories from social psychology—one that leads to a different critique of the politics of sight than the one Pachirat offers and to a different understanding of the conditions under which it can succeed. Methodologically, we seek to illustrate the value of reanalyzing interpretive research through close reading.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 116 , Issue 3 , August 2022 , pp. 1025 - 1037
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arendt, Hannah. 1963. Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
Aronson, Elliot. 1969. “The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance: A Current Perspective.” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed. Berkowitz, Leonard, 2–3. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bastian, Brock, and Loughnan, Steve. 2017. “Resolving the Meat-Paradox: A Motivational Account of Morally Troublesome Behavior and its Maintenance.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 21 (3): 278–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Björkman, Lisa, Wedeen, Lisa, Williams, Juliet, and Hawkesworth, Mary. 2019. “Interpretive Methods.” American Political Science Association Organized Section for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research, Qualitative Transparency Deliberations, Working Group Final Report III.2.Google Scholar
Browning, Christopher R. 1992. Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Batallion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Büthe, Tim, and Jacobs, Alan M.. 2015. “Transparency in Qualitative and Multi-Method Research: A Symposium.” Qualitative and Multi-Method Research: Newsletter of the American Political Science Association’s QMMR Section 13 (1): 2–64.Google Scholar
Cooper, Joel. 2007. Cognitive Dissonance: Fifty Years of a Classic Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cramer, Katherine. 2015. “Transparent Explanations, Yes. Public Transcripts and Fieldnotes, No: Ethnographic Research on Public Opinion.” Qualitative and Multi-Method Research: Newsletter of the American Political Science Association’s QMMR Section 13 (1): 17–22.Google Scholar
Editorial Board. 2019. “Don’t Look Away.” The New York Times, December 6: A30.Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert. 2000. The Civilizing Process, trans. Jephcott, E.. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Feldman, Leonard. 2014. Review of Every Twelve Seconds . Migration Studies 2 (2): 283–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujii, Lee Ann. 2013. “The Puzzle of Extra-Lethal Violence.” Perspectives on Politics 11 (2): 410–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold. 1956. “Conditions of a Successful Degradation Ceremony.” American Journal of Sociology 61: 420–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glover, Jonathan. 2000. Humanity: A Moral History of the Twentieth Century. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Gross, James J., and Thompson, Ross A.. 2007. “Emotion Regulation: Conceptual Foundations.” In Handbook of Emotion Regulation, ed. Gross, James J., 3–24. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Guendelsberger, Emily. 2019. On the Clock. New York: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Havel, Vaclav. 1985. The Power of the Powerless: Citizens against the State in Central-Eastern Europe. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Hilberg, Raul. 1961. The Destruction of the European Jews. Chicago: Quadrangle Books.Google Scholar
Levinson, Meira. 2015. “Moral Injury and the Ethics of Educational Injustice.” Harvard Educational Review 85 (2): 203–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litz, Brett T., Stein, Nathan, Delaney, Eileen, Lebowitz, Leslie, Nash, William P., Silva, Caroline, and Maguen, Shira. 2009. “Moral Injury and Moral Repair in War Veterans: A Preliminary Model and Intervention Strategy.” Clinical Psychology Review 29: 695–706.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Longo, Matthew, and Zacka, Bernardo. 2019. “Political Theory in an Ethnographic Key.” American Political Science Review 113 (4): 1066–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, R. B. 2012. “Slaughterhouse Rules.” The Atlantic, November.Google Scholar
Moyn, Samuel. 2020. “The Best Scholarly Books of the Decade.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. April 14 https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-best-scholarly-books-of-the-decade/.Google Scholar
Murphy, Jeffrie G. 1999. “Moral Reasons and the Limitation of Liberty.” William and Mary Law Review 40 (3): 947–58.Google Scholar
Pachirat, Timothy. 2009. “Shouts and Murmurs: The Ethnographer’s Potion.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 7 (2): 41–44.Google Scholar
Pachirat, Timothy. 2011. Every Twelve Seconds: Industrialized Slaughter and the Politics of Sight. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Pachirat, Timothy. 2015. “The Tyranny of Light.” Qualitative and Multi-Method Research: Newsletter of the American Political Science Association’s QMMR Section 13 (1): 27–31.Google Scholar
Pachirat, Timothy. 2018. Among Wolves: Ethnography and the Immersive Study of Power. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Roy, Donald F. 1959. “Banana Time: Job Satisfaction and Informal Interaction.” Human Organization 18 (4): 158–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schatz, Edward, ed. 2009. Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine. 2014. “Judging Quality: Evaluative Criteria and Epistemic Communities.” In Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, 2nd ed., eds. Yanow, Dvora and Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine, 120–46. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sherman, David K., and Cohen, Geoffrey L.. 2006. “The Psychology of Self-Defense: Self-Affirmation Theory.” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, ed. Zanna, Mark, 183–242. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sontag, Susan. 1977. On Photography. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Sontag, Susan. 2004. Regarding the Pain of Others. New York: Picador.Google Scholar
Walzer, Michael. 1973. “Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 2 (2): 160–80.Google Scholar
Wedeen, Lisa. 2010. “Reflections on Ethnographic Work in Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 13: 255–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Bernard. 1981. “Politics and Moral Character.” In Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973-1980. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanow, Dvora, and Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine, eds. 2014. Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Zacka, Bernardo. 2014. “Every Twelve Seconds: Industrialized Slaughter and the Politics of Sight.” Contemporary Politcal Theory 13: e1–3. https://doi.org/10.1057/cpt.2013.9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zacka, Bernardo. 2017. When the State Meets the Street: Public Service and Moral Agency. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimbardo, Philip. 2007. The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.