The protests at the 1999 World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle marked a turning point in trade politics. The size and depth of the international coalition that came together to protest the WTO was striking. And then there were the television images and the stunning denouement: Teamsters marching with 'turtles,' tear gas and police charges in the darkness, the collapse of the negotiations. The author of one of the books reviewed here, Jagdish Bhagwati, was in Seattle as an adviser to the WTO's director. While trying to get to the meeting, he found himself 'confronting a tough Chinese Red Guards-style female demonstrator who was blocking my way illegally.' A colleague then 'drew me away from a confrontation that would surely have left me bloodied, saying, `You are the foremost free trader today; we cannot afford to lose you!" Bhagwati's story speaks to several things, including his considerable ego. Most important, though, it captures the embattled state in which mainstream trade economists loyal to free trade doctrines now believe they exist: 'there are not too many out there, fighting the fight for free trade,' Bhagwati worries, 'We need to change that.' Do Irwin and Bhagwati understand that this is what most of the critics believe? I'm afraid not. Both authors characterize the critics as 'anti-globalization.' Although this accurately describes some, it is not true for the majority. Both authors seem to think that the main reason critics are against globalization is that they are anticapitalist and antimarket. Irwin, for example, tells us that for many of these groups, 'Free markets and capitalism are seen as embodying and furthering environmental destruction, male dominance, class oppression, racial intolerance and colonial exploitation.' To characterize most environmental organizations, or most contemporary trade unions, as 'anticapitalist' is absurd, if that means that they are committed to the abolition of capitalism. If the term means that they are critical of the way that capitalism currently operates, the characterization is accurate, but then the authors' summary dismissal of that position becomes puzzling. The critics insist that there are better and worse forms of market economy, that the neoliberal model of regulation toward which we are currently moving (one that expands property rights while ignoring human rights) is worse than feasible alternatives, and therefore, that the current model of global economic regulation can and ought to be changed. Unfortunately, Irwin and Bhagwati, by tilting at anticapitalist windmills, fail to join the real argument. IN THEIR EFFORT to extract free trade from the wider matrix of economic globalization, the authors downplay the degree to which trade deals such as NAFTA and the WTO shape the character of the larger economic system. For example, some of the most novel and important provisions in NAFTA and the WTO--pertaining to investor property rights and the deregulation of financial services--undoubtedly increase international capital mobility. Dani Rodrik has argued that increased international capital mobility could significantly increase the 'price elasticity of the demand for labor.' That is, firms will shift production to other countries in response to smaller and smaller differences in labor costs, other things being equal. This could dampen wage growth not only in the North, but in the South as well. Bhagwati and Irwin both devote considerable effort to exploring how free trade affects wages, yet neither so much as mentions Rodrik's well-known argument. Why not? Free capital mobility is one thing, Bhagwati says, free trade is another. He favors considerably less of the former than we have today, and much more of the latter. But while conceptually distinct, the fact is that both principles are promoted in NAFTA and the WTO. If we want to assess the impacts of these international agreements, we must consider how they affect capital mobility, and how it in turn affects workers, the environment, and so on. Slippage in the way the concept of 'free trade' is employed permits Bhagwati and Irwin to evade this challenge.
Includes bibliographical references (p. [487]-508) ; The papers collected in this anthology look at Chinese overseas, residing in five continents in the half century after the Second World War, from many new perspectives. Some papers raise questions about the Chinese diaspora in broad conceptual terms, and inquire into the meaning of being Chinese outside China. Other papers examine life in local communities, analysing how historical and contemporary circumstances affect their lives and the ways they negotiate their identity in the host country. In- depth case studies further bring out the complexity of the subject by identifying the range of variables, including the social, economic, political and cultural characteristics of the places of origin and destinations, as well as emigration and immigration policies, which affect the patterns of migration and the nature of settlement in any place at any time. This is especially highlighted in chapters using a comparative approach. With scholars from different disciplines, using different types of data, methodologies and theoretical tools, the richness of the subject matter becomes apparent ; published_or_final_version ; Preface / Sinn, Elizabeth pix ; Contributors pxi ; 1 Introduction: migration and new national identities / Wang, Gungwu p1 ; Glossary p485 ; Bibliography p487 ; Pt.I Overview p13 ; Pt.II Identity and ethnicity p63 ; Pt.III The diaspora in Europe p139 ; Pt.IV The Asia Pacific front p201 ; Pt.V New focus on Australia p277 ; Pt.VI.Chinese overseas in comparative perspectives ; Pt.VII Ethnicity, Religion and communal development and Qiaoxiang: Chinese overseas and the home village p423 ; 2 Upgrading the migrant: neither Huaqiao nor huaren / Wang, Gungwu p15 ; 3 Groundlessness and utopia: the Chinese diaspora and territory / Mung, Emmanuel Ma p35 ; 4 蕭玉燦主義的歷史命運 / 周南京 p49 ; 5 Preserving bukit China: the cultural politics of landscape interpretation in Melaka's Chinese cemetery / Cartier, Carolyn L. p65 ; 6 Representations of 'the Chinese' and 'ethnicity' in British racial discourse / Tam, Suk-tak p81 ; 7 Emerging British Chinese identities: issues and problems / Parker, David p91 ; 8 Integration or segregation: the Dutch and South African Chinese compared / Harris, Karen L. p115 ; 9 Chinese immigrants in Denmark after 1949: immigration patterns and development / Thuno, Mette p141 ; 10 Living among three walls? The peranakan Chinese in the Netherlands / Minghuan, Li p167 ; 11 The Chinese and Chinese districts in Paris / Guillon, Michelle p185 ; 12 Becoming 'Chinese Canadian': the genesis of a cultural category / Ng, Wing-chung p203 ; 13 Political participation amongst Chinese Canadians: the road to the 1993 election / Lary, Diana p217 ; 14 神戶的中國人與中國人社會 / 安井三吉 p229 ; 15 從日本華僑敎育的當地化傾向看日本華僑社會的當地化趨勢 / 朱慧玲 p241 ; 16 越南華人經濟形態的轉變(1975-1993) / 黃小堅 p261 ; 17 Astronaut families and parachute children: Hong Kong immigrants in Australia / Pe-Pua, Rogelia p279 ; 18 The changing characteristics of Chinese migrants to Australia during the 1980s and early 1990s / Coughlan, James E. p299 ; 19 Gold mountain no more: impressions of Australian society among recent Asian immigrants / Ip, David F. p347 ; 20 Chinese immigration to Australia and South Africa: a comparative analysis of legislative control / Harris, Karen L. p373 ; 21 Settlement experiences of recent Chinese immigrants in Australia: a comparison of settlers from Hong Kong, Taiwan and China / Wu, Chung-tong p391 ; 22 The role of the true jesus church in the communal development of the Chinese people in Elgin, Scotland / Liu, Garland p425 ; 23 現代中國少數民族人口境外遷移初探: 以新彊、雲南為例 / 譚天星 p447 ; 24 山東省日照市旅韓華僑的調查報告 / 晁中辰 p463 ; 25 戰後中國大陸客家人海外移民剖析: 梅州地區人口國際遷移情況的調查 / 黃靜 p475
In: The economic history review, Band 26, Heft 4, S. 695-767
ISSN: 1468-0289
Review in this Article Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office. Vol. XV, 1–7: Richard II.R. A. Buchanan. Industrial Archaeology in Britain.Ralph Davis. English Overseas Trade 1500–1700.Robert Latham and William Matthews(Eds.). The Diary of Samuel Pepys. A new and complete transcriptionA. F. J. Brown. Essex People, 1750–1900, from their diaries, memoirs and letters.S. D. Chapman. The Cotton Industry in the Industrial Revolution.Robin M. Reeve. The Industrial Revolution 1750–1850.David J. V. Jones. Before Rebecca. Popular Protests in Wales 1793–1835.Dorothy Marshall. Industrial England 1776–1851.Robert Owen. A New View of Society, or Essays on The Formation of the Human Character Preparatory to the Development of a Plan for gradually ameliorating the Condition of Mankind.Janet Roebuck. The Making of Modern English Society from 1850.E. P. Hennock. Fit and Proper Persons: Ideal and Reality in Nineteenth Century Urban Government.Michael Sanderson. The Universities and British Industry, 1850–1970.H. V. Emy. Liberals, Radicals and Social Politics 1892–1914.A. R. Bridbury. Historians and the Open Society.Roderick Floud. An Introduction to Quantitative Methods for Historians.David Ricardo. The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation.Horst Claus Recktenwald (Ed.). Political Economy. A Historical Perspective.D. E. C. Eversley (Ed.). Third International Conference of Economic History, Munich, 1965.H.J. Habakkuk. Population Growth and Economic Development.Peter Laslett (Ed.) with the assistance of Richard Wall. Household and Family in Past Time.Norman J. G. Pounds. An Historical Geography of Europe 450 B.C.‐A.D.1330.Pauline Croft (Ed.). The Spanish Company.Phyllis M. Martin. The External Trade of the Loango Coast 1576–1870.A. J. H. Latham. Old Calabar 1600–1891. The Impact of the International Economy upon a Traditional Society.M. E. Falkus. The Industrialization of Russia, 1700–1914.Francis E. Hyde. Far Eastern Trade 1860–1914.E. A. Boehm. Prosperity and Depression in Australia 1887–1897.C. Forster (Ed.). Australian Economic Development in the Twentieth Century.E. A. Boehm. Twentieth Century Economic Development in Australia.Patrick Fridenson: Histoires des Usines Renault. I. Naissance de la Grande Entreprise: 1898–1939.Charles P. Kindelberger. The World in Depression 1929–1939.Melchior Palyi. The Twilight of Gold 1914–1935: Myths and Realities.C. F. Delzell (Ed.). Mediterranean Fascism 1919–1945.E. Wiskemann. Italy since 1945.J. S. Bromley and E. H. Kossmann (Eds.). Britain and the Netherlands.G. Kurgan‐Ph. Moureaux (Ed.). La quantification en histoire.I.J. Roorda. Hetrampjaar 1672.H. Van der Wee. Historische aspecten van de economische groei. Tien studies over de economische ontwikkeling van West‐Europa en van de Nederlanden in het bijzonder (12e–19e eeuw).H. De Vries. Landbouw en bevolking tijdens de agrarische depressie in Friesland (1878–1895).J. A. Faber. Drie eeuwen Friesland. Economische en sociale ontwikkelingen van 1500 tot 1800.Van Beylen. Schepen van de Nederlanden. Van de late Middeleeuwen tot het einde van de 17e eeuw.G. Kurgan‐Van Hentenryk. Leopold II et les groupes financiers beiges en Chine. La politique royale et pesprolongements (1895–1914). Société Générale de Belgique, 1822–1972. R. De Herdt. Bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van de veeteelt in Vlaanderen, inzonderheid tot de geschiedenis van de rundveepest, 1769–1785.E.J. Baels. De Generate Keizerlijke en Koninklijke Indische Compagnie gevestigd in de Oosten‐rijkse Nederlanden, genaamd "de Oostendse Compagnie".C. Van Bostraeten. De nederzetting Sloten en de Merowingische begraafplaats te Gent—Port Arthur. Economisch‐ en sociaal‐historisch jaarboek. R. Noel. Les deépôts de pollens fossiles.A. P. Timmermans. Les banques en Belgique, 1946–1968. Contributions à l'histoire économique et sociale. Tome VI: 1970–1971. O. Mus. Inventaris van het archief van de Commissie van Openbare Onderstand, leper: Oud Regime zonder de oorkonden.P. Lebrun, J. Gadisseur, J. Pirard, D. Degreve, C. Desama (Ed.). L'industrialisation en Belgique au XIXe siècle. Première approche et premiers résultats.F. B. M. Tangelder. Nederlandse rekeningen in de pondtolregisters van Elbing, 1585–1602. Finances Publiques d'Ancien Régime—Finances publiques contemporaines: processus de mutation, continuites et ruptures. Collogue International: Spa, 16–19‐IX‐1971. Pro Civitate.C. Verlindenet al. Dokumenten Voor de Geschiedenis van Prijzen en Lonen in Vlaanderen en Brabant (XVIe‐XIXe E.)
