Making Sociology Universal: Revisiting the Contributions of Syed Hussein Alatas

  • Habibul Haque Khondker
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter examines two related problems: first, the discourse of corruption as a social problem, and secondly, certain problems of agenda-setting in sociology, which continues to be dominated by Anglo-American sectarian and national interests. The chapter calls for making sociology truly universal as an academic discipline. An understanding of such questions as to why corruption remains largely outside the purview of sociology and how sociological agendas are set can be found in the works of Syed Hussein Alatas, a prominent Southeast Asian sociologist. Alatas examined the subject of corruption as far back as the 1950s. Sociology of corruption as a sub-field failed to take off despite the ubiquity of this phenomenon. In recent years, a number of new books, including an updated version of Alatas’s book, have been published. Studies of corruption remain very much a prerogative of political scientists and public policy experts. Economists see corruption as a market-distorting externality and treat it as a peripheral subject. Gunnar Myrdal, who was an exception, in his Asian Drama identified the problem of corruption as a serious bottleneck for Asian development. The problem still persists forty years after Myrdal’s analysis. In a number of countries in the developing world, corruption has become a part of the fabric of society. Yet sociological theorization and empirical studies are lacking. This chapter examines corruption both as a social problem as well as an indicator of the “corruption of sociology” for which we can draw from the writings of Alatas, especially his notion of “captive mind” and the absence of intellectual autonomy on the part of Third World sociologists.

References

  1. Abuva, Jose V. (1970) “What Are We in Power For?: The Sociology of Graft and Corruption”. Philippine Sociological Review, 18 (3 & 4).Google Scholar
  2. Alatas, Syed Hussein (1956) “Some Fundamental Problems of Colonialism” in Eastern World (London) November.Google Scholar
  3. ——— (1957) “Effects of Corruption”, Singapore Tiger Standard. 28 February.Google Scholar
  4. ——— (1963) “The Weber Thesis and Southeast Asia” in Archives de Sociologie des Religions, 15.Google Scholar
  5. ——— (1964) “Archaeology, History and the Social Sciences in Southeast Asia”, in Federation Museum Journal, IX.Google Scholar
  6. ——— (1969) “The Captive Mind in Development Planning: The neglected problems in development studies and the need for an autonomous social science tradition in Asia” paper presented in the The Society for International Development, 11th World Conference, Delhi, November 14–17.Google Scholar
  7. ——— (1977) The Myth of the Lazy Native: A Study of the Image of Malays, Filipinos and Javanese from the 16th to the 20th century and its function in the ideology of colonial capitalism. London: Frank Cass.Google Scholar
  8. ——— (1986) The Problem of Corruption. Singapore: Times Book.Google Scholar
  9. ——— (1989) “The Problem of Corruption” in K.S. Sandhu and Paul Wheatley (Ed) Management of Success: The Moulding of Modern Singapore. Singapore: ISEAS.Google Scholar
  10. ——— (1991) Corruption: It’s Nature, Causes and Functions. Kuala Lumpur: S. Abdul Majed & Co.Google Scholar
  11. ——— (1999) Corruption and the Destiny of Asia. Petaling Jaya: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Burawoy, Michael (2004) “Public Sociologies: Contributions, Dilemmas, and Possibilities”, Social Forces, 82 (4).Google Scholar
  13. Caiden, G (2001) “Corruption and Democracy” in Gerald Caiden, O.P. Dwivedi and Joseph Habbra (Ed) Where Corruption Lives. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
  14. Deflem, Mathieu (2004) “There’s the ASA, But Where’s the Sociology?” Footnotes, July–August.Google Scholar
  15. Giddens, Anthony (1997) Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press, [third edition].Google Scholar
  16. Haan, N, Robert Bellah, P. Rabinow and W. Sullivan (Eds) (1983) Social Science as Moral Inquiry. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Hao, Yufan and M. Johnston, (2002) “Corruption and the Future of Economic Reforms in China” in Arnod J. Heidenheimer and M. Johnston (Ed) Political Corruption: Concepts and Contexts. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publisher.Google Scholar
  18. Hodgkinson, Peter (1997) “The Sociology of Corruption—Some Themes and Issues”, Sociology, 31 (1).Google Scholar
  19. Hollinger, P and C. Belton (2017) “Rolls-Royce Humbled by Long List of Corruption Offences”. Financial Times. January 18.Google Scholar
  20. Khondker, Habibul Haque (1987) “How To Think About Corruption in Bangladesh” Paper for the 21st Bengal Studies Conference, University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh.Google Scholar
  21. Lynd, Robert (1939) Knowledge for What? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Mills, C. Wright (1959) The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Pearce, F (1976) Crimes of the Powerful. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  24. PERC. (1994). Hong Kong: Annual Report.Google Scholar
  25. Rose-Ackerman, Susan (1999) Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences and Reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Said, Edward (1993) Culture and Imperialism. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
  27. Transparency International (2016) www.transparency.org/news/corruption-perceptions-index-2016 (accessed on May 17, 2017).
  28. Werlin, H. (1994) “Revisiting Corruption: With a New Definition” International Review of Administrative Science. 60.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Habibul Haque Khondker
    • 1
  1. 1.Zayed UniversityAbu DhabiUAE

Personalised recommendations