Suchergebnisse

Digital platforms and application software have changed how people work in a range of industries. Empirical studies of the gig economy have raised concerns about new systems of algorithmic management exercised over workers and how these alter the structural conditions of their work. Drawing on the republican literature, we offer a theoretical account of algorithmic domination and a framework for understanding how it can be applied to ride hail and food delivery services in the on-demand economy. We argue that certain algorithms can facilitate new relationships of domination by sustaining a socio-technical system in which the owners and managers of a company dominate workers. This analysis has implications for the growing use of algorithms throughout the gig economy and broader labor market.

Strikes often lack a reasonable chance of success unless they violate some basic liberties (of contract, movement, etc.). This creates a dilemma for liberal democracies that recognize a right to strike: either the right is toothless, or the basic liberties do not have priority and so are not basic. Alex Gourevitch argues that grounding the radical right to strike in an interest in freedom resolves the dilemma. We point out an ambiguity in this solution: it either does not solve the dilemma, or it tacitly presupposes that there is no dilemma. However, we go on to show that a modified, dynamic conception of the radical right to strike can ground its priority, albeit at the expense of the basicness of certain static basic liberties. What is more, we argue that this generalizes to other forms of direct action, such as the recent Black Lives Matter blockades and those at Standing Rock.

Genealogies are an increasingly important part of contemporary political philosophy. However, even recent genealogies differ a great deal in terms of their ends and methods. Strikingly, this has received virtually no discussion in the literature. This article begins to fill that gap. It does so by comparing and contrasting the genealogies of Bernard Williams, Quentin Skinner, and Raymond Geuss, exploring their different goals, methods, and value for political philosophy. This helps us better understand these different kinds of genealogy in their own right; shows the distinct value of each of these different kinds of genealogy to political philosophy; and enables political philosophers to better be able to select the kind of genealogical investigation most relevant to their interests and to employ the correct kind of genealogy better as a result.

Cover -- Title page -- Copyright page -- Contents -- Acknowledgements -- 1 Introduction -- (a) Prefigurative Politics Before It Was Named -- (b) The Term and the Idea -- (c) About This Book -- (d) The Chapters of the Book -- 2 What Prefigurative Politics Is and Is Not -- (a) Prefigurative Politics Gains its Current Meaning -- (b) Prefigurative Politics as Organisational Structure -- (c) A Broader Conception -- (d) Is Everything Prefigurative? -- 3 Praxis and Social Change -- (a) Powers -- (b) Drives -- (c) Consciousness -- (d) Praxis and Social Change -- 4 Decision-Making in Large-Scale Organisations -- (a) Federalism in the First International and Beyond -- (b) The Arguments for Formal Prefigurative Decision-Making Structures -- (i) Empowerment -- (ii) The Drive to Change -- (iii) Consciousness-Raising -- (c) The Necessity of Hierarchy? -- (d) Political Organisation and Seeking State Power -- (e) Defence -- (f) The Formal and the Informal -- 5 The Personal is Political -- (a) The Personal/Political Distinction -- (b) Addressing Informal Hierarchies and Inequalities -- (c) Reason and Emotions -- (d) Intersectionality -- 6 Prefigurative Politics and the State -- (a) State Power Neither Sufficient Nor Necessary -- (b) The Praxis of the State -- (c) State Power and Building a New Society -- (d) Nationalisation and Dictatorship -- (e) 21st Century Socialism -- (f) Democratic Confederalism -- 7 Radical Prefigurativism, Not Liberal Individualism -- (a) Prefigurative Politics as Naive -- (b) Prefigurative Politics as Insular -- (c) Prefigurative Politics as Divisive -- 8 Conclusion: Now. Here. You. -- Notes -- Chapter 1 -- Chapter 2 -- Chapter 3 -- Chapter 4 -- Chapter 5 -- Chapter 6 -- Chapter 7 -- Bibliography -- Index -- EULA.

Explores Deleuze and Guattari's own diverse conceptions of anarchism and expands it in the spirit of their philosophyThis collection of 13 essays addresses and explores Deleuze and Guattari's relationship to the notion of anarchism: in the diverse ways that they conceived of and referred to it throughout their work, and also more broadly in terms of the spirit of their philosophy and in their critique of capitalism and the State. Both Deleuze and Guattari were deeply affected by the events of May '68 and an anarchist sensibility permeates their philosophy. However, they never explicitly sustained a discussion of anarchism in their work. Their concept of anarchism is diverse and they referred to in very different senses throughout their writings. This is the first collection to bring Deleuze and Guattari together with anarchism in a focused and sustained way.Key FeaturesThe only book to focus exclusively on the philosophy of Deleuze and Guattari and anarchismIncludes an anthropological perspective, a line of enquiry pioneered by Pierre Clastres, referred to by Deleuze and Guattari and recently renewed by contemporary anthropologists such as Eduardo Vivieros de Castro and Eduardo KohnProvides historical overviews alongside current anarchist applications of Deleuze and Guattari's workContributorsJesse Cohn, Purdue University Northwest, USA. Aragorn Eloff, independent researcher and Director of the Institute for Critical Animal Studies in Africa.Elmo Feiten, independent researcher. Chantelle Gray van Heerden, University of South Africa (UNISA), South Africa. Christoph Hubatschke, University of Vienna, Austria. Nathan Jun, Midwestern State University, USA.Gregory Kalyniuk, independent researcher.Thomas Nail, University of Denver, USA. Paul Raekstad, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Andrew Stones, University of Warwick, UK. Alejandro de la Torre Hernández, National Institute of Anthropology and History, Mexico Gerónimo Barrera de la Torre, University of Texas, Austin. Natascia Tose, independent researcher. Elizabet Vasileva, Loughborough University, UK. "