To purpose of the recent hunger strike of the mapuche, in the list Chilesoc appeared some requirements to sign a statement of support about your situation. So far, all reasonable. Now, you asked for it to be a statement of support for both sociologists (and initially using the word expert). Which I thought was inadequate-because of truth, what experts in the social?, if a sociologist truly believe that we are that, we are very wrong. To which several replied by saying that the expert was not important, that what is relevant was to make the request. Which is all very well, but in between were again some of the statements insisted on the special value of the opinion of sociologists.
Then I write the replicated full that I did about it:
It is always strange when it denies and affirms the same thing in a single paragraph. It denies that it wants to (or the importance) to speak as an expert,and immediately afterwards it is insisted that the speech of the sociologists is special. We are told that it is to speak as experts, but as professionals, but -among other things – a professional is defined by who has access to a specific knowledge (or an expert). We are told that it is to speak as experts, but that ‘we must contribute with a wider look at the social reality’ which remains a way of asking that our speech is special. Or, it is proposed that, given that this is a political issue, then being an expert is not relevant; but what from when to say that one is an expert or has a special look at a topic is not a political act of legitimacy of the speech? The political effect desired is based precisely on the pretense of having a speech special. In the end, if you do not have that claim then you do not insist on show the credentials at the time of signature.
In the end, to speak publicly, to speak as concerned citizens. Another title to speak is not required. Another title you do not have.
And finally, if what you want is to help the mapuche, then, become acts of truth: Protest, organize a rally, join the hunger strike. But to put together a statement based on an alleged contribution to the special character of professionals from the social, when that contribution is not recognized in the society, is the kind of stuff that looks useful and seems important and seems to understand, but in reality only serves to make one remain quiet with their conscience, rather than to provide politically in an effective way.
Yes, I think that came out a bit aggressive -in particular, the last part, but in the end, not always one is in the mood more sober.