@article{Mackert2024, author = {Mackert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Citizenship}, series = {Politische Soziologie: Handbuch f{\"u}r Wissenschaft und Studium}, journal = {Politische Soziologie: Handbuch f{\"u}r Wissenschaft und Studium}, editor = {Endreß, Martin and Rampp, Benjamin}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Baden-Baden}, isbn = {978-3-8487-4836-5}, year = {2024}, language = {de} } @article{Mackert2023, author = {Mackert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Soziale Schließung}, series = {Politische Soziologie : Handbuch f{\"u}r Wissenschaft und Studium}, journal = {Politische Soziologie : Handbuch f{\"u}r Wissenschaft und Studium}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Baden-Baden}, isbn = {978-3-8487-4836-5}, year = {2023}, language = {de} } @article{Mackert2021, author = {Mackert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Social life as collective struggle}, series = {sozialpolitik.ch}, journal = {sozialpolitik.ch}, number = {1}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t}, address = {Freiburg}, issn = {2297-8224}, doi = {10.18753/2297-8224-174}, year = {2021}, abstract = {In recent years, all over the globe we have seen intensifying economic exploitation, political disenfranchisement, social marginalization and cultural repression in all kinds of political regimes, from liberal democratic to authoritarian and dictatorial. Although the strategies vary with regard to regime and context, in all of them we observe that while a growing number of social groups are speaking out and rising against them, a presumably much higher number of groups do not. In this article, I argue that all these processes can be conceived as aspects of ongoing closure struggles in social life. However, in order to understand why some social groups are able to fight against closure strategies while others are not, closure theory in its current state of elaboration is not of any help. While it operates with the term solidarization, it does not offer any explanation of how such acting in solidarity may become possible in closure struggles. The article is a mainly theoretical contribution of how to solve this problem.}, language = {en} } @article{MackertHartmann2015, author = {Mackert, J{\"u}rgen and Hartmann, Eddie}, title = {Violence}, series = {Oxford Bibliographies sociology}, journal = {Oxford Bibliographies sociology}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, address = {Oxford}, doi = {10.1093/obo/9780199756384-0137}, year = {2015}, language = {de} } @article{WolfMackert2020, author = {Wolf, Hannah and Mackert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Introduction}, series = {Urban Change and Citizenship in Times of Crisis Vol. 2. Urban Neo-liberalisation}, journal = {Urban Change and Citizenship in Times of Crisis Vol. 2. Urban Neo-liberalisation}, editor = {Mackert, J{\"u}rgen and Turner, Bryan S. and Wolf, Hannah}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {London}, isbn = {978-0-42926-228-9}, pages = {1 -- 14}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The processes of neo-liberalisation, coined as 'actually existing neo-liberalism' are by their very nature variegated and context-specific and can appear in multi-faceted and contradictory forms. Consequentially, sociological reflection has tried to conceptualise ongoing processes of transforming the city under the concept of urban neo-liberalism which is generally understood as the contextually specific and path-dependent realisation of neo-liberal restructuration projects, embedded in varying social, political, economic, and cultural 'regulatory landscapes'. As much as neo-liberalism as ideology and political programme aims at erasing any democratic participation in society, its proponents have taken sides pushing ahead the re-conceptualisation of the city as a market with the right of the stronger 'to do down the weaker'. The city has become a focal point for neo-liberalism's war against democracy and citizens. Turning social relations into market transactions in order to restructure cities is not a new idea from the neo-liberals but one of the non-negotiable dogmas of their religion called science.}, language = {en} } @article{SchmidtWellenburgMackert2018, author = {Schmidt-Wellenburg, Christian and Mackert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {EU-Citizenship}, series = {Europasoziologie : Handbuch f{\"u}r Wissenschaft und Studium}, journal = {Europasoziologie : Handbuch f{\"u}r Wissenschaft und Studium}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Baden-Baden}, isbn = {978-3-8487-2456-7}, pages = {120 -- 129}, year = {2018}, language = {de} } @article{Mackert2014, author = {Mackert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {The secret society and the social dynamics of terrorist behavior}, series = {Revue de Synth{\`e}se}, volume = {135}, journal = {Revue de Synth{\`e}se}, publisher = {Brill}, address = {Leiden}, issn = {1955-2343}, doi = {10.1007/s11873-014-0261-z}, pages = {331 -- 359}, year = {2014}, abstract = {The article argues that individualist accounts cannot adequately explain the social dynamics of terrorist behavior as they turn analyses of terrorism into analyses of terrorists. A relational approach that concentrates on the social relations between terrorist organizations and their members would be able to do this, however. Therefore, the article presents a formal analysis that makes the "secret society" of terrorists the lynchpin of an explanation of how terrorist organizations shape the behavioral conditions of volunteers and suicide terrorists in a manner that triggers a type of behavior we might call terrorism.