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Blogbetreiber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie einen Blog Beitrag zitieren möchten.
Because actual history is rarely linear, let alone teleological, I read the repudiation of Hegel before I ever read Hegel. I had read arguments and polemics against Hegel in Althusser, Deleuze, and Foucault long before I had every cracked Hegel's books. A funny thing happened once I started reading, writing, and teaching Hegel, is that I started to warm up to him. It was not the idea of spirit that appealed to me, or even the dialectic as some overarching logic, but the more limited, finite dialectics of the different figures and moments of consciousness. If you need an example of what I am talking about just think of the famous dialectic of master and slave, the hit single of the Phenomenology of Spirit. This passage has been separated from the progression of spirit to take on a life of its own as a way to discuss everything from desire to anti-colonial violence. However, hit singles have a way of overshadowing the whole album. I have often thought that Hegel's Phenomenology and Philosophy of Right offer more than just that famous struggle, the figures of the stoic, sceptic, unhappy conscious, the struggle of culture and alienation, faith and enlightenment, could be liberated from the development of spirit, to become ways of thinking about the current state of spirit, which appears less and less as a culmination of progress than a motley accumulation of everything every believed. It is for this reason that I was delighted to learn of Biko Mandela Gray and Ryan Johnson's Phenomenology of Black Spirit. One aspect of this book is an attempt to put the figures of Hegel's Phenomenology, to work; the master and slave, but also the stoic, sceptic, and unhappy consciousness become critical figures of subjectivity, and not just moments of the development of spirit. It puts these figures to work in relation to figures of black struggle and thought from Frederick Douglass to Angela Davis, reading what could be called "the black radical tradition" as something more than a series of political contestations and positions, to see it as having its own intellectual foundation and development, even as counters the trajectory that Hegel charted. Gray and Johnson sometimes contrast Hegel's figure with the reality and history of black struggle. This can be seen clearly in the contrast between Douglass' struggle for freedom and Hegel's concept of the master/slave struggle. As Gray and Johnson write, "The lord' and the 'bondsman,' then are logical (dis)positions, figures who are both more and less than the historical people who were enslaved and who were exercising domination. 'The slave' had names. 'The master' did, too. And these names make a difference. They make differences." Logic and history connect and part ways. In Hegel's account the bondsman condition begins with fight, a struggle for recognition, and ends in work, work providing a sense of recognition that could not be found in struggle. Douglass' history inverts this order. As Gray and Johnson write,"With American chattel slavery, however, work was not the way out of slavery but the brutal institutions very engine. The more a slave worked, the stronger was the institution...In chattel slavery, work will never set you free. Work reinforces the chains and sharpens the sting of the whip. Douglass worked had and long, and saw himself in the fields, landscapes, ships and other objects into which he put his transforming labor. Yet freedom never came to him from work. The only way for him to set out on the path out of slavery and into freedom was to turn away from the object. on which he worked and face the master in order to fight."Gray and Johnson's analysis here cites and joins Chamayou's discussion of slave hunts, in which the historical inquiry calls into question the conceptual logic. Work cannot function as the basis for recognition in a system based on reducing human beings to their capacity for work. It is only the fight, the struggle that can break this logic. If Douglass deviates from Hegel's figures of subjectivity other historical moments would seem to not only confirm it, but Hegel's thought provides the concept that is otherwise missing. Booker T. Washington's ideas of individual freedom, merit, and self-reliance realizes Hegel's idea of stoicism more than even Hegel. The history does not contradict the concept, but confirms it and makes a case for its relevance. As Gray and Johnson write, "Here is a new form of recognition. It is not the recognition of another self-consciousness, directly in the form of self consciousness, but that of future self-consciousness, a higher form of self, or perhaps the promise of being recognized by a truly fair, just, and impartial form of subjectivity, above and beyond any particular determination of race, gender, age, etc., "No man whose vision is bounded by color can come into contact with what is highest and best" ( Washington, Up from Slavery) The recognition that the stoic seeks is not simply another person's recognition, not just recognition from this white man or Black man, but a general recognition from an ideal person. It is recognition of a hard earned merit that is mine."Reading Washington through Hegel makes it possible to see how the stoic appears not just once, as a figure of progression, but again and again, as a turn inward for recognition when the world becomes unreliable. It also makes it possible to see that Hegel's attachment to work, to work as an ethical ideal is less a matter of his own system, than the grey on grey of a philosopher reflecting the general norms of his time. It also makes it possible to see in Washington not just a specific figure from one period, but something more of a refrain as stoicism, self-reliance, and merit, appear again and again as a conservative response to racism. The conservative attempt to reduce Martin Luther King Jr. to some future date where people would be judged only by the content of their character, to merit, is really an attempt to turn King into Washington. Speaking of King, it is with respect to King that we can see the real strength of Gray and Johnson's reading. As much as Hegel gives us figures of individual consciousness, stoicism, scepticism, etc., that can be seen not just once in the linear progression of history but appearing again and again, his real goal was to think something other than the individual, to think spirit as universality, sociality, or even transindividuality. In Gray and Johnson's reading of the black radical tradition this problem of collectivity appears again and again as the struggle of the individual, King, Malcolm X, and Angela Davis, to transcend individuality in their very individual struggle. This is what Hegel's unhappy consciousness makes it possible to think. As Gray and Johnson write:"Here is where the trouble lies: sacramental work is, undeniably the individual's work, in this case King's work. Put differently although this working is supposed to deny the self and attribute everything to God, it actually reaffirms the essentiality of the finite self, while God is reduced to a superficial element. At best, sacramental work and desire is done in the name of God. The same failure to to renounce and surrender oneself also applies to labour as a form of gratitude. The 'entire movement,' writes Hegel, 'is reflected not only in the actual desiring, working, and enjoyment, but even in the very giving thanks where the reverse seems to take place in the extreme of individuality' (Phenomenology of Spirit). The reason: we are the ones working on and changing things, while God is just a fictional idea, a fancy name, that contributes nothing to our work. We are the ones working, day in and day out; we finite persons change the world; no one and nothing but us. The individual self tried to overcome itself through work, to act merely as an instrument in God's handmade plan, but it inevitably ends up emboldening itself."Unhappy Consciousness returns from the medieval world of Christianity to become the dialectic of the modern movement and leader. The more the leader devotes him or herself in works, the more that devotion and dedication becomes the work. As Gray and Johnson argue the figures of the sixties and seventies, King, Malcolm X, and Angela Davis eventually give way to collective movements, to the Panthers, and Black Power as a new figure of reason (in Hegel's terminology), or collective consciousness, in ours. I have picked three moments from Gray and Johnson's book to illustrate the different relations between concept and history at work in the book, three different ways that it thinks the relation between its two different topics, Hegel and the black radical tradition. The relation between Hegel and the black radical tradition is sometimes one of negation, as the history of struggle in the case of Douglass negates the concept of struggle in Hegel; sometimes one of affirmation, as the philosophical concepts reveal and illustrate what is at stake in the political position of Washington; and ultimately it is one of transformation, as the dialectic of philosopher and history, contemplation and contestation, individual and community, pushes towards something else, pushes us to think through the limits of the civil rights era with its larger than life figures. As a last word I will cite a line that Gray and Johnson write with respect to Angela Davis' idea of coalition politics, but I think that such an idea can be used to describe the book's own strange coalition of Hegel and politics. "Difference, conjunction, and contradiction generate, rather than impede, political momentum."
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Blogbetreiber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie einen Blog Beitrag zitieren möchten.
When I was in graduate school "the imaginary" was one of those words that circulated all the more often because it was untethered to any specific theoretical source. It borrowed bits from Lacan and bits from Castoriadis to suggest some historically specific articulation of the very capacity to imagine. There were multiple imaginaries, political, social, technical etc., As someone who was getting interested in Spinoza at the time I tried to connect his writing on the imagination with this idea to no avail.Now, thinking about Spinoza again, it might make sense to think about the way in which Spinoza's particular idea of the imagination is useful for thinking about social and political life. I should be clear that on this point I mean "imagination" as it is described as a particular kind of necessarily incomplete and inadequate knowledge in the Ethics, and not superstition as it is developed in Spinoza's political writings. Any such separation is artificial, as the two are thoroughly intertwined as bodies and minds, however, it is still worth at least heuristically the limitation of thinking from that of acting. For Spinoza the imagination, images formed by the body, always involve both the body that affects us and how we are affected. As Spinoza writes, "Next, to retain the customary words, the affections of the human body whose ideas present external bodies as present to us, we shall call images of things, though they do not reproduce the figure of things. And when the mind regards bodies in this way, we shall say that it imagines." (EIIP17schol).It is not representation but presence that is central to the imagination. To imagine something is to regard i as present. This presence is a confused amalgamation of the qualities of the thing affecting us, and the way we are affected. To imagine is to treat our own associations and connections as if they were part of what we are perceiving. "For example, a soldier, having seen traces of a horse in the sand, will immediately pass from the thought of a horse in the sand will immediately pass from the thought of a horse to the thought of a horseman, and from that to the thought of war and so on. And so each one, according as he has been accustomed to join and connect the image of things in this or that way, will pass from one thought to another" (EIIP18Schol). As I have argued in my post on Spinoza and conspiracy theories is that it stresses the imagination can be both complex, involving a chain of associations from hoof print to horse, and horse to war, and immediate, directly lived as something present. As Althusser stresses for Spinoza the imagination is nothing other than the phenomenological world of lived experience as such. All of our perceptions and evaluations of the world as it is lived, or tendency to view some aspects of nature as good or bad, useful or harmful, organized or disorganized, are the imagination, which is to say are confused perceptions of our own desires and the way that the object affects us. I was thinking of this mediation of the immediate or the immediacy of mediation when reading about theories of race. First, and not surprising, is this line from Etienne Balibar's "Is there a Neo-Racism?" As Balibar writes "I shall therefore venture the idea that the racist complex inextricably combines a crucial function of misrecognition (without which the violence would not be tolerable to the very people engaging in it) and a 'will to know', a violent desire for immediate knowledge of social relations." In other words, part of the appeal of racism is that it makes social relations immediately legible. It provides a geography, dividing town into the "good" and "bad" part, a morality, telling us (people who believe ourselves to be white) who to trust and who to fear. As much as this imagination is immediate, registered in somatic markers such as skin, hair, and eye color, the immediacy is a product of associations and connections that we are constantly subject to, media, entertainment, etc., and, like Spinoza's soldier, we have forgotten in focusing on the immediate present nature of the image.Or, to take another version of the argument, this time from Stuart Hall, "Race is only one element in this struggle to command and structure the popular ideology: but it has been, over the past two decades, a leading element: perhaps the key element. Since it appears to be grounded in natural and biological "facts," it is a way of drawing distinctions and developing practices which appear, themselves, to be "natural," given and universal...Race provides the structure of simplifications which make it possible to construct plausible explanations of troubling developments and which facilitates the application of simplifying remedies. Who now wants to begin to explore the complex of economic and political forces which have perpetuated and multiplied the poverty of the working-class districts fo the inner cities? Who will have time for that complicated exercise--which may require us to trace connections between structures of our society which is more convenient to keep apart: when a simple, obvious, "natural" explanation lies to hand."A few hasty connections/conclusions. First, if you listen to any episode of Hotel Bar Sessions the podcast that I am now a cohost of, I suggest you listen to the interview with Caleb Cain available here (I can plug this in good faith because this is from before I joined the show):One of the thing that comes up in the discussion is how the racist, or "race realist" explanation offers a quick an easy explanation of a variety of phenomena, such as why the inner city of Baltimore is the way that it is in terms of poverty and crime. An actual, or to use the Spinozist term, adequate understanding of the actual factors that have made the inner city the way it is would have to take into consideration the history of slavery, Jim Crow, redlining, deindustrialization, etc. etc. etc., Of course it is important to point out that what appears here as immediate, race as an explanation, is itself the product of a long history of associations. It took us a long time to see race, and it takes a lot of work, political and ideological, for us not to see everything about social life, the accumulation of capital, and so on, that is effaced in the immediacy and simplicity of seeing race. So this is what it might mean to consider what "the imaginary institution of society" might mean from a Spinozist perspective. It is the dominance of a particular set of immediate associations of bodies and qualities, associations that are themselves the product of a complex articulation (in Hall's sense), that disappears in the immediacy of the association. I have focused here on race as one such mediated immediacy. It would be wrong to think it is the only one. As Alexandra Minna Stern argues in her book Proud Boys and the White Ethnostate: How the Alt-Right is Warping the American Imagination, "Transphobia is the butter on the bread of much alt-right and alt-light vlogging." As with race there is an appeal to a kind of natural immediacy, that of sex, gender, and gender roles, one that is the product of many mediations, right down to the latest explosion in a gender reveal party. The natural order of sex and gender is in some sense the entry point to a larger sense of a natural order. Of course the relation between these two different images of nature, racial and sexual, is complex, overdetermined, and in some sense always shifting. As much as there is an epistemic tendency towards the imagination predicated on its immediacy and self-evident nature, there is a practical one as well: the order and connection of bodies being the same as ideas and all. For many, especially those with advantages in the existing order, there are reasons to hold unto and act within the horizon described by its imagination. I recently finished reading Jeremy Gilbert and Alex William's Hegemony Now: How Big Tech and Wall Street Won the World (and How We Win it Back). In the midst of that book there is a long discussion to retrieve the idea of interests in politics. One of the things that Gilbert and Williams stress that one's interest is related to both one's position and one's horizon. As they write,"From this perspective, workers who vote for immigration restrictions are acting against their interests when conceived within a liberal, communist, or even expansively social democratic horizon, but not when conceived within a conservative horizon. What is it that defines the particular characteristics of the horizon within which interests are perceived, computed, and acted upon? In part it must be a question of the scale--in terms of space and time--of that horizon. When horizons of interest are operating at a small scale, this will mean a focus on the hyperlocal (my immediate family) and the hyper-present (today and tomorrow and perhaps next year). What is reasonable within one horizon is unreasonable in another."If we want to change and expand the horizon of people's interest we must first recognize the horizon that they already operate within even if that horizon is defined by imaginations that seem irrational to us. "Inadequate and confused ideas follow with the same necessity as adequate, or clear and distinct ideas" (EIIP36). To put this in Spinozist terms, we all strive to maintain our existence, but we do so according to what we understand, rightly or wrongly, to be in our interest according to our given level of imagination or understanding. All of which is a very long way of saying that any politics of radical change has to start with understanding the epistemic and practical attachments that most have to the existing imaginary institution of society.
