scholarly journals Chartist imaginary: literary form in working-class political theory and practice

2015 ◽  
Vol 52 (07) ◽  
pp. 52-3522-52-3522
Keyword(s):  
Working Class ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Literary Form ◽  
Theory And Practice

Domestic Colonies

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Arneil
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Mentally Ill ◽  
Abraham Lincoln ◽  
The State ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
Alexis De Tocqueville ◽  
Modern History ◽  
Peter Kropotkin

Colonization is generally defined as a process by which states settle and dominate foreign lands or peoples. Thus, modern colonies are assumed to be outside Europe and the colonized non-European. This volume contends such definitions of the colony, the colonized, and colonization need to be fundamentally rethought in light of hundreds of ‘domestic colonies’ proposed and/or created by governments and civil society organizations initially within Europe in the nineteenth and first half of the twentieth centuries and then beyond. The three categories of domestic colonies in this book are labour colonies for the idle poor, farm colonies for the mentally ill, and disabled and utopian colonies for racial, religious, and political minorities. All of these domestic colonies were justified by an ideology of domestic colonialism characterized by three principles: segregation, agrarian labour, improvement, through which, in the case of labour and farm colonies, the ‘idle’, ‘irrational’, and/or custom-bound would be transformed into ‘industrious and rational’ citizens while creating revenues for the state to maintain such populations. Utopian colonies needed segregation from society so their members could find freedom, work the land, and challenge the prevailing norms of the society around them. Defended by some of the leading progressive thinkers of the period, including Alexis de Tocqueville, Abraham Lincoln, Peter Kropotkin, Robert Owen, Tommy Douglas, and Booker T. Washington, the turn inward to colony not only provides a new lens with which to understand the scope of colonization and colonialism in modern history but a critically important way to distinguish ‘the colonial’ from ‘the imperial’ in Western political theory and practice.

The Philadelphian system: sovereignty, arms control, and balance of power in the American states-union, circa 1787–1861

1995 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel H. Deudney
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
American States ◽  
Close Analysis ◽  
Legitimate Violence ◽  
American Union ◽  
Real State

A rediscovery of the long-forgotten republican version of liberal political theory has arresting implications for the theory and practice of international relations. Republican liberalism has a theory of security that is superior to realism, because it addresses not only threats of war from other states but also the threat of despotism at home. In this view, a Hobson's choice between anarchy and hierarchy is not necessary because an intermediary structure, here dubbed “negarchy,” is also available. The American Union from 1787 until 1861 is a historical example. This Philadelphian system was not a real state since, for example, the union did not enjoy a monopoly of legitimate violence. Yet neither was it a state system, since the American states lacked sufficient autonomy. While it shared some features with the Westphalian system such as balance of power, it differed fundamentally. Its origins owed something to particular conditions of time and place, and the American Civil War ended this system. Yet close analysis indicates that it may have surprising relevance for the future of contemporary issues such as the European Union and nuclear governance.

The Fix We Are In

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-87
Author(s):  
Richard Hudelson
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Working Class ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Labor Movement ◽  
Philosophy Of History ◽  
Science Ethics ◽  
Current Thinking ◽  
Grand Strategies

I have been thinking about the history and future of the labor movement for fifty years. As an academic in philosophy I have focused my research on the intersections of the global labor movement with philosophy of history, philosophy of science, ethics, economics, and political theory. ‘The Fix We Are In’ is a summary of my current thinking. At present the grand strategies for emancipation, ascendant in the mid-twentieth century, have faltered. Headless capitalism runs amuck. The conditions of the working class deteriorate. There is no vision of a better world—no clear pathway toward a better future. The ‘popular revolt’ bubbling up around the globe is a product of this moment. My paper concludes with a difficulty regarding my own favored way forward. Responses from readers would be welcome at: [email protected].

Two regimes of the symbolic: radical democracy between Romanticism and structuralism

2019 ◽  
pp. 77-88
Author(s):  
Warren Breckman
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Democratic Theory ◽  
Radical Democracy ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
German Romanticism ◽  
Linguistic Turn ◽  
Ernesto Laclau ◽  
Constructed Dialogue ◽  
History Of

The ‘symbolic’ has found its way into the heart of contemporary radical democratic theory. When one encounters this term in major theorists such as Ernesto Laclau and Slavoj Žižek, our first impulse is to trace its genealogy to the offspring of the linguistic turn, structuralism and poststructuralism. This paper seeks to expose the deeper history of the symbolic in the legacy of Romanticism. It argues that crucial to the concept of the symbolic is a polyvalence that was first theorized in German Romanticism. The linguistic turn that so marked the twentieth century tended to suppress this polyvalence, but it has returned as a crucial dimension of contemporary radical political theory and practice. At stake is more than a recovery of historical depth. Through a constructed dialogue between Romanticism and the thought of both Žižek and Laclau, the paper seeks to provide a sharper appreciation of the resources of the concept of the symbolic.

Plucking Off the Mask of Mystery

2019 ◽  
pp. 257-294
Author(s):  
Gerald J. Postema
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Special Interest ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Social Needs ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Radical Critique

This chapter discusses Bentham's critique of Common Law theory and practice. Bentham's critique is of special interest because that criticism reflects the considerations and arguments that moved him to his positivist conception of law. This radical critique of both the practice and the theory of Common Law rests on the same set of principles and arguments, drawn from his social and political theory, in particular his conception of the primary tasks and functions of law, and the best or most efficient means of serving them. Thus, Bentham's defence of his conception of the nature of law rests not on normatively neutral, analytical, or conceptual considerations, but on his analysis of fundamental human and social needs, and the ways in which law can be used to meet them. Jurisprudence draws directly on political theory. His is a distinctively utilitarian positivism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document