Suchergebnisse

"E. P. Thompson is a towering figure in the field of labor history, best known for his monumental and path-breaking work, The Making of the English Working Class. But as this collection shows, Thompson was much more than a historian: he was a dedicated educator of workers, a brilliant polemicist, a skilled political theorist, and a tireless agitator for peace, against nuclear weapons, and for a rebirth of the socialist project. The essays in this book, many of which are either out-of-print or difficult to obtain, were written between 1955 and 1963 during one of the most fertile periods of Thompson's intellectual and political life, when he wrote his two great works, The Making of the English Working Class and William Morris: Romantic to Revolutionary. They reveal Thompson's insistence on the vitality of a humanistic and democratic socialism along with the value of utopian thinking in radical politics. Throughout, Thompson struggles to open a space independent of official Communist Parties and reformist Social Democratic Parties, opposing them with a vision of socialism built from the bottom up. Editor Cal Winslow, who studied with Thompson, provides context for the essays in a detailed introduction and reminds us why this eloquent and inspiring voice remains so relevant to us today."--

Sectarianism is a consistent hallmark of the Left. In particular, many debates revolve around the question of how to make a successful revolution. This essay seeks to build a stronger, more united idea of the Left by engaging the concepts of revolution and utopia. I have categorised two prominent and seemingly dualistic perspectives within the Left, ones which are also revolutionary. I label these the "strategic" and "prefigurative" camps. Both camps have harboured conceptions of utopia which have served as roadmaps for their respective theories on revolutionary transition, and by charting these conceptual developments in utopian thinking I offer a different roadmap which leads to an open utopia. Open utopia offers the possibility of a methodological synthesis which can bridge the strategic and prefigurative pulses of the Left, where the hard analysis and focus on end goals emphasised by strategic proponents is woven together with the importance of process and alternative institutions (recognized as vital by prefigurative proponents). I name this methodology the radical imagination, and by employing this methodological frame onto Leftist social movement activity I conclude that we can bridge a fractious Left by embracing a revolutionary project aimed at an open utopia. ; peer-reviewed

While it is often assumed that those of a left political conviction favor the increased political participation of the disadvantaged and those of a more conservative bent oppose it, examination of the views of five ideologically defined intellectual tendencies raises doubts about this conclusion. Political orientations of a left-right character are not consistently linked to issue positions on this question. In general, Liberals call for measures to increase the participation of the disadvantaged and Conservatives warn against such action. But New Right Conservatives, surprisingly, also seek to mobilize the disadvantaged, and generally favor their participation. Western Marxists often argue that the disadvantaged must actively participate in the struggle for social change while the Marxist-Leninists contend that to attribute such an active role to the disadvantaged could seriously threaten the entire socialist-communist project. Fundamental values, in the form of philosophical assumptions about human nature are hypothesized to be as helpful as political ideology of a left-right character in understanding views on the participation of the disadvantaged. Western Marxists and Liberals are both optimistic about human nature and they favor participation of these groups while Conservatives and Marxist-Leninists are pessimistic about humankind and discourage it. The New Right characterizations of human nature are contradictory and their enthusiasm for the political participation of the disadvantaged can be interpreted as either a deeply held emotional commitment, or merely one element in a calculated electoral strategy.

Austria does not often make political headlines. It has at least twice in recent years: in 1986, when the ""Waldheim Affair"" was debated worldwide, and in 1999, when the Austrian Freedom Party (FPOe) under Joerg Haider received 27 percent of the vote in national elections. Established by former Nazis for former Nazis, the FPOe entered the mainstream of Austrian politics when it became part of a coalition government. This volume explores whether its rise is a uniquely Austrian phenomenon or corresponds to broader social and political changes in Europe.Parallels to Haider's party can be found in other European countries. Its anti-immigration agenda and rhetoric are similar to those of the French FN, the Belgian Vlaams Bloc, and the Italian Lega Nord. And its anti-European Union posture is similar to the sentiments of the ""anti-Maastrich"" wing of the British conservative party. However, European reaction to the FPOe's rise derives not only from its policies, but its linkage to past suspicions that the Austrians have not learned the lessons of history as had the Germans. The FPOe's success strengthened that impression. In response, 14 European Union governments downgraded their bilateral relations with the Austrian government to a purely technical level. Although the sanctions were lifted in September 2000, the spotlight is still very much on Austria, and concern about the FPOe remains high.This important volume contains eleven chapters by internationally prominent scholars from a broad spectrum of the social sciences. Its cross-disciplinary approach provides perspective on the Haider phenomenon, its rhetoric, and its impact on daily life in Austria. It also analyzes the influence of right-wing populism on politics, culture, and society, and its implications in Austria as well as elsewhere in Europe. The Haider Phenomenon will be of interest to historians, political scientists, those in European studies, and scholars in contemporary political extremism.