This guide accompanies the following article: Matthew W. Hughey, 'The Janus Face of Whiteness: Toward a Cultural Sociology of White Nationalism and White Antiracism', Sociology Compass 3/6 (2009): 920–936, 10.1111/j.1751‐9020.2009.00244.xAuthor's introductionOver the past 20 years, the study of white racial identity has received in‐depth, interdisciplinary attention. Under sociological scrutiny, the study of whiteness has traversed quite a few stages: from understandings of whiteness as a category replete with social privileges, as a mere reflection of non‐racial (often class‐based) dynamics, to its most recent turn that emphasizes the contextual and intersectional heterogeneity of whiteness. Because of the increased attention to context and political disputes, the study of whiteness has never been more amenable to cultural analysis than it is today. Hence, an emphasis on different white racial formations that span a political spectrum – from conservative to liberal and racist to antiracist – is now dominant. In this vein, white nationalists and white antiracists represent the distinct polarities of contemporary inquisitions into white racial identity. Motivated by this academic milieu, this guide offers an overview of the major scholarship that address white nationalism & white antiracism, appropriate online materials, and examples from a sample syllabus. Together, these resources aim to assist in understanding the general processes and contexts that produce 'whiteness' and imbue it with meaning, the social relationships and practices in which white racial identity identities become embedded, and how whiteness simultaneously possesses material and symbolic privileges alongside diverse and seemingly antagonistic experiences.Author recommendsThe complexity of whitenessMcDermott, Monica and Frank L. Samson 2005. 'White Racial and Ethnic Identity in the United States.'Annual Review of Sociology 31: 245–61.Any contemporary apprentice of the sociological study of white racial identity should read this essay. Monica McDermott and her student Frank Samson combine to provide a robust overview of the literature. They walk the tightrope of balancing both a broad coverage of the literature with the depth that key studies necessitate. In so doing, they put a finger on the key dilemma of studying white racial identity today: 'Navigating between the long‐term staying power of white privilege and the multifarious manifestations of the experience of whiteness remains the task of the next era of research on white racial and ethnic identity' (2005: 256).Duster, Troy 2001. 'The 'Morphing' Properties of Whiteness.' Pp. 113–33 in The Making and Unmaking of Whiteness, edited by E. B. Rasmussen, E. Klinenberg, I. J. Nexica and M. Wray. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.In this essay – part of a larger volume on whiteness that I also recommend – Duster synthesizes disparate approaches to the study of whiteness. Demonstrating how some scholars understand white racial identity as a contextual and cognitive category ('fluid'), while some frame whiteness as a structural and fixed category of material privileges ('frozen'), Duster asks 'who is right?' He answers via the metaphor of whiteness‐as‐water. In one moment, whiteness can morph into vapor as a contextual and unstable identity, while the next moment it can instantly transform into a harsh and unyielding form of ice‐like privilege. Duster's essay is an excellent retort for those who argue that we should move 'beyond' race to the utopian realm of color‐blind individualism. Duster demonstrates, although the example of the supposedly egalitarian New Deal, that while race is socially constructed, the legacy of racism remains a historically reproduced and real social fact – denying the existence of race perpetuates racial inequality. Duster closes the chapter with a personal anecdote that grounds the historical example in modern, interactional, and everyday life.Perry, Pamela 2002. Shades of White: White Kids and Racial Identities in High School. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Perry gives us two ethnographic studies in one – that of two northern California high schools: one located in a predominantly white, if economically diverse, suburb, the other situated in a multiracial urban community. Perry persistently and systematically probes the complexities of white racial identity in the practices and discourses of the youth attending these high schools. She finds that whites in the predominantly white, suburban high school do not see themselves as a unique race and take their racial identity for granted – they understand distinctly white practices as normative rather than as constitutive of a subjective worldview. In contrast, the whites at the multiracial, urban high school possess a more critical and comparative view of race and their own place in the racial order. In sum, Perry argues that whiteness is a set of complex, contradictory, and multiple subject positions.Wray, Matt. 2006. Not Quite White: White Trash and the Boundaries of Whiteness. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Matt Wray brings the tools of cultural sociology viz‐á‐viz'symbolic boundaries' to the interrogation of the moniker White Trash. Wray problematizes this relatively normalized term to question its origins and how it persists. Drawing upon literary texts, folklore, diaries, medical articles, and social scientific analyses from the early 1700s to the turn of the 20th century, Wray documents the multiple meanings that were projected onto poor rural whites in the United States. Of particular import, Wray demonstrates how white supremacist ideas about class and region became dominant through public health campaigns and eugenic reformations. Impoverished whites found themselves the targets of officials and activists who framed them as 'filthy' or "feebleminded," and thus a threat to the purity and supremacy of the white race. This text is particularly informative for its demonstration of how white supremacist logic was not only focused on racial 'otherness' but used the axes of class and location to directly demarcate and attack those seen as 'white' yet somehow racially deficient and unworthy.Winant, Howard 2004. 'Behind Blue Eyes: Whiteness and Contemporary U.S. Racial Politics.' Pp. 3–16 in Off White: Readings on Race, Power, and Society, edited by Michelle Fine, Lois Weis, Linda C. Powell and April Burns. New York, NY: Routledge.In applying his now classic approach formulated in concert with Michael Omi (Racial Formations, 1986), Howard Winant applies the 'racial projects' thesis to whites: 'I think it would be beneficial to attempt to sort out alternative conceptions of whiteness, along with the politics that both flow from and inform these conceptions. … focusing on five key racial projects, which I term, far right, new right, neoconservative, neoliberal, and new abolitionist' (2004: 6). Hence, Winant maps a theory of white identity formation onto a bifurcated 'culture war.' Labeling this phenomenon 'racial dualism as politics,' Winant advances a paradigm in which whiteness is undergoing 'a profound political crisis.' Winant's essay is especially important for those that wish to emphasize the heterogeneity of white racial identity, as he provides Weberian‐like 'ideal types' for the comprehension of the racial‐political landscape.Hughey, Matthew W. (forthcoming 2010). 'Navigating the (Dis)similarities of White Racial Identities: The Conceptual Framework of "Hegemonic Whiteness."'Ethnic & Racial Studies.In this work, I build upon many of the aforementioned studies. Like Pamela Perry (2002) I dive into two ethnographic sites, but of much different breed. To interrogate how whiteness might be akin to 'vapor and ice' (Duster 2001) and to provide a robust answer to the dilemma of the 'long‐term staying power of white privilege' (McDermott and Samson 2005) alongside the 'political crisis' of whiteness (Winant 2004), I studied a white nationalist and white antiracist organization. Combining over fourteen months of field observations, in‐depth interviews, and content analysis of documents, I found that the varied political and overt ideological orientations of both groups masked striking similarities in how both groups made meaning of whiteness. In particular, these similarities were guided by a collective reliance on reactionary, racist, and essentialist scripts, latent worldviews – and like Wray (2006) – symbolic boundaries. The realization that there remains a shared 'groupness' to outwardly different white identities has the potential to destabilize the recent trend that over‐emphasizes white heterogeneity at the expense of discussion of power, racism, and discrimination. As a resolution to this analytic dilemma, this article advances a conceptual framework entitled 'hegemonic whiteness.' In this model, white racial identity formation is understood as an ongoing process in which (1) racist, reactionary, and essentialist ideologies are used to demarcate inter‐racial boundaries and (2) performances of white racial identity that fail to meet those ideals are marginalized and stigmatized, thereby creating intra‐racial distinctions within the category 'white.'White supremacy & nationalismDobratz, Betty A. and Stephanie L. Shanks‐Meile 1997. The White Separatist Movement in the United States: 'White Power, White Pride!' Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.This is a good place to begin with the study of the white separatist, nationalist, and supremacist movements in the United States. The book is primarily descriptive and quickly debunks the stereotype that the movement is tied to an uneducated and Southern cadre of disenfranchised men. The authors interviewed more than 125 white separatists, attended white power rallies and other white separatist meetings, and examined much of the movement‐generated literature. A major strength of the text is the demonstration of key divisions within the white supremacist movement, most notably religious ideology and views toward gender. However, this high note is often bookended by their overdependence on journalistic‐like description rather than sociological explanation.Zeskind, Leonard. 2009. Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream. New York, NY: Farrar Straus Giroux.This book is a critical companion to Dobratz and Shanks‐Meile (1997). Beginning in the 1950s and taking the reader into the contemporary moment, the text affords a sprawling account of the shifting currents in white nationalism. In both meticulous detail and incredible breadth, the 645‐page tome was composed from Zeskind's 15‐year‐long research of the white nationalist movement – describing in detail how the movement has somewhat successfully moved from the shadows of a stigmatized racist identity to wear the mask of a more 'button‐down' and gentile white nationalism.Ferber, Abby L. 1998. White Man Falling: Race, Gender, and White Supremacy. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Abby Ferber does an excellent job of illuminating white nationalist publications like White Patriot and White Power to clarify not only the racial, but the intersectional weltanschauung of white male nationalists. In so doing, Ferber demonstrates how the concept of 'race' has evolved alongside the development of the white supremacist and nationalist movements. Ferber's empirically based critique unpacks the still‐growing ideological assertion that white men are now the quintessential victims of the social order, and she convincingly demonstrates the repercussions of their attempts to re‐assert white male power. I would be remiss if I did not also point the reader to her follow‐up study: Home‐Grown Hate: Gender and Organized Racism (New York, NY: Routledge, 2004). Other notable mentions in this vein include Kathleen Blee's Inside Organized Racism: Women in the Hate Movement (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002) and Jessie Daniels'White Lies: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality in White Supremacist Discourse (New York, NY: Routledge, 1997).Berbrier, Mitch 2000. 