Boundary-crossing arises from habits, not from belonging ties.

Evidence

Put differ­ ently, ‘neighbourly contact’ cannot be seen as of its own accord engendering the goods for productive relations across difference to manifest (Thiranagama and Kelly, 2010: 12). Rather, I read conviviality as arguing that the neutralization of conflict is realized only when multicultural norms which annul the very interrogation of differ­ ence already pre-empt the encounter. Put differently, the unspectacular breaching of already ascribed racial and ethnic boundaries emerge from alternative ‘habits’ and ‘habituations’ (Noble, 2013: 162), rather than alternative ties of belonging and/or circuits of contact. — Sivamohan Valluvan, Conviviality and Multiculture, 17

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Clarifies the core theoretical claim of conviviality: difference-boundary breaching happens through habituated norms that pre-empt the interrogation of difference, not through contact networks.
  • DEEPTHINKING: The premise that productive inter-ethnic norms must already pre-exist the encounter — that contact is downstream of norms rather than generative of them — inverts the standard integrationist policy logic and is worth dwelling on.
  • corroborated: 4 independent passages support this claim — Sivamohan Valluvan, Conviviality and Multiculture: A
, 17
  • XREF: connects to: Eliminating ceremonial distance between people produces estrangement, not intimacy. — Theodor W. Adorno, Minima Moralia: Reflections from
, 36; Social reproduction is a contested field, not automatic habit — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 120; Habits are acquired socially and deeply rooted, not instinctive — Eddie S. Glaude Jr., Democracy in Black: How Race Still
, 164 (+2 more)

Broader Connections