}, language = {de} } @article{Mackert2004, author = {Mackert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Reorganiszation and Stabilization}, series = {Journal of classical sociology}, volume = {4}, journal = {Journal of classical sociology}, number = {3}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {1468-795X}, pages = {311 -- 336}, year = {2004}, abstract = {The consequences of economic globalization have created a new interest in'EmileDurkheim's conception of an institutional and moral reorganization of modernsociety that he developed in Professional Ethics and Civic Morals. Contrary toexisting attempts to explain these political processes towards democratization, thisarticle argues for a causal analysis of social change and concentrates on the socialmechanisms that trigger the reorganization process of modern society. Two thesesare entertained. The first thesis argues that the programme of an institutional andmoral reorganization of modern society can be reanalysed as a causal process ofdemocratization. This process takes two steps. While social mechanisms of reorgan-izationbring about the institutional and moral reorganization of modern society,social mechanisms of stabilizationguarantee the functioning of the emergingdemocratic system. Further, the second thesis argues that this kind of explanationcan be applied to Durkheim's vision of a European confederation. The analysisreveals that his idea of a 'post-national' constellation refers to crucial problems ofthe recent debate regarding a democratic deficit in the European Union, and itshows that Durkheim's contribution to both political sociology and historical-comparative research has been misconceived and prematurely repudiated.}, language = {en} } @article{Mackert2012, author = {Mackert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Social Closure}, series = {Oxford Bibliographies}, journal = {Oxford Bibliographies}, publisher = {Oxford University}, address = {Oxford}, doi = {10.1093/obo/9780199756384-0084}, year = {2012}, abstract = {"Social closure" is one of the most basic terms and concepts in sociology. Basically, closure refers to processes of drawing boundaries, constructing identities, and building communities in order to monopolize scarce resources for one's own group, thereby excluding others from using them. Society is not a homogenous entity but is instead internally structured and subdivided by processes of social closure. Some social formations, such as groups, organizations, or institutions, may be open to everybody, provided they are capable of participation, while access to most others is limited due to certain criteria that either allow people to become members or exclude them from membership. Therefore, social closure is a ubiquitous, everyday phenomenon that can be observed in almost every sphere and place in the social world. Members of societies experience closure from the very beginning of their social life. To be excluded from certain groups starts at school, where presumably homogenous classes begin to subdivide into distinct peer groups or sports teams. Here, exclusion may be rather arbitrary, but the experience of having a door slammed in one's face proceeds in cases, where inclusion depends on formal rules or preconditions. Access to private schools follows explicit rules and depends on financial capacities; access to university depends on a certificate or diploma, eventually from certain schools only; membership in a highly prestigious club depends on economic and social capital and the respective social networks; and finally, in the case of migration, people will have to be eligible for citizenship and pass the thorny path of naturalization. However, it is not just the enormous plurality of forms that makes social closure crucial for sociology. Rather, the process of closure of social relations—of groups, organizations, institutions, and even national societies—is the fundamental process of both "communal" (Vergemeinschaftung) and "associative" relationships (Vergesellschaftung), and neither would be possible without social closure. In this broad and fundamental sense, social closure is not restricted to processes in national societies. It even allows for understanding crucial processes of the way the social world is organized at the regional or global level.}, language = {en} } @article{Mackert2013, author = {Mackert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Gewalt in Ordnungskonflikten als Problem der erkl{\"a}renden Soziologie}, series = {Berliner Journal f{\"u}r Soziologie}, volume = {23}, journal = {Berliner Journal f{\"u}r Soziologie}, number = {1}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, issn = {0863-1808}, doi = {10.1007/s11609-013-0210-y}, pages = {91 -- 113}, year = {2013}, abstract = {Gewaltt{\"a}tige soziale und politische Auseinandersetzungen, wie sie sich j{\"u}ngst in den Staaten Nordafrikas und des Nahen Ostens, in den franz{\"o}sischen Banlieues oder in London ereignet haben, deuten darauf hin, dass die sozialen Ordnungen, in denen sie entstehen, nicht l{\"a}nger ungeteilt als legitim erachtet werden. Vielmehr werden sie von alternativen Ordnungsvorstellungen infrage gestellt und herausgefordert. Auf die Erkl{\"a}rung derartiger Ordnungskonflikte ist die Soziologie nicht gut vorbereitet. Der Aufsatz skizziert deshalb zun{\"a}chst Probleme und offene Fragen einer Soziologie der Gewalt - von der klassischen Soziologie {\"u}ber begrifflich-konzeptionelle und theoretisch-methodologische Probleme bis hin zu problematischen modernisierungs- und zivilisationstheoretischen Annahmen {\"u}ber eine k{\"u}nftige Rolle von Gewalt in sozialen Prozessen. Eine Erkl{\"a}rung der genannten Ph{\"a}nomene, so die These, wird nur dann m{\"o}glich, wenn eine Soziologie der Gewalt den konstitutiven Zusammenhang von Ph{\"a}nomenen physischer Gewalt und Formen sozialer Ordnung in den Mittelpunkt stellt. Eine erkl{\"a}rende Soziologie, die „Warum"- und „Wie"-Fragen nicht auseinanderreißt, muss sich dazu auf die sozialen Mechanismen der Gewaltentstehung in Prozessen der Produktion und Reproduktion sozialer Ordnung konzentrieren.}, language = {de} }