'The Victim Ideology of White Supremacists and White Separatists in the United States.'Sociological Focus 33: 174–91.In much the same vein as Ferber, Mitch Berbrier demonstrates how white victimization ideologies are a growing, but not yet central, facet of white supremacist and separatist organizing. Rather, discourses of racial victimization are put to the service of larger concerns in white supremacist activism: for example, either to activate a sense of urgency in the perceived loss of white racial pride and self‐esteem, or to convince outsiders (and potential members) that they are living in time of white 'genocide.' I also recommend Berbrier's 1998 Social Problems article entitled '"Half the Battle": Cultural Resonance, Framing Processes, and Ethnic Affectations in Contemporary White Separatist Rhetoric.'White antiracismBonnett, Alastair 2000. Anti‐Racism. London and New York, NY: Routledge.This is a valuable text for those wishing to understand both the historical trajectory of, and current variation within, the antiracist movement. Bonnett first traces anti‐racism's philosophical historicity through thinkers such as Comte, Montaigne, and Du Bois. After delineating the theoretical underpinnings of the movement, Bonnett then outlines the spatial variation of antiracism to uncover the networked relationships between Brazil, China, France, the US, and the UK, to name just a few examples. In this vein, while the text does not explicitly focus on white anti‐racism, a large portion of the book directly challenges the dominance of the Eurocentric variations of anti‐racism, as it even briefly surveys the outgrowths of anti‐racism in the form of multiculturalism, anti‐Nazi/anti‐fascist movements, and the 'local' activist organizations that purport to represent marginalized communities. While the book takes on a large subject matter, its relatively small size often falls short of giving each subject the attention it deserves. Still, the book serves as an excellent overview.Apthecker, Herbert 1993. Anti‐Racism in U.S. History: The First Two Hundred Years. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.Like Bonnett's text (2000), this book does not explicitly center on white antiracism, but much of the examples used by the late Marxist historian are drawn from white abolitionists and activists. In fact, recovering the lost history of whites whom rejected racist rationales for the 'peculiar institution' of slavery and in turn, evidenced a remarkable degree of racial egalitarianism, appears the impetus for Aptheker's decision to compose the book. Overall, the text remains a tour de force of the pervasiveness of both white racism and its white resistance, as it covers the intersection of racism, sexuality, labor, the political ideologies of Grégoire, Banneker, & Jefferson, religion, the effects of the civil war, and emancipation.Srivastava, Sarita 2005. '"You're Calling me a Racist?" The Moral and Emotional Regulation of Antiracism and Feminism.'Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 31(1): 29–62.This article demonstrates how the dominant practices and discourses of emotional expression shape antiracist debates over what constitutes a proper antiracist approach. By showing how the predominant mode of discussion in many antiracist organizations is hinged to the disclosure of personal experiences and emotion, Srivastrava demonstrates that this mode constricts the ability to produce organizational or structural change. Accordingly, white antiracist discussion groups often devolve into a setting in which the focus shifts from fighting racism to that of quelling the emotional turbulence of white participants – a pattern that unintentionally reestablishes a focus on white well‐being and privilege.Niemonen, Jack June 2007. 'Antiracist Education in Theory and Practice: A Critical Assessment.'The American Sociologist 38(2): 159–77.With critical aplomb, Jack Niemonen interrogates the pedagogical, curricular, and organizational claims of 'antiracist education'– an endeavor largely tied to liberal, white, and 'multicultural advocates.' Operationalized through a study of approximately 160 papers recently published in peer‐reviewed journals, Niemonen finds that the dominant forms of 'antiracist education' are far from sociologically grounded, empirically based accounts of the significance of race, but 'embodies the confessional and redemptive modes common in evangelical Protestantism' (164). Picking up on a key contradiction endemic to a large percentage of white antiracist literature, whites are often framed as 'inherently racist' yet are prodded to constantly seek paths to redemption and salvation. Informing my own work, Niemonen demonstrates how antiracist educators often employ a myopic and reductionist 'culture war' view of the world in which battle lines are drawn between the 'good and bad' whites. Aside from the fact that Niemonen's scathing critique sometimes borders on a kind of evangelicalism in its own right, his overview of the literature does afford the prescient observation that a great deal of antiracist activism is built on abstract moralism rather than sociological empiricism.O'Brien, Eileen 2001. Whites Confront Racism: Antiracists and Their Paths to Action. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.O'Brien's work is a survey of white antiracist activists from across North America. The book is a nice counterpoint to Niemonen's (2007) findings, as O'Brien finds that many white antiracists are quite savvy in their ability to avoid the typical options of 'being a nonracist' or devolving into emotional turmoil associated with 'white guilt'; many of the whites demonstrate large variation in how they combat modern racism. Of import, O'Brien shows that these whites' affiliations with antiracist organizations – and even their lack thereof – can play a crucial role in their approach to their antiracist activism. As such, O'Brien shows that a more critical white antiracist approach is evolving; one that frames race as a 'social construction' and which unpacks the individual, institutional, and cultural forms of racism.Online materialsPublic Broadcasting Service, 'Race – The Power of an Illusion' http://www.pbs.org/race/000_General/000_00‐Home.htm Starting from the supposition that 'Race is one topic where we all think we're experts', the series, readings, video, and ability to directly ask questions of experts in the field (e.g.: historian George M. Fredrickson and biological anthropologist Alan Goodman) together help to debunk many of the core beliefs that undergird the modern white supremacist and nationalist movement. In so doing, the program helps to show how social, economic, and political conditions, rather than biological make‐up, disproportionately channel advantages and opportunities to whites.Public Broadcasting Service, 'From Swastika to Jim Crow' http://www.pbs.org/itvs/fromswastikatojimcrow/index.html The website includes a video, discussion guide, and multi‐chaptered narrative on the little‐known story of German refugee scholars, who were expelled from Nazi Germany, migrated to the United States south and faced oppression from US white supremacists, and found employment at historically black colleges and universities. The resources therein illuminate the intricate web of politics, migration, nationalism, the contextual construction of racial and ethnic identity, and racism & antiracism.'Racism Review' http://www.racismreview.com/blog/ Launched in 2007, 'Racism Review' is produced and maintained by Joe R. Feagin (Texas A&M University) and Jessie Daniels (CUNY‐Hunter College). Contributors to the blog are scholars and researchers from sociology and a number of other social science disciplines across North America. Many of the articles center on the topics of white racial identity, racism, and antiracism, and aim to serve as credible and reliable sources of information for journalists, students, and members of the general public who seek evidence‐based research and analysis.Southern Poverty Law Center http://www.splcenter.org/index.jsp The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) was founded in 1971 as a small civil rights law firm, and today the website for the SPLC is internationally known as a clearing‐house for critical information, and perspectives on, white supremacist and white nationalist groups.Sample syllabus'Sociological Perspectives on Whiteness'Overview of the courseThis course investigates the social construction of race through an exploration of white identity, both theoretically and empirically. It includes an investigation of the historical genesis of white identity, its intersection with political movements and organizations, the relation of whiteness to race, ethnicity, class, gender, nation, and how whiteness is understood in popular culture, and the sociological mechanisms by which it is reproduced, negotiated, and contested.Lecture 1 – Introduction to Race as a Social ConstructionHaney López, Ian F. 1998. 'Chance, Context, and Choice in the Social Construction of Race.' Pp. 9–16 in The Latino/a Condition: A Critical Reader, edited by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic. New York, NY: New York University Press.Urciuoli, Bonnie 1996. 'Racialization and Language.' Pp. 15–40 in Exposing Prejudice: Puerto Rican Experiences of Language, Race, and Class. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Duster, Troy 2001. 'The 'Morphing' Properties of Whiteness.' Pp. 113–133 in The Making and Unmaking of Whiteness, edited by E. B. Rasmussen, E. Klinenberg, I. J. Nexica and M. Wray. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Lipsitz, George 1998. 'The Possessive Investment in Whiteness.' Pp. 1–23 in The Possessive Investment in Whiteness: How White People Profit from Identity Politics. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Lecture 4 – The Creation of 'White Ethnics'Jacobson, Matthew Frye 2001. 'Becoming Caucasian: Vicissitudes of Whiteness in American Politics and Culture.'Identities 8(1): 83–104.Roediger, David R. 1994. 'Whiteness and Ethnicity in the History of "White Ethnics" in the United States.' Pp 181–198 in Towards the Abolition of Whiteness. New York, NY: Verso.Sacks, Karen Brodkin 1994. 'How did Jews Become White Folks?' Pp 78–102 in Race, edited by Steven Gregory and Roger Sanjek. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Roediger, David R. 1999. 'Irish‐American Workers and White Racial Formation in the Antebellum United States.' Pp 133–163 in The Wages of Whiteness: Race and the Making of the American Working Class. New York, NY: Verso.Lecture 6 – Colorlessness and Color‐blindness as a Defense of WhitenessAnsell, Amy E. and James M. Statman 1999. '"I Never Owned Slaves:" The Euro‐American Construction of the Racialized Other.'Research in Politics and Society 6: 151–73.Gallagher, Charles A. 2003. 'Playing the White Ethnic Card: Using Ethnic Identity to Deny Contemporary Racism.' Pp. 145–158 in White Out: The Continuing Significance of Racism, edited by Ashley Doane and Eduardo Bonilla‐Silva. New York, NY: Routledge Press.Bonilla‐Silva, Eduardo. 2003. 'The Central Frames of Color‐Blind Racism.' Pp. 25–52 in Racism Without Racists. New York, NY: Rowman and Littlefield.Lecture 7 – Learning WhitenessConley, Dalton. 2001. 'Universal Freckle, or How I Learned to Be White.' Pp. 25–42 in The Making and Unmaking of Whiteness, edited by Birgit Brander Rasmussen, Eric Klinenberg, Irene J. Nexica, and Matt Wray. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Giroux, Henry A. 1998. 'Youth, Memory Work, and the Racial Politics of Whiteness.' Pp 123–36 in White Reign: Deploying Whiteness in America, edited by Joe L. Kincheloe, Shirley R. Steinberg, and Nelson M. Rodriguez, and Ronald E. Chennault. New York, NY: St. Martin's Press.Hall, Kim Q. 1999. 'My Father's Flag.' Pp. 29–35 in Whiteness: Feminist Philosophical Reflections, edited by Chris J. Cuomo and Kim Q. Hall. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Williams, Patricia J. 1997. 'The Ethnic Scarring of American Whiteness.' Pp. 253–63 in The House that Race Built: Black Americans, U.S. Terrain, edited by Wahneema Lubiano. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.Lecture 12 – Whiteness in Popular Culture and Everyday LifeDeloria, Philip 1999. Playing Indian. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Hughey, Matthew W. 2009. 'Cinethetic Racism: White Redemption and Black Stereotypes in "Magical Negro" Films.'Social Problems 56(3): 543–77.Lott, Eric 1995. Love and Theft: Blackface Minstrelsy and the American Working Class. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Lecture 13 – White Privilege and the Future of White PeopleHaney López, Ian F. 1998. 'Choosing the Future.' Pp. 404–7 in The Latino/a Condition: A Critical Reader, edited by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic. New York, NY: New York University Press.Winant, Howard 2001. 'White Racial Projects.' Pp 97–112 in The Making and Unmaking of Whiteness, edited by Birgit Brander Rasmussen, Eric Klinenberg, Irene J. Nexica, and Matt Wray. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.West, Cornel 1997. 'I'm Ofay, You're Ofay: A Conversation with Noel Ignatiev and William "Upski" Wimsatt.'Transition 73(7): 176–98.Yúdice, George 1995. 'Neither Impugning nor Disavowing Whiteness Does a Viable Politics Make: The Limits of Identity Politics.' Pp. 255–85 in After Political Correctness: The Humanities and Society in the 1990s, edited by Christopher Newfield and Ronald Strickland. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.[The construction of this syllabus is indebted to Bethany Bryson (James Madison University), Wende E. Marshall (University of Virginia), and Jennifer Roth‐Gordon (Brown University)]
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Blogbetreiber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie einen Blog Beitrag zitieren möchten.
