Klaus Rasborg

From class society to the individualized society?: A critical reassessment of individualization and class

The concept of “individualization” plays a central role in both classic and modern sociology. In modern sociology writers such as Beck, Giddens, and Bauman made the concept of individualization a key one in their theories of “late”, “reflexive”, and “liquid modernity”. However, the emphasis which the sociology of individualization puts on “liberation”, choice and social change is challenged by the sociology of stratification and power (Bourdieu, Dean, and others) with its greater emphasis on class, power and social reproduction. This paper seeks to “overcome” this schism between social change and social reproduction in the form of an attempt to think the differentiated (stratified) forms of individualization in reflexive modernity. The assumption is that there is a differentiation in reflexive modern people’s ability to deal with the requirements of individualization, depending on their possession of economic, social and cultural capital. This is argued by means of a theoretical “reconstruction” of the insights and deficiencies of the sociology of individualization, and demonstrated—with a focus on young people—by a number of empirical examples. In conclusion, the paper discusses the possibility of a theoretical integration of the fundamental insights of both the sociology of individualization and the sociology of stratification.

Book Review: Beyond Left and Right. The Future of Radical Politics:

A short and under-researched chapter deals with panics about female violence and girl gangs. Finally, Thompson looks at panics about sex on the screen, mainly examining the National Viewers and Listeners Association. While this book is useful in foregrounding some aspects of the media in moral panics, it is less so in questioning the very terminology of its title. Thompson does refer to a sociology of morals and changing forms of moral regulation, as well as briefly touching on what qualifies as a panic. But these matters are left underexplored. It might have been expected that the moral component of moral panics would have been subject to greater scrutiny by someone who has also written on the sociology of religion. Questions about why and how moral diversity and changing values do and do not figure in the media could have been addressed. In a concern to assert that moral panic is a key sociological concept, there is very little about what makes something a panic. This word has led to a view of the term moral panic as wholly pejorative. Some have also critiqued the ways in which ‘reason’ and ‘emotion’ are contrasted in analyses of moral panics, where the former is often used to disqualify the latter. Attempts to develop a ‘grassroots’ or bottom-up conception of moral crusades sometimes avoid this problem. But there is still a question of where the panic occurs and who, if anyone, is actually panicking. Most analyses of moral panics focus on and make much use of the media, but the obvious point that a media panic may be far from the same thing as a public panic is still glossed over, as the two are often treated as if they are the same thing. Furthermore, attempts to delineate the core characteristics of moral panics do not seem to stand up to scrutiny. For example, was the social reaction to BSE a moral panic? The ‘threat’ may not have been mundane, but was it regarded as a threat to social order itself ? Has there been increased hostility because of it and, if so, directed at what or whom? Beef producers, the government or the cows? Whether the idea of moral panics can be used sensibly, or perhaps at all, is open to more doubt than this book indicates.