Rule of Exclusion Anthropology
In the following chapters, Charles Tilly examines how hoarding of opportunities and exploitation are two important ways in which social exclusion is created and maintained. The principle of competitive exclusion, sometimes called Gause`s exclusion law or simply Gause`s law, states that two species competing for exactly the same resources cannot coexist side by side in a stable manner. Farmer, P. (2004). An anthropology of structural violence. Current Anthropology, 45(3), 305-325. Why and how are diseases such as AIDS and tuberculosis linked to poverty and inequality? This Current Anthropology study examines AIDS and tuberculosis in rural Haiti in relation to the social and economic structures in which they are embedded. A syncretic and biosocial anthropology shows how inequality and poverty create a different risk of infection and adverse consequences, including death. It is important to link this anthropology to epidemiology and understanding of different approaches to new diagnostic and therapeutic tools. Access to full text: available online Based on field observations, Joseph Grinnell formulated the principle of exclusion from competition in 1904: “It is unlikely that two species with roughly the same feeding habits will remain balanced for long in the same region.
One will supplant the other.  Georgy Gause formulated the competition exclusion law based on laboratory competition experiments with two Paramecium species, P. aurelia and P. caudatum. The conditions were to add fresh water every day and initiate a constant flow of food. Although P. caudatum initially dominated, P. aurelia recovered and then drove out P.
caudatum by competition from exploitative resources. However, Gause was able to survive P. caudatum by distinguishing environmental parameters (food, water). Thus, Gause`s law is only valid if the ecological factors are constant. Some communities that seem to respect the principle of competitive exclusion are MacArthur`s warbler and Darwin`s finch, although the latter still overlap ecologically and are only negatively affected by competition under extreme conditions.  Fischer, A. M. (2008). Resolving the theoretical ambiguities of social exclusion with regard to polarization and conflict (Working Paper No. 08-90). DESTIN, London School of Economics. Is social exclusion a superfluous concept? This article aims to resolve conceptual ambiguities by redefining social exclusion as processes of disability and rejection.
This definition draws attention to closely related processes of disadvantage and at the same time distinguishes social exclusion from poverty. Exclusion occurs at all levels of a social hierarchy, and exclusions that do not necessarily lead to poverty can still have a very strong impact on social processes such as conflict. Full text: available online Tilly, C. (1998). How to accumulate opportunities. In permanent inequality. University of California Press What is opportunity hoarding and how does it relate to social exclusion? In this chapter, Tilly uses examples of chain migration to illustrate how some groups organize themselves to accumulate opportunities and exclude others from specific occupations and economic sectors. While hoarding opportunities does not necessarily entail exclusion costs to society, it is a potential mechanism of categorical inequality. It can be combined with exploitation to create harmful differences in terms of opportunities and rewards between groups in society.
Access to full text: available online “Othering” and “bordering” are two other important exclusion processes. Othering is the process by which a dominant group defines a group of children. This is done by inventing categories, labels, and ideas about what distinguishes people who belong to those categories. Literature defines “otherness” as what occurs when a person, group, or category is treated as an “object” by another group. This “objectification” allows actors to break the moral rules of social relations. The issue of capacity for action is at the heart of the debate on social exclusion. This focuses on the role of different actors as well as on the more impersonal strengths and processes in exclusion. These actors and forces may include globalization, international organizations, nation-states, elites, and excluded groups and individuals themselves. A partial solution to the paradox lies in increasing the dimensionality of the system.
Spatial heterogeneity, trophic interactions, competition with multiple resources, trade-offs between competition and colonization, and lagging can prevent exclusion (ignoring stochastic extinction over long periods of time).