Plekhanov/Labriola As a bit of an experiment, coupling my interest in André Tosel and my work on translation, I have decided to try my hand at a few translations of the former when I get the time. These are totally unauthorized, and rough drafts posted for edification and entertainment purposes only. I started on this piece because it is short, and because it works on an area that I need to learn more about, the history of Marxist-Spinozism before Matheron or Althusser. However, the more I worked on this piece, the more I thought that this split between Plekhanov and Labriola, still exists, in the divide between neo-enlightenment Spinozists and what some might call post-modern, but I prefer to call Marxist Spinozists. The Marxist Uses of Spinoza: Lessons of Method The history of the role of Spinoza's thought in the formation and the development of the work of Marx remains to be written, as is that of the history of the diverse Marxist usage (from different Marxisms) of Spinozist philosophical elements. This double history would reveal the work of Marx, and its contradictions, as much it would open up the work of Spinoza himself. Marxisms have reflected their aporias and their hopes onto Spinoza without necessarily truly thinking them through. In other words this is a domain of misunderstandings and equivocations. In order to undertake this history it would be useful to draw some lessons from the encounter of Marx and Marxist thought with Spinoza. First remark. The encounters of Spinoza by Marxists are discontinuous and contradictory. This discontinuity is initially characterized by the lack of a definitive encounter between Marx himself and Spinoza. Marx is formed through the reading of Spinoza, of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, and the correspondence. Not to learn the lessons of materialism, but an ethico-political lesson. Spinoza is considered as philosopher of freedom and autonomy, modern incarnation of Prometheus and continuation of Epicurus, all at once. Marx, in is progression from Kantian-Fichtean idealism to the speculative communism of the 1844 Manuscripts, develops three theses which are the practical theses of philosophical materialism, without the epistemological and ontological theses of this materialist tradition. Thesis One: Philosophy has a fundamental interest in the liberty of humanity, understood as autonomy and as the end of all heteronomies. Thesis Two: Philosophy is critical of all transcendental authorities of all principle of domination which justify and represent their domination through this principle. Thesis Three: Philosophy is eminently a science, knowledge, but knowledge of life, of the simple life of spirit of bodies rendered by their power. All particular sciences and knowledge must be thought from the point of view of science of life and its forms, as forms of life. When Marx elaborates the materialist conception of history he revolutionizes materialism but he does this without ever connecting it to the spinozist theory of nature, of the relations of extension and thought, of bodies and mind. He integrates and modifies the strong ontological and epistemological thesis of materialism, but these theses are taken more from Hobbes and other materialists of the eighteenth century than from Spinoza. Let us state these theses which are capable of a Spinozist formulation, without however assuming such a formulation. Thesis Four: Nature is the original reality and it is organized as matter at different objective levels. Thought cannot be separated from matter. Thesis Five: Nature in its diverse senses is intelligible. It emerges only from itself, excluding all creation. The human order is not a kingdom within a kingdom and susceptible of being understood. Thesis Six: All knowledge presupposes the reality of its object outside of thought. The appropriation by the knowledge of its own object of knowledge presupposes the reference to a real object. It is necessary to pay attention to the debates in Marxism of the Second International in order to see how the question of "Spinoza precursor of Marxist materialism appears." Emerging in the years of the crisis of revisionism the debate engages above all the German and Russian theorists of social democracy: Bernstein, Kautsky, and Plekhanov. It is in part based on the Anti-Dühring of Friedrich Engels and puts into play the complex questions of the relationship between the materialist theory of history with the sciences of nature with the political problem of the alliance of the intellectual groups in the perspective of socialist transition. This debate between 1896-1900 is inscribed in a theoretical problematic, such of Marxist orthodoxy that will find a new actualization with the problems proper to Soviet philosophy between 1917 and 1931, when it is a matter of specifying what would be called "Marxism-Leninism." If the question of materialism assumes the continuity between the Spinoza of the Second International and that of the Third, nothing would be more erroneous than to let oneself be taken in by the apparent continuity of an imaginary history of philosophy. These occurrences are in effect specific, they constitute theoretical and political conjunctures which must be grasped in a way that takes into account the strategic dimensions of the class struggle whether or not it is led by Marxist parties, the problem of alliances, that of the intellectual division of labor. Marxist philosophy, as it is officially constituted, is part of the practice of parties, and the reference to Spinoza is overdetermined by the political and theoretical stakes that have to be elucidated in each specific situation. Here we touch on the second lesson of method: it is necessary to historically specify the conjunctures where Spinoza intervenes and where and how there is a specific usage of this prestigious and troubling reference. This method makes it possible to determine what falls under ideological legitimation, and what is inserted at the level of the practical politics of the party, of the state, of the level of specialized intellectuals. Spinoza does not only appear only in the emergence of Marxist orthodoxy. He intervenes, in a subterranean manner, in the elaboration of theorists where the considerable theoretical importance has never been associated with an actual political importance. This can be found in the crisis over revisionism in the last century, such that Antonio Labriola in his Essays on the Materialist Conception of History (1895-1898) attests to the presence of a different Spinoza than that of his contemporary Plekhanov and a fortiori than that which was celebrated in Soviet Philosophy in 1927 and 1932. Spinoza intervenes as a critic of the same orthodoxy which returns as elements of an older materialism in another theoretical configuration that has solicited different aspects of his philosophy: no longer the parallelism between extension and thought, not a determinist ontology but the mode considered to be at once conceptual and experimental, the same geometrico-genetic method, in that it now excludes the guarantees of teleological philosophies of history. A contradictory intervention which is not without analogies to another occurrence, the most recent, that of Spinoza in the work of Louis Althusser which can be considered as a systematic deconstruction of the Marxist orthodoxy of the Second and Third International. Between Labriola (1898) and Althusser (1965), if we except the Soviet Spinoza, there is little except Ernst Bloch's remarks that no one has yet taken into account for a history of materialism oriented in the direction of a utopian ontology. This appearance of a Spinoza critical of stated and intended Marxist orthodoxies gives a third lesson of method: the diverse contradictory Marxist uses of Spinoza are situated between two poles, the first is that of an orthodoxy elaborated by the intellectuals of the social democratic and communist parties at the end of an a party/state conception of a finalist world and at the other is from thinkers situated in a problematic relation to the party, who look in Spinoza for other ways to make sense of the world and other practices then the becoming state of the worker parties. This opposition can appear to be schematic. It can be developed into provisional and schematic path of investigation. Such an investigation takes one central question: What is it in the philosophy of Spinoza that authorizes these discontinuous usages, determined by their conjunctures, and perhaps violently opposed? Confronting therefore these different usages of Spinoza that can be considered historically significant in the course of history, that is to say in terms of their specific conjunctures. This can be seen with the orthodox use of Spinoza by Plekhanov and the critical usage of Spinoza by Labriola at the heart of the second international. Plekhanov gave himself the task of elaborating the originality of Marx's philosophy and defending it in the face of revisionists who, with Bernstein, contest the self-sufficiency of Marx's philosophy, dividing into an evolutionary sociology and a Kantian inspired ethics. For Plekhanov there is very much a Marxist philosophy. It is inscribed in the materialist current which it revitalizes by giving it a historical dialectical dimension. Spinoza is the direct ancestor of Marx in that it is through the monism of the former that one can unify the science of nature and the science of history of the latter. Marx has revitalized substance as historical-social matter, metabolism of humanity with nature, and has inherited his realist theory of knowledge, thought is nothing other than a moment or function of matter. There is a Spinozism of Marx that is the realization of historical Spinozism as a the affirmation of the materialist conception of the world, one predicated on the knowability of matter in terms of its organization at diverse levels. Only this conception of the world can give the workers' movement its organization and which would permit it to avoid the disorganization that revisionism introduces, neo-Kantian idealism cannot organize the class struggle without harmful compromises. Spinoza is one part of orthodox Marxism returned to during this period. This Spinoza can authorize the theses of Friedrich Engels, in some sense simplifying the complexity of the Anti-Dühring. Concerned to think together the development of the sciences of nature, the materialist conception of history, and developing a philosophy capable of correct reflection and the movement of the specialization of sciences and the political struggle of classes (alliance with the intellectual stratum), Engles had proposed the idea of a materialist dialectic that oscillates between an ontological conception and a methodological conception of this dialectic. These two conceptions are apparently unified in the idea of "the science of the general laws of motion, both of the external world and of human thought — two sets of laws which are identical in substance, but differ in their expression in so far as the human mind can apply them consciously, while in nature and human history (at least up to now), these laws assert themselves unconsciously, in the form of external necessity, in the midst of an endless series of seeming accidents." This parallelism between (laws of) movement of the external world and (the laws of) thought has a Spinozist connotation which reinforces the idea of liberty as the comprehension of necessary laws. However, it remains above all intended to make possible a representation of the dialectic under materialism, without examining its own difficulties. Plekhanov is not interested in these difficulties in elaborating a general materialist conception that Marx completes and fulfills through the mediation of Hegel. Antonio Labriola, who wrote "Origin and Nature of the Passions According to Spinoza's Ethics" at a young age (1866), refuses this ontologization or methodolization of the dialectic in order to develop the idea of a philosophy of praxis as a philosophy immanent to a new conception of history, reflecting the constitution of history as a complex unifying ground and surface. In this sense, the Plekhanov project, apparently Spinozist, of thinking the continuity of nature and society at the heart of a substantial and homogenous causality loses its sense. The process of social life must be desubstantialized at with it the philosophy that is presented as a hyperphilosophy or super science organized as "theosophic or metaphysic of the totality of the world, as if by an act of a transcendent knowledge we can arrive at a vision of substance and all of the phenomena and processes under it." Antonino Labriola as much as he refuses to make man an 'kingdom in a kingdom' refuses the naturalization of history and the transformation of Marxism into a naturalist ontology where social practice becomes a species of being in general. Labriola denounces a matter found on things as a form of metaphysical superstition. Spinoza is evoked as a hero in the struggle against the imagination and ignorance that resurfaces in Marxist orthodoxy under the form of universal materialism. It is necessary above all to think of the diverse levels of the "animation" of matter, and therefore the specificity of the "artificial terrain" which constitutes practice. What Spinoza knew how to do for the theory of passions must be done for praxis: each one, the relations of affects and and those that constitute praxis, are not ruled by a subject and for this reason must be studied through a genetic method. Labriola speaks of a genetic method that also defines the method of Marx in Capital. The genetic method takes its distance from the dialectic and its teleological philosophy of history and established guarantees. For Labriola the turn to Spinoza is less about the strengthening of a materialist monism than it is about the possibility of reinterpreting Marx's Capital as a geometry of capitalist social being. The geometrical method is an instrument of internal purification destined to eliminate the finalism of productive causes and biological predetermination from Marxist orthodoxy. The philosophy of praxis manifests the basic critical and formal tendency of monism: everything is conceivable as a the causal genesis of a complex totality. The materialist dialectic is neither a universal method nor a logic of being, but constitutes the critical movement internal to knowledge which acts on the practice of philosophy and makes it a "conceptual form of explication" parallel to contemporary science. The reference to Spinoza intervenes in the critique of a Marxist orthodoxy which is supposed to include in a dogmatic manner Spinoza's own materialism. Marx and Spinoza are considered as two practitioners of philosophy who refuse the closure of knowledge in favor of the immanent self-reflection of knowledge. The lesson of Spinoza is not to find the unity of knowledge under a principle but to demystify the fetishes which substitute imaginary principles for the movement of practice. One could develop a similar analysis of the confrontation of the Soviet Spinoza of the Third International to the Spinoza of Louis Althusser. The Soviet Spinoza is an impoverished and petrified version of the Spinoza of Plekhanov. With respect to Althusser, Spinoza's critique is referenced constantly and augmented, infinitely better elaborated than in Labriola, since it acts this time not as a critique of metaphysical fetishism, even materialist, but of the metaphysics of the juridical subject characteristic of occidental rationalism. The contributions of R. Zapata and J.-P. Cottent have clarified these points, but it seems opportune to underly the paradox of this history: it is possible to tie together the diverse uses of Spinoza, one against the other. If Spinoza is enrolled in the constitution of a "conception of the world" which intends to complete a current of philosophy and which cannot at any time criticize its presuppositions, it is also possible, as with Althusser, to think the structure of ideological interpellation that constitutes the ideological subject and invalidates philosophy considered as a theory of knowledge. If Spinoza makes possible a conception of the world in which the State Party is supposed to be the subject of history accomplishing its ultimate ends, it also makes it possible for Althusser to try to reconstruct Marxist theory on the ruins of the triple myth of origin, subject, and the end. The Labriolian critique of imaginatio and ignorantia is radically interiorized in the destruction of Marxisms of the Second and Third International. The recourse to structural causality supposed to have been developed in the theory of modes and substance serves as an incomplete program to develop the theoretical revolution of Marx. However, it goes further still: there are two Spinoza's in Althusser himself. The Spinoza critical of any theory of knowledge ultimately occludes the Spinoza of structural causality: the denunciation of the triple myth of origin, subject, and end is lead to the liquidation of the rational modernism present in Marx. However the pars destruens always prevails over the pars construens. The idea of structural causality (such that of substance as the absent cause over the modes and affects) is accompanied with the affirmation of an unknown radicality of Marxist science, but the critique of the metaphysics of subjectivity in the teleology of Marxism that accompanies it announces the crises of Marxist liberation in the last interventions of Althusser. Everything comes to pass as if Althusser deconstructs a dogmatic Spinoza in the name of another Spinoza, more secret and more enigmatic. Spinoza is always divided from Spinozism which claims to define himOriginally published in Bloch, Olivier, Editor, Spinoza au XXe siècle, Paris, PUF, 1993.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Blogbetreiber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie einen Blog Beitrag zitieren möchten.
