Questioning mentalities of governance: a history of power relations among the Roma in Romania
View/ Open
Voiculescu2013.docx (27.56Mb)
Date
27/11/2013Author
Voiculescu, Cerasela Stefania
Metadata
Abstract
The thesis explains the socioeconomic differences among the Roma through a
historical exploration of the relations established between Roma and significant
Others at local, regional, and central levels in different, overlapping spheres of power
(state, politics, religion, informal economy). Through a historical-ethnographic
analysis of difference and power struggles, the thesis seeks to bring the political
aspects of Roma lives back into the discourses of empowerment which are highly
depoliticized by both the state and transnational neo-liberal governance (World
Bank, UNDP, EU etc.). It is largely an explanation of transformations undergone by
two Roma groups in Romania who experienced utterly different living conditions
(while some got ’poorer’, the others became more affluent) in the period from
socialism to post-socialism.
The qualitative analysis, based on 7-months of ethnographic fieldwork,
overcomes the flaws of policy-oriented research based primarily on statistics. The
latter is produced by state and transnational development actors and ignores
qualitative differences between Roma groups, the context of Romanian and Eastern
European transformations (e.g. clientelism, informal economy, neopatrimonial state)
and constitutes ’identities’ (’the poor’, ’the marginal’, ’the vulnerable’) through
which the Roma are governed and maintained in a subordinate position. These
symbolic categories are used as part of a larger neoliberal problematization of
governance called ’social integration’, which constitutes itself as a ’regime of truth’
and follows an economic rationality which reproduces the status quo and does not
necessarily empower the Roma.
In addition, these ’regimes of enunciations’ are adopted un-reflexively as
objects of study in social science and Romani studies. Distancing itself from these
academic and policy practices, my comparative historical ethnography of power
relations and discursive practices among the Roma challenges and brings a
reconsideration of the current mentality of governance as social integration.
Furthermore, my thesis constitutes an important contribution to Romani
studies by 1) challenging a unilateral perspective directed by political agendas, and
2) producing reflexivity in relation to the object of study. It indicates that the historical study of power struggles as “an ascending analysis of power” (Foucault
1980: 99) is more beneficial in terms of empowerment than the study of predefined
themes of governance (e.g. poverty and marginalization). The Roma continuously
negotiate their relations with the Others in interaction with an uncertain
socioeconomic environment, and these struggles constitute mechanisms of
transformation in their lives.
My thesis thus reveals different interactions Roma have had within and across
spheres of power struggle (economy, state, politics, religion), which suggest an
explanation for the two Roma groups’ different living conditions. A ‘mobile’ or a
‘sedentary’ interaction with the socialism-to-postsocialism socioeconomic
transformations provided opportunities or restrictions for the improvement of the
Roma’s material living conditions. While a ‘mobile’ and trans-local approach was
adopted by Caldarars, a ‘sedentary’, localized socioeconomic practice was
experienced as a restriction by the Romanianized Gypsies. Although these ‘patterns’
largely correspond to the groups studied, there was a variation in terms of mobility
and wealth within both. Nevertheless, the mobile-sedentary distinction is relevant as
it shows different ways of governance. While a trans-local mobile approach with low
levels of subjection to state governance worked as a form of self-governance, a local
‘navigation’ of limited field of possibilities restricted access to better living
conditions and increased the subjection to state governance.
My thesis also draws attention to possible sources of empowerment (Roma politics)
which are blocked by particular transformations of state and politics (patronage
politics and political patronage), or translated by the state into the language of ‘social
integration’ (e.g. Pentecostalism as self-governance). To sum up, I consider that my
thesis undertakes a re-evaluation of the existent problematization of social
integration and constitutes a reflexive knowledge base for the support of genuine
forms of empowerment among the Roma.