Suchergebnisse

The question of what kind of city we want cannot be divorced from that of what kind of social ties, relationship to nature, lifestyles, technologies & aesthetic values we desire. The right to the city is far more than the individual liberty to access urban resources: it is a right to change ourselves by changing the city. It is, moreover, a common rather than an individual right since this transformation inevitably depends upon the exercise of a collective power to reshape the processes of urbanization. The freedom to make & remake or cities & ourselves is, the author argues, one of the most precious yet most neglected of our human rights. The author also argues that urbanization has played an active role, alongside such phenomena as military expenditures, in absorbing the surplus product that capitalists perpetually produce in their search for profits. In the later of the article, the author also discusses the topic of girding the globe, property & pacification, dispossessions, & formulating demands. Adapted from the source document.

Neoliberalism has become a hegemonic discourse with pervasive effects on ways of thought and political-economic practices to the point where it is now part of the commonsense way we interpret, live in, and understand the world. How did neoliberalism achieve such an exalted status, and what does it stand for? In this article, the author contends that neoliberalism is above all a project to restore class dominance to sectors that saw their fortunes threatened by the ascent of social democratic endeavors in the aftermath of the Second World War. Although neoliberalism has had limited effectiveness as an engine for economic growth, it has succeeded in channeling wealth from subordinate classes to dominant ones and from poorer to richer countries. This process has entailed the dismantling of institutions and narratives that promoted more egalitarian distributive measures in the preceding era.

AbstractThis essay argues that it is a matter of vital concern to develop a theoretical apparatus that is adequate to the inherent spatiotemporal dynamics of capital accumulation and the changing practices developed to manage the crisis tendencies of those dynamics. This requires integrating the a-spatial theory of capital accumulation and its internal contradictions with the spatial/geographical theory of imperialism that invokes geopolitical and geo-economic struggles between nation-states. I argue that the two are linked by the way capital deals with the problem of absorbing capital surpluses, namely through geographical (and temporal) fixes. The geographical fix requires imperialist expansionism and the battering down of all barriers to the spatial movement of capital. Such a conception provides the necessary clarity in formulating the relations between capital and state that are sometimes missing from Ellen M. Wood's arguments in Empire of Capital.

Neoliberalism has become a hegemonic discourse with pervasive effects on ways of thought and political-economic practices to the point where it is now part of the commonsense way we interpret, live in, and understand the world. How did neoliberalism achieve such an exalted status, and what does it stand for? In this article, the author contends that neoliberalism is above all a project to restore class dominance to sectors that saw their fortunes threatened by the ascent of social democratic endeavors in the aftermath of the Second World War. Although neoliberalism has had limited effectiveness as an engine for economic growth, it has succeeded in channeling wealth from subordinate classes to dominant ones and from poorer to richer countries. This process has entailed the dismantling of institutions and narratives that promoted more egalitarian distributive measures in the preceding era. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright 2007 The American Academy of Political and Social Science.]

Harvey responds to contributions (all, 2006) in a symposium on his New Imperialism (2003). He counters criticisms related to "accumulation by dispossession" vs Marx's "primitive accumulation," logics of power, & geographical scale & spatio-temporal dynamics, with particularly sharp remarks directed at Ben Fine's assessment. References. D. Edelman

Resumo:Processos predatórios de desapossamento, com diversos recursos à violência, oque passa pela intervenção estatal, longe de se restringirem a um momentoencerrado na pré-história do capitalismo, constituem, ao lado da reproduçãoampliada, um dos eixos fundamentais da expansão deste modo de produção e seuexame é imprescindível para a compreensão do "novo imperialismo". ; Abstract: Predatory processes of dispossession,relying on different means of violence whichnecessitate state intervention, far from beingrestricted to a circumscribed moment ofthe pre-history of capitalism, constitute, withexpanded reproduction, one of thefundamental axes of expansion of this mode ofproduction and its examination iscrucial to understand this 'new imperialism'.

Argues that technical, epistemological, & political issues surrounding the conjunction of the geographical & sociological imaginations, combined with political, economic, & social conditions related to globalization, make it imperative to bring geography & territoriality into the sociological imagination. A philosophy of social space has the potential to overcome the disjunction between sociological & geographical imaginations, thereby allowing for a revision of the history, concepts, categories, & problems that dominate the contemporary epoch. Space is described as an inherent element of the social experience. The ability of geographical concerns to address critical problems like global governance & cosmopolitanism is explored, along with sites for the production of geographical knowledges; & the role of supra-national institutions, non-governmental organizations, business/industrial groups, & educational institutions in the production & synthesis of geographical knowledges & data banks. Other issues discussed include the connection between geographical knowledges & the political importance of mapping; the structural components of highly diverse & seemingly incompatible geographical knowledges; & the fate of critical geography/critical theory. References. J. Lindroth

The removal of the neutral mask of "globalization" has revealed the many forms of raw imperialism that lie beneath, & presents the task of identifying clearly what the capitalist form of imperialism is about, particularly the US form that moved from multilateral neoliberalism to the unilateral militarism & neoconservatism of the current administration. Capitalist imperialism is analyzed as a contradictory fusion of the territorial logic by use of state power & capitalist logic that is derived from the market driven processes of accumulation in space and time. The irreducibility of these logics one to another as identified by Arendt are related the cumulative relation of property to the accumulation of power. Further analysis of the two logics identifies crises of over accumulation, & the chronic instability of democracy in the US. The disadvantages of Marx's assumptions underlying his general theory of capital accumulation are related to the dual neoliberal mantras of privatization & commodification. The move from consent to coercion in the Washington Consensus has shaped the politics focus increasingly on resistance to accumulation by dispossession as the nexus of inaction. Although imperialist projects of this sort rarely lasts, the short run results prove catastrophic if not suicidal for countries & peoples. In the face of this, it is imperative that the global justice movement join with an antiwar movement to set up different rules of international engagement. References. J. Harwell