Daniel Levine on Hidden Hands, Vocation and Sustainable Critique in International Relations
Daniel Levine is part of a new generation of IR scholars that takes a more pluralist approach to addressing the hard and important questions generated by international politics. While many of those interviewed here display a fairly consistent commitment to a certain position within what is often referred to as 'the debate' in IR, Levine straddles the boundaries of a diverse range of positions and understandings. Time to ask for elaboration.
Print version of this Talk (pdf)
What is, according to you, the biggest challenge / principal debate in current IR? What is your position or answer to this challenge / in this debate?
The question I'd like us to be asking more clearly than we are is, 'are we a vocation and, if so, what kind of vocation are we'? This points to a varied set of questions that we, as scholars, gesture to but spend relatively little theoretical time developing or unpacking. There's an assumption that the knowledge we produce is supposed to be put good for something, practical in light of some praiseworthy purpose. Even theorists who perceive themselves to be epistemologically value-free hope, I think, at least on an intuitive level, that some practical good will emerge from what they do. They hope that they are doing 'good work' in the sense that some Christians use this term. But, there is not really a sustained project of thinking through how those works work: how our notions of vocation might be different or even mutually exclusive, and how the differences in our notions of vocation might be bound up in non-obvious ways to our epistemological, methodological, and theoretical choices.
Moreover, except for a few very important and quite heroic (and minoritarian) efforts, we don't really have a way to think systematically about the structure of the profession: how it influences or intervenes or otherwise acts on particular ideas as they percolate through it, and how those ideas get 'taken up' into policy. Brian Schmidt has done work like that, so has Inanna Hamati-Ataya, Ole Waever, Ido Oren, Oded Löwenheim, Elizabeth Dauphinee, Naeem Inayatullah, and Piki Ish-Shalom; and it's good work, but they are doing what they are doing with limited resources, and I think without due appreciation from a big chunk of the field as to why that work is important and what it means.
When I started writing Recovering International Relations, I had wanted to recover the 'view from nowhere' that many social scientists idealize. You know, that methodological conceit where we imagine we are standing on Mars, watching the earth through a telescope, or we're Archimedes standing outside of the world, leveraging it with distance and dispassion. I had worked on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for a long time, was living in Tel Aviv, working for a think tank, and was—am—an Israeli citizen and an American citizen. I had this somewhat shocking discovery right after the Second Intifada broke out. Most of my senior colleagues were deploying their expertise in what seemed to me to be a very tendentious way: to show why the second Intifada was Yassar Arafat's fault or the Palestinian Authority's fault—or, in a few cases, the Israelis' fault. There were some very simplistic political agendas that were driving this research. People were watching the evening news, coming into work the next morning, and then running Ehud Yaari's commentary through their respective fact-values-methods mill. Or if they were well-connected, they were talking to their friends on the 'inside', and doing the same thing.
It was hard to admit this for a long time, but I was very naïve. I found that very unsettling and quite disillusioning. That's why the view from nowhere was so appealing. I wanted to be able to talk about Israel and Palestine without taking a position on Israel and Palestine—but without eschewing the expertise I had acquired along the way, in part because I was a party to this conflict, and cared about its outcome. I was young, inexperienced, and slightly arrogant to boot—neither yet a scholar, nor an 'expert,' nor really aware of the game I was playing. So my objections were not well received, nor did I pose them especially coherently. To their credit, my senior colleagues did recognize something worthwhile in my diatribes, and they did their best to help me get into graduate school.
As the project developed, and as I started engaging with my mentors in grad school, it appeared that the view from nowhere was essentially impossible to recover. With Hegel and with the poststructuralists, we can't really think from nowhere; the idea of it is this kind of intellectual optical illusion, as though thinking simply happens, without a mind that is conditioned by being in the world. Therefore, there needs to be a process by which we give account of ourselves.
There are a variety of different ways to consider how one might do that. There's what we might call the agentic approach, in which we think through the structure of thought itself: its limitations, our dependence on a certain image of thinking notwithstanding those limits—thought's work on us, on our minds. This is closest to what I do, drawing on Adorno and Kant, and Adorno's account of how concepts work in the mind; how they pull us away from the things we mean to understand even as they give us the words to understand them. And drawing on Jane Bennett, William Connolly, Hannah Arendt, Cornel West, JoanTronto, and JudithButler to think through how one conditions oneself to accept those limitations from a space of love, humility and service. Patrick Jackson's (TheoryTalk #44) Conduct of Research in IR is quite similar to this approach; and so is Colin Wight's Agents, Structures and International Relations; though they use more philosophy of science than I do.
One could also do this more 'structurally.' One could say 'this is how the academy works and this is how the academy interconnects with the larger political community' and then try to trace out those links: I mentioned Hamati-Ataya, Oren, and Ish-Shalom, or you could think of Isaac Kamola, Helen Kinsella, or Srdjan Vucetic.
Any of those approaches—or really, some admixture of them—would be pieces of that project. I would like us to be doing more of that—alongside, not instead of, all the other things we are already doing, from historical institutionalism to formal modeling, to large-N and quantitative approaches, and normative, feminist and critical ones. I would like such self-accounting to be one of the things scholars do, that they take it as seriously as they take methods, epistemology, data, etc. Driving that claim home in our field, as it's presently constituted, is our biggest challenge.
How did you arrive at where you currently are in IR?
I'm 42, so the Cold War was a big deal. I'm American-born, and I was raised in a pretty typical suburb. John Stewart from the Daily Show is probably the most famous product of my hometown, though I didn't know him. My view of history was a liberal and progressive in the Michael Waltzer/Ulrich Beck/Anthony Giddens, vein, but I was definitely influenced by the global circumstances of the time, and by the 'End of History' discourse that was in the air. I thought that the US was a force of good in the world. I was a nice Jewish boy from New Jersey. I really wanted to live in Israel for personal reasons, and the moral challenge of living in Israel after the Intifada seemed to go away with the peace process. So, it seemed to me that it was a kind of golden moment: you could 'render unto Caesar what was due to Caesar', and do the same for the Lord. I could actually be a Jewish-Israeli national and also a political progressive. (That phrase is, of course, drawn from the Gospels, and that may give you some sense of how my stated religious affiliations might have differed from the conceptual and theological structures upon which they actually rested—score one for the necessity of reflexivity. But in any case, those events were important.)
I moved to Israel when I was 22 and was drafted into the military after I took citizenship there. In the IDF, I was a low-level functionary/general laborer—a 'jobnik', someone who probably produces less in utility than they consume in rations. Our job was to provide support for the combatants that patrolled a certain chunk of the West Bank near Nablus—Shechem, as we called it, after the biblical name. I was not a particularly distinguished soldier. But we were cogs in a very large military occupation, and being inside a machine like that, you can see how the gears and pieces of it meshed together, and I started taking notice of this. Sometimes I'd help keep the diary in the operations room. You saw how it all worked, or didn't work; or rather, for whom it worked and for whom it didn't. All that was very sobering and quite fascinating.
I once attended a lecture given by the African politics scholar Scott Straus, and he said the thing about being present right after genocide is that you come across these pits full of dead bodies. It's really shocking and horrific—there they are, just as plain as day. Nothing I saw in the sheer level of violence compares to that in any way—I should stress this. But that sense of it all just being out there, as plain as day, and being shocked by this—that resonated with me. Everyone who cared to look could understand how the occupation worked, or at least how chunks of it worked. So I would say in terms of events, those things were the big pieces that structured my thinking.
Here's two anecdotal examples. Since I was a grade of soldier with very limited skills, I was on guard duty a lot. We had a radio. I could hear the Prime Minister on the radio saying we are going to strike so-and-so in response to an attack on such-and-such, and then I could see helicopters pass overhead to Nablus, and then I could see smoke. Then I could see soldiers come back from going out to do whatever it was the helicopter had provided air support for. I'd see ambulances with red crescents or red Stars of David rush down the main road. It began to occur to me that there was a certain economy of violence in speech and performance. I didn't think about it in specifically theoretical terms before I went back to graduate school, but Israelis had been killed, political outrage had been generated. There was a kind of affective deficit in Israeli politics that demanded a response, and some amount of suffering had to be returned—so the government could say it was doing its job. I found this very depressing. My odd way of experiencing this—neither fully inside nor outside—is certainly not the most important or authentic, and I'm not trying to set myself up as an expert on this basis. I'm only trying to account for how it made me think at the time and how that shows up in what and how I write now.
Later, when I was in the reserves, I was in the same unit with the same guys every year. One year, we were lacing our boots and getting our equipment for our three weeks of duty in a sector of the West Bank near Hebron, I think it was. I remember one guy, one of the more hawkish guys, said 'we'll show 'em this time, we'll show them what's what'. Three weeks later, that same guy said 'Jeez, it's like we're like a thorn in their backside; no wonder they hate us so much.' (He actually used some colorful imagery that I can't share with you.) I remember thinking, 'well, ok, he'll go home and he'll tell his family and his friends; some good will come of this.' The next year, I saw the same guy saying the same thing at the start, 'we'll show those SOBs.' And then three weeks later, 'oh my God, this is so pointless, no wonder they hate us…' So after a few years of this I finally said to him, 'tagid, ma yihiyeh itcha?'—Like, dude, what's your deal? 'We've had this conversation every year! What happens to you in the 48 weeks that you're not here that you forget this?' And I think he looked at me like, 'what are you talking about?'
I thought about that afterwards: we have these moments of experience when we're out of our everyday environment and discourse, the diet of news and fear, PR and political nonsense—that's when these insights become possible. So, when this guy comes in and says 'ok, we'll get those SOBs,' he's carrying with him this discourse that he has from home, from the news and TV, from his 'parliament' with his friends where they get together and talk about politics and war and economics and whatever else—and then a few weeks of occupation duty disrupts all that, makes him see it in a different light, and he has these kinds of fugitive experiences which give him a weirdly acute critical insight. Suddenly, he's this mini-Foucault.
In a few weeks, though, he goes back to his life, there's no space or niche into which that uncomfortable, fugitive insight can really grow, so it just sort of disappears or withers on the vine, its power is dissipated. This is a very real, direct experience of violence and it's covered over by all of this jibber-jabber. So there's a moment where you start to wonder: what exactly happens there? What happens in those 48 weeks? What happens to me during those weeks? You can see how a kind of ongoing critical self-interrogation would evolve out of that. Again, none of those things are exactly what my book's about, but it gives you a sense of how you might find Adorno's kind of critical relentlessness and negativity vital and important and really useful and necessary. You can see how that might inform my thinking.