Contents -- Preface -- Introduction -- 1. Progressive Radicalism before the Left -- 2. The French Revolution and the Original Left -- 3. Thomas Paine and the Rights of Man -- 4. Socialism's Wrong Responses to the Right Problems -- 5. Marxism's Wrong Turnings: Class War and Wholesale Collectivization -- 6. Down the Slippery Slope to Totalitarianism -- 7. Keeping Left: In Defence of Democracy and Individual Rights -- 8. After Vietnam: The Left Descends into Cultural Relativism -- 9. Final Full Turn: The Left Condones Reactionary Religion -- 10. Two Open Letters to Friends -- 11. Capitalism and Beyond: Toward a New Old Left -- Postscript -- Notes -- References

The left–right scale is the concept most often used to describe citizens' and parties' political positions. Its prevalence suggests that political preferences are structured by a single ideological dimension. However, much research shows that citizens' issue preferences in Western Europe are structured by two dimensions: economic; and social–cultural. How can a single dimension be sufficient to orient oneself in a two-dimensional political space? This article suggests a solution to this paradox: among citizens, the left–right scale and more concrete political issues are related in a non-linear way. Economic issue preferences should be more strongly related to ideological differences among left-wing citizens (e.g. between extreme-left and centre-left citizens) than among right-wing individuals. The reverse pattern should characterize the relation between sociocultural issues and ideological self-placement. The analysis of 28 elections in five West European countries offers strong support for the hypothesis of a non-linear relation.

'Politische Akteure verorten sich seit der französischen Revolution mit Hilfe der Unterscheidung zwischen 'links' und 'rechts'. Allerdings platzieren sie sich zunehmend in der 'Mitte' oder gleich 'jenseits von links und rechts'. Sind die beiden Kategorien damit überflüssig geworden? Oder behindern sie sogar eine neue Sicht auf die politische Landschaft? Der Beitrag diskutiert zunächst die Funktion des Links-Rechts-Schemas als Orientierungshilfe für politische Akteure und Wähler. Anschließend wird die inhaltliche Aussagekraft des Schemas ausgelotet und mit anderen Kategorisierungen verglichen: der dreipoligen Typologie der Cultural Theory und dem zweidimensionalen Modell von Herbert Kitschelt. Abschließend wird eine Netzwerktheorie des Parteiensystems skizziert, in der die politische Landschaft als symbolische Matrix der Identitätskonstruktion und Abgrenzung von Parteien fungiert. Das Links-Rechts-Schema reduziert diese politische Landschaft auf eine einzige Dimension und leistet damit eine wichtige Übersetzung politischer Positionen in die Logik des politischen Systems mit dem Wechselspiel zwischen Regierung und Opposition. Bei dieser Reduktion werden aber auch wichtige inhaltliche Unterschiede ausgeblendet.' (Autorenreferat)

Recent years have seen increased attention to integrating what we know about individual citizens with what we know about macro-level contexts that vary across countries. This article discusses the growing literature on how people's interpretations, opinions, and actions are shaped by variable contextual parameters and provides a novel substantive application. Using surveys conducted in 20 European democracies, the authors examine the effect of income inequality on people's attitudes about the functioning of the political system and trust in public institutions. They find that citizens in countries with higher levels of income inequality express more negative attitudes toward public institutions. Moreover, they show that the negative effect of inequality on attitudes toward the political system is particularly powerful among individuals on the political left. In contrast, inequality's negative effect on people's faith in the system is muted among those on the right.