Suchergebnisse

'Pacific Empires: Essays in Honour of Glyndwr Williams' edited by Alan Frost and Jane Samson is reviewed.

Lectures delivered at the universities of Sheffield, Edinburgh and London. cf. Pref. ; Microfilm. ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Filmed; No. 7 on a reel of 8 titles. ; Master negative: 92-80804-7.

AbstractThe article reassesses some of the recent historiographic developments in studies of the Russian Revolution and the collapse of the Russian Empire. In particular, it focusses on the role of nationalist politics in late Imperial Russia, in 1917, and in early Soviet politics. It also considers the end of the Russian Empire within the context of historiographical approaches to the collapse of other European empires. Based on these considerations, the article concludes that the place of nationalist politics in the Russian Revolution can be exaggerated.

WOS:000354048600030 ; In 1851 and again in 1918–19 British officials assigned to the Ottoman Empire conducted extensive inspections of the empire's prisons and drew up detailed reports of what they found. Notwithstanding their imperialist and orientalist undertones, these reports describe Ottoman prisons as being in a serious state of disrepair.1 Stratford Canning, the famous British Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, commissioned the 1851 inspections with the intent to assist the Ottomans in reforming their criminal justice system. He ordered British Foreign Office representatives stationed throughout the empire to undertake a comprehensive inspection of prisons in order to ascertain their deficiencies and to report back to him. Canning justified prison improvement and inspection according to civilisational principles: But in the present advanced state of human knowledge and public opinion no government which respects itself and claims a position among civilised communities can shut its eyes to the abuses which prevail. Or to the horrors which past ages may have left in that part of its administration which separate the repression of crime and the personal constraint of the guilty or the accused.2

It is argued that when the world's economic and military hegemon pursues a foreign economic policy of liberalism, there are tendencies for that nation to acquire an empire. These arguments are illustrated with examples from the British Empire of the nineteenth century. The article concludes with some speculations on the current situation, with the United States now in the role of the world's hegemon.

As a media form entwined in the U.S. military-industrial complex, video games continue to celebrate imperialist imagery and Western-centric narratives of the great white explorer (Breger, 2008; Dyer-Witheford & de Peuter, 2009; Geyser & Tshalabala, 2011; Mukherjee, 2016). While much ink has been spilt on the detrimental effects of colonial imagery on those it objectifies and dehumanises, the question is why these games still get made, and what mechanisms are at work in the enjoyment of empire-themed play experiences. To explore this question, this article develops the concept of 'casual empire', suggesting that the wish to play games as a casual pastime expedites the incidental circulation of imperialist ideology. Three examples – Resident Evil V (2009), The Conquest: Colonization (2015) and Playing History: Slave Trade (2013) – are used to demonstrate the production and consumption of casual empire across multiple platforms, genres and player bases. Following a brief contextualisation of postcolonial (game) studies, this article addresses casual design, by which I understand game designers' casual reproduction of inferential racism (Hall, 1995) for the sake of entertainment. I then look at casual play, and players' attitudes to games as rational commodities continuing a history of commodity racism (McClintock, 1995). Finally, the article investigates the casual involvement of formalist game studies in the construction of imperial values. These three dimensions of the casual – design, play and academia – make up the three pillars of the casual empire that must be challenged to undermine video games' neocolonialist praxis.

The paper examines two aspects of empire in Machiavelli's thought. First, Machiavelli's model of the empire-building state is analysed.Machiavelli's answer to a classical question of the best form of government is discussed, establishing (1) why Machiavelli prefers a republic to a principality, and (2) why he prefers the expansionistic model of the republic based on Rome over the non-expansionistic model based on Sparta and Venice. In both cases, it is argued, Machiavelli's choice is dictated by his understanding of greatness: the Roman Republic is the ultimate example because it has achieved the greatest empire the world has ever seen. Accordingly, Machiavelli develops his political ideal, the model of the expansionistic republic that should closely follow the Roman example. The crucial role of Machiavelli's reading of the ancient historians, Livy, Sallust and, particularly, Polybius, is strongly emphasised. A second thread is developed later in the paper. Following Pocock's account(s), the author examines various causes of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire that Machiavelli offers in different places in his opus, trying to find a description of the most general cause, that would encompass all others. In the final part of the paper both threads converge; a key passage from Arte della guerra is analysed, with important conclusions reached: (1) It is shown that Machiavelli fully realised the unavoidable final destiny that awaits his model state. (2) Machiavelli also described the 'main', most general cause for Rome's downfall; a general mechanism of this process is outlined.

The paper examines two aspects of empire in Machiavelli's thought. First, Machiavelli's model of the empire-building state is analysed.Machiavelli's answer to a classical question of the best form of government is discussed, establishing (1) why Machiavelli prefers a republic to a principality, and (2) why he prefers the expansionistic model of the republic based on Rome over the non-expansionistic model based on Sparta and Venice. In both cases, it is argued, Machiavelli's choice is dictated by his understanding of greatness: the Roman Republic is the ultimate example because it has achieved the greatest empire the world has ever seen. Accordingly, Machiavelli develops his political ideal, the model of the expansionistic republic that should closely follow the Roman example. The crucial role of Machiavelli's reading of the ancient historians, Livy, Sallust and, particularly, Polybius, is strongly emphasised. A second thread is developed later in the paper. Following Pocock's account(s), the author examines various causes of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire that Machiavelli offers in different places in his opus, trying to find a description of the most general cause, that would encompass all others. In the final part of the paper both threads converge; a key passage from Arte della guerra is analysed, with important conclusions reached: (1) It is shown that Machiavelli fully realised the unavoidable final destiny that awaits his model state. (2) Machiavelli also described the 'main', most general cause for Rome's downfall; a general mechanism of this process is outlined.