In terms of books, as an undergraduate, I had read, not very attentively, Said and Foucault, and all of the stuff at the University of Chicago we had to take in what they called the 'Scosh Sequence,' from sociologists like Elijah Anderson and William Julius Wilson to Charles Lindblom and Mancur Olsen: texts from the positive and the interpretive to the post-structural. I had courses with some very smart Israeli and Palestinian profs—Ephraim Yaar, Salim Tamari, Ariela Finkelstein. And of course Rashid Khalidi was there at that time. Once I was in the military, the Foucault and Said suddenly started popping around in my head. Suddenly, this sort of lived experience of being on guard duty made the Panopticon and the notion of discipline go from being a rather complicated, obscure concept to something concrete. 'Oh! That's what discipline is!'
When I went back to graduate school, I was given a pretty steady diet of Waltz, rational deterrence theory, Barry Posen, Stephen Walt (Theory Talk #33), and Robert Jervis (Theory Talk #12). Shai Feldman was a remarkable teacher, so were Ilai Alon in philosophy, Shlomo Shoham in sociology and Aharon Shai in History. Additionally I had colleagues at work who were PhD students at the Hebrew University working with Emanuel Adler; they gave me Wendt (Theory Talk #3), Katzenstein's (TheoryTalk # 15) Culture of National Security, Adler and Barnett, and Jutta Weldes' early article on 'Constructing National Interests' in the EJIR (PDF here). My job was to help them publish their monographs, so I got really into the guts of their arguments, which were fascinating. I am not really an agency-centered theory guy anymore and I am not really a constructivist anymore, but that stuff was fantastic. I saw that one could write from a wholly different viewpoint, perspective, and voice. This is all very mainstream in IR now, but at the time, it felt quite edgy, very novel. Part of the reason why the middle chapters of Recovering IR has these long discussions about different kinds of constructivism is that I wouldn't have had two thoughts to rub together if it was not for those books. I do disagree with them now and strongly, but they were very important to me all the same.
What would a student need to become a specialist in IR or understand the world in a global way?
I'd be more comfortable answering that question as someone who was, until relatively recently, a grad student. I've not been productive long enough to say 'Well, here's how to succeed in this business and be a theorist of enduring substance or importance' with any authority. But I can say, 'here's how I'm trying to be one.' There's a famous article by Albert O. Hirschman called 'The Principle of the Hiding Hand,' (PDF here) and in it he says that frequently, the only way one can get through really large or complicated projects is to delude oneself as to how hard the project is actually going to be. He takes as an example these ambitious, massively complicated post-colonial economic projects of the Aswan High Dam variety. The only way such enormous projects ever get off the ground, he says, is if one either denies their true complexity or deludes oneself. Otherwise you despair and you never get it done. From the first day of seminar to dissertation proposal to job—thank God I had no idea what I was in for, or I might have quit.
Also, the job market being what it was, we had to be very, very passionate scholars who wrote and argued for the sheer intellectual rush and love of writing. And yet, we also had to be very practical and almost cynical about the way in which the academic market builds on the prestige of publications and the way in which prestige becomes shorthand for your commodity value. At least in the US, the decline of tenure and the emergence of a kind of new class of academics whose realm of responsibility is specifically to engage in uncomfortable kinds of political and moral critique—but without tenure, and at the mercy of a sometimes feckless dean, an overburdened department chair or fickle colleagues—that's very scary. If you're doing 'normal science', it's a different game and the challenges are different. But if your job is to do critique, in the last ten years, it's a very big deal. Very difficult. I'm very fortunate in that regard; at Alabama I've had great support from my department, my chair, and my college.
I was a Johns Hopkins PhD, and my department was fantastic in terms of giving me support, encouragement, getting out of my way while throwing interesting books at me, reading drafts that were bad and helping me make them good—or at least telling me why they were bad. We did not get particularly good professional training, because I think they did not want us to get professionalized before we found our own voice. I'm really grateful for that, truly. But then there's this period in which you have to figure out how to make your voice into a commodity. That's really tough, it's a little bit disheartening—even to discover that you must be a commodity is dismaying; didn't we go into the academy to avoid this sort of logic? But just like Marx says, commodities have a double life, and so do you. The use-value of your scholarship and its exchange-value do not interlock automatically and without friction. So you spend all this time on the use-value of it—writing a cool, smart, interesting dissertation—thinking that will translate into exchange-value, and it turns out that it sort of does, but a lot of other things translate into exchange-value too that aren't really about how good your work is necessarily. And many of your colleagues, if what you're doing is original, won't really understand what you're doing; the value or the creativity of it won't be apparent to them unless they spend a lot of time sifting through your bad drafts of it, which only a few—but God bless those—will do. So how you create exchange-value for yourself is important. So is finding people who will care about you, your project, your future—and learning when to take their advice, when to ignore it, and how to do so tactfully.
If all that's hard, you're probably doing it right. It's unfortunate that that's how it is, but at all events, that's how it was for me.
Would you elaborate on the concept of vocation and why this is so important to the view from nowhere? It is important to say that the view from nowhere is perhaps difficult. So is vocation, or a kind of Weberian approach, a way to articulate that for you?
There's a quote in a book from a Brazilian novelist named Machado de Assis. His protagonist is this fellow Bras Cubas, who's writing a posthumous memoir of his own life. He's writing from beyond the grave. From there, he can view his whole life and his entire society from outside; he's finally achieved positivism's view from nowhere. But the thing about this view—and the book means to be a sendup of the Comtean positivism that was fashionable in Brazil in those days—is that it gives him no comfort. He now knows why he lived his life the way he did; how he failed and what was—and what was not—his fault. The absurdity of it all makes sense. But it changes nothing: he has died unfulfilled, unloved, and essentially alone: a minor poet and back-bench politician who was ultimately of little use to anyone nor of much to himself. All he knows is how that happened.
In the end, if we're all playing a role in how a world comes into being and it's in some sense our job simply to accept this, and our job as scholars merely to explain it, this gives us no comfort in the face of suffering, in the face of violence and evil. To some extent as scholars, and to some extent as a discipline, we exist as a response to evil, to suffering, to foolishness, to folly; it's not a coincidence that the first professorship of IR is created in Britain in the wake of WWI, and that it's given to someone like E. H. Carr.
If we don't have a view from nowhere because we've given up anything like a moral sense that can't be reduced to fractional, material, or ideological sensibilities, and if we know that sometimes those 'views from somewhere' can provide cover for terrible kinds of evil or justify awful kinds of suffering, then the notion of vocation seems to come in at that point and say well, 'here's what I hope I'm doing', or 'here's what I wish to be doing', or 'here's what I'd like to think I'm doing', and then allowing others to weigh in and give their two cents. Vocation, in the sense of Weber's lectures, comes out of that. It's Kant for social scientists: What can I know? What should I do? For what may I hope? In other words, what the necessity and obligation of thinking is on the one hand, and on the other what its limitations are.
This is a way to save International Relations from two things: one, from relativism and perspectivism, and the other, from a descent into the technocratic or the managerial. I am trying to stand between the two. My own intellectual background was in security studies at Tel Aviv University in the 1990s: the period immediately after Maastricht, in the period of the Oslo Process, the end of Apartheid. My hope back in the days when the peace process seemed to me to be going well was that I'd be able to have a kind of technocratic job in Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs or Defense. Counting tanks, or something similar. I thought that would be a pretty good job. I would be doing my part to maintain a society that had constructed a stable, long-term deterrent by which to meaningfully address the problem of Jewish statelessness and vulnerability, but without the disenfranchisement of another people. I could sit down and count my tanks with a clear conscience, because the specter of evil was being removed from that work. The problem of the occupation was being be solved. Again, it's somewhat embarrassing to admit this now.
I would say in the US academy, there is definitely a balance in favor of the technocrats. We have enormous machines for the production and consumption of PhDs in this country. The defense establishment is an enormous player. Groups like the Institute for Defense Analysis need a lot of PhDs, the NSF funds a lot of PhDs (for now, at least), and that tips the balance of the profession in a certain way. My ability to use ideas compellingly at ISA won't change that fact all by itself, there's a base-superstructure issue in play there.
In Europe, it's a different story, for a bunch of reasons. The defense establishments of the EU member states aren't as onerous a presence. And, there are more of them; so there's a kind of diversity there and a need to think culturally about how these various institutions interlock and how people learn to talk to each other: the Martha Finnemore-to-Vincent Pouliot-to-Iver Neumann (Theory Talk #52) study of ideas and institutions and officials. Plus, you have universities like the EUI and the CEU, which are not reducible to any particular national interest or education system; creating knowledge, but for a political/state form that's still emergent. No one knows exactly what it is, what its institutions and interests will ultimately be. Because of that, it's hard to imagine the EUI producing scholars with obviously nationally-inflected research programs, like Halford Mackinder, Mahan, Ratzel from a century ago. There will still be reifications and ideologies, but there's more 'give' since the institutions are still in play. And there's fantastically interesting stuff happening in Australia, and in Singapore—think of people like Janice Bialley-Mattern, Tony Burke and Roland Bleiker.
Critique has a long and controversial history in our discipline. Could you perhaps elaborate, as a kind of background or setting, how critique can be used in IR and why you've placed it at the center of your approach to IR theory?
Critique as term of art comes into the profession through Robert Cox (Theory Talk #37) and through the folks that were writing after him in the '90s, including Neufeld, Booth, Wyn-Jones, Rengger, Linklater and Ashley—though pieces of the reflexive practice of critique are present in the field well before. For Cox, the famous line is that theory is always 'for something and for someone.' The question is, if that's true how far down does that problem go? Is it a problem of epistemology and method, or is it a problem of being as such, a problem of ontology? Is it fundamental to the nature of politics?
If the set of processes to which we refer when we speak of 'thinking' is inherently for someone and for something, and that problem harkens back to the idea that all thinking is grounded in one's interests and perspectives, i.e., that all practical or systematic attempts to understand politics are 'virtuous' in the Machiavellian sense (they serve princely interests) but not necessarily in the Christian sense (deriving from transcendent values), then we have a real problem in keeping those two things separate in our minds. Think of Linklater's book Men and Citizens in International Relations as a key node in that argument, though Linklater ultimately believes (at least in that book) that a reconciliation between the two is possible. I'm less convinced.
Now recall the vocation point we discussed before. IR as a discipline has a deep sense of moral calling which goes beyond princely interest. And the traditions on which it draws are as much transcendently normative as anything else. So encoded in our ostensibly practical-Machiavellian analyses is going to be something like a sense of Christian virtue; we'll believe we're not merely correct in our analyses, but really and truly right in some otherworldly, transcendent way. True or not, that sense of conviction will attach itself to our thinking, to the political forces and agendas that we're serving. We'll come to believe that we are citing Machiavelli in the service of something greater: whether that's 'scientific truth' or the national interest, or what have you. Nothing could be more dangerous than that. Critique, as an intervention, comes here: to dispel or chasten those beliefs. Harry Gould, Brent Steele, and especially Ned Lebow (Theory Talk #53) write about prudence and a sense of finitude: these are the close cousins of this kind of critique.
If we take seriously the notion that people sometimes fight and kill in the service of really awful causes while believing they are doing right, and that scholars sometimes help them sustain those convictions rather than disabuse them of them—even if they do not intend this—then critique becomes an awfully big problem and it really threatens to undermine the profession as such. It opens up a whole new level of obligation and responsibility, and it magnifies what might otherwise be staid 'inside baseball'—Intramural scholarly or methodological debates. Part of the reason why the 'great debates' were so great—so hotly fought—had to do with this: our scholarly debates were, in fact, ideological ones.
It undermines the field in another way as well. If we take critique seriously, there's got to be a lot of moral reflection by scholars. That will make it hard to produce scholarship quickly, to be an all-purpose intellectual that can quickly produce thought-product in a policy-appropriate way, because I will want to be thinking from another space, and of course precisely what policy-makers want is that you don't think from some other space; that you present them with 'shovel ready' policy that solves problems without creating new ones.
So you now have not just a kind of theoretical or methodological interruption in the discussion of, say, absolute or relative gains. You now have to give an account of yourself. And for me, that's what critique in IR means. To unpack the definition I gave above, it's the attempt to give an account of what the duties and limits of one's thinking are in the context of politics, given the nature of politics as we understand it. Because IR comes out of the Second World War, we're bound to take the most capacious notions of what political evil and contingency can be; if we are not always in the midst of genocide and ruin, then we are at least potentially so. And so contingency and complexity and all the stuff that we're talking about must face that. I want to hold out that Carl Schmitt and Hans Morgenthau might be right—in ways which neither they, nor I, can completely fathom. Then I have to give accounts of thinking that take a level of responsibility commensurate with that possibility.
In that vein, when I look at accounts of thinking in the context of the political, when I look at what concepts are and how they work and how they do work on the world so that it can be rendered tractable to thought, I realize that what we come up with when we're done doesn't look very much like politics anymore. We have tools which, when applied to politics, change it quite dramatically; they reify or denature it. To be critical in the face of that, you're going to be obliged to an extensive degree of self-interrogation and self-checking, which I call chastening.
That process of chastening reason, is, in effect, what remains of the enlightenment obligation to use practical reason to improve what Bacon called the human estate. What's left of that obligation is to think in terms of the betterment of other human beings as best as you can, knowing you can't do that very well, but that you may still be obliged to try.
That's really hard to do and it's an odd form of silence and non-silence. After all, if I were to look at the Shoah while it was happening, or look at what happened in Rwanda, and say 'well, I don't really have a foundational position on which to stand so I can't analyze or condemn that'—that would not be a morally acceptable position. Price and Reus-Smit (TheoryTalk #27) say this in their 1998 article and they are absolutely right. But then there's the fact that I don't quite know what to say beyond 'stop murdering people!' The world is so easy to break with words, and so hard to put back together with them—assuming anyone cares at all about anything we say. So I am obliged to respond to those kinds of events when I see them, and I am also obliged to acknowledge that I can't respond to them well, because my authority comes from the conceptual tools I have, and they aren't really very good. Essentially, what I'm doing as scholar of IR is the equivalent is using the heel of my shoe to hammer in a nail. (That's a nice line, no? I wish it was mine, but it's Hannah Arendt.) It will probably work, but it will take a while, and the nail won't go in so straight. To chasten one's thinking is to remind oneself that the heel of one's shoe is not yet a hammer; that all we're doing is muddling through—even when we do our work with absolute seriousness and strict attention to detail, context and method—as of course we should.
You discuss IR theory in terms of different reifications. In which was does that also lead you to take a stand against a Weberian understanding of IR?
I think where I depart from Weber is that he has more faith than I do that, at some point, disenchantment produces something better. There is faith or hope on their part that the iron cage that we experience as a result of disenchantment and as a result of the transformation from earlier forms of charismatic and traditional authority to contemporary rational ones won't always be oppressive, not forever. New forms and ways of being will emerge, in which those disenchanted modes actually will fulfill their promise for a kind of improvement in the human estate. If it's a long, complicated process—hence the image of slow boring into hard wood—but faith is still justified, good things can still happen.
For me, the question is how would you manage a society that is liable to go insane or to descend into moments of madness because of the side-effects or intervening effects of disenchantment and modernization, while holding fast to the notion that at some point, this is going to get better for most people? I'm a bit less certain about that than I read Patrick and Weber being. I think that even if they're right, it makes sense morally as scholars, not necessarily as citizens or individuals or people, to dwell in the loss of those who fall along the way.
I find myself thinking about the people who are gone a lot. My ex-wife teaches on slavery, and I think a lot about this terrible thing she once told me. On slave ships, when there was not enough food they would throw the people overboard because ship masters got insurance money if their property went overboard, but not if human beings succumbed on-ship. There's a scene depicting this in Spielberg's film Amistad and it haunts me. I find myself thinking about those people, dragged under with their chains. I wonder what they looked like, what they had to say. I wonder what they might have created or how their great-great grandchildren children would have played with my child. I wonder if my best friend or true love was never born because her or his ancestor died in this way. An enormous number of people perished. I can't quite believe this, even if I know it's true.
Yoram Kaniuk, the recently deceased Israeli novelist, wrote that the Israeli state was built on the ground-up bones of the Jews who couldn't get there because it was founded too late. I wonder about them too. And when I taught course modules on Cambodia, I would find myself looking at the photographs made of the people in Tuol Sleng before they were killed, the photo archives which the prison kept for itself. There is a mother, daughter, father, brother, son, and I find myself drawn into their eyes and faces. I don't want those people to disappear into zeros or statistics. I want somehow to give them some of their dignity back, and I want to dwell in the tragic nature my own feeling because it bears remembering that I cannot ever really do that. If I remember that, I will have some sense of what life's worth is, and I won't speak crassly about interventions or bombings or wars—wherever I might come down on them. I would say that it's almost a religious obligation to attend to the memory of those people. My desire to abide with them makes me very, very suspicious of hope or progress. I want this practice of a kind of mourning or grief to chasten such hope.
There's a problem with that position. Some will point out to me that this will turn into its own kind of Manichean counter-movement, a kind of Nietzschean ressentiment. Or else that dwelling in mourning has a self-congratulatory quality to it. And there are certainly problems with this position at the level of popular or mass politics. We do see a lot of ressentiment in our politics. On the left, there's a lot of angry, self-aggrandizing moral superiority. And you can think about someone like Sarah Palin in the US as a kind of populist rejection of guilt and responsibility from the right.
But as social scientists, we might have space to be the voice for that kind of grief, to take it on and disseminate the ethics that follow from it; to give that grief a voice. That kind of relentless self-chastening is what I'm all about. I think it opens you up to new agendas and possibilities. I think it's a much deeper way to be 'policy relevant' than most of my colleagues understand this term. If we are relentlessly self-critical as scholars, and if we relentlessly resist the appropriation of scholarly narratives to simplistic moral or political ends and if we, as a society, help to build an intolerance of that and a sense of the mourning that comes out of that, we also open our society up to say things like, 'ok, well what's left?'
And then, well, maybe a lot of things are left, and some of them are not so bad. Maybe we start to imagine something better. That's where I'd rejoin Jackson and Weber; after that set of ethical/emotional/spiritual moves. I think, by the way, that Patrick mostly agrees with me; it's only a question of what his work emphasizes and what mine has emphasized. On this point, consider Ned Lebow's notion of tragedy. He and I disagree on some of the details of that notion. But on top of his remarkable erudition, he's a survivor of the Shoah. I suspect he has thought very deeply about grief and mourning, and in ways that might not be open to me.
The final question I want to pose to you is a substantive one: Your understanding of critique somehow does relate to sustaining progress, in a way. Perhaps on the one hand, you are not so optimistic as Weber was, but on the other hand, your work conveys the sense that it is possible to bridge the gap between concepts and things. I'm not sure if it's possible, but perhaps you can relate it to the substantive example of how your work relates to concrete political situations. I think the example of Israel-Palestine comes to mind best.
Again, I don't think I am as optimistic as that. In my heart of hearts, I desperately wish this to be the case. To think of the people who were most influential on my intellectual development—my cohort of fellow grad students at Johns Hopkins and our teachers, to whom as a group I owe, really, everything in intellectual terms—I was certainly in the minority view. Most of them were, I think, working in the Deleuzian vein of making 'theory worthy of the event.' I just don't believe that's possible; or anyway I think it's really, really, really hard, the work of a generation to tell that story well and have it percolate out into our discipline and our culture. In the meantime, we must muddle through. I hope I'm wrong and I hope they're right. I'm rooting for them, even as I try to give them a hard time—just as I give Keohane (Theory Talk #9) and Waltz and Wendt and everyone else I write about a hard time. But I'd be happy, very happy, to be wrong.
What I do think can be done is that you can sustain an awareness of the space between things-in-themselves and concepts, and by extension some sense of the fragility and the tenuousness of the things that you think and their links to the things that you do. Out of this emerges a kind of chastened political praxis.
You mentioned Israel and Palestine, which I care a great deal about and am trying to address more squarely in the work I'm doing now, partly on my own and partly in pieces I've worked on with my colleague Daniel Monk. What we observe is that though the diplomatic negotiations failed pretty badly twelve and a half years ago, we're still looking at the same people running the show: the same principal advisers and discussants and interlocutors: in the US and Israel and in the Palestinian Authority. The same concepts and assumptions too. Just a few days ago, Dennis Ross published a long op-ed about how we get the peace process back on track, and you might think that you're reading something from another time—as though the conflict were a technical challenge rather than a political one. You know that Prince song about 'partying like it's 1999'?
I don't know what a peaceful, enriching, meaningful Israeli-Jewish-Arab-Palestinian-Muslim-Christian collective co-existence or sharing of space or world looks like, but I know that this pseudo-politics ain't that. When I see something that's just a re-hashing, I can say, 'come on guys, that is not thinking, that's recycling the old stuff and swapping out dates, proper nouns and a few of the verbs.' Nor is it listening to other voices who might inspire us in different ways, or might help us rethink our interests, categories and beliefs. Lately, I've been listening to a band called System Ali, hip-hop guys from Jaffa's Ajami quarter, who sing in four languages. What they say matters less to me than the fact that they really seem to like another, they trust each other, they let each voice sing its song and use its words. They have something to teach me about listening, thinking, acting and feeling—because it's music after all—and that can produce its own political openings.
Of course, there are pressure groups, from industry and AIPAC to whatever else in the US, and those groups merit discussion and debate, but I'm also wary of the counter-assumption which follows from folks who talk about this too reductively: that there actually is an American interest, or a European or Arab or Israeli one, which somehow transcends partisan interest—one that can be recovered once the diaspora Jews, the oil moguls, the arms dealers or the Christian 'Left Behind' people are taken out of the picture. That feels like the same heady brew that Treitschke and Meinecke and the German realpolitik scholars poured and drank: that the national state has some transcendent purpose to which we gain access by rising above or tuning out the voices of the polity or its chattering classes. Only with a light liberal-internationalist gloss: Meinecke meets David Lake (Theory Talk # 46), Anne-Marie Slaughter or John Ikenberry.
I can also go meet starry-eyed idealists who want to hold hands and sing John Lennon, I can say to them yes, I want to hold your hand and sing John Lennon, but I am also enough of a social scientist to know that if a policy does not respond to real and pressing problems—water, land, borders etc.—that any approach that does not respond to those things will be hopelessly idealist. It will be what my granny called luftmentsch-nachess—the silly imaginings of men with their heads in the clouds, like the parable about Thales and the Thracian maiden. I am not interested in being either a luftmentsch nor a technocrat. So what does that leave with you with? You need to balance.
You can look at groups at the margins of political culture to see what they can tell you. In Israel and Palestine, it's groups like Ta'ayush, Breaking the Silence and Zochrot, and this settler leader who recently died, Rabbi Frohman, who was going out and meeting every Palestinian leader he could because for him, being a Jew in the land was not, in the first instance about his Israeli passport. There were and are possibilities for discussion that feel really pregnant and feel very different from the conversation we are sustaining now; which reveal its shallowness and its limitations and its pretentiousness. These other voices are of course not ideal either, they are going to have their own problems and limitations, their own descent into power and exclusion and so on, but they reveal some of the lie of what we're doing now.
I guess in the end, social scientists make a living imagining the future on the basis of the past. I also spend a lot of time reading novels and watching books and films. Partly because I am lazy and I like them. Partly because I'm looking for those novels and films to help me imagine other possibilities of being that aren't drawn from the past. Art, Dewey tells us in The Public and its Problems, is the real bearer of newness. Maybe then, I get to grab onto those things and say ok, what if we made those them responsive to an expansive materialist analysis of what an Israeli-Palestinian peace would need to survive? What if we held the luftmentsch's feet to the materialist/pragmatic fire, even as we held the wonk's feet to the luftmentsch's fire? Let them both squeal for a while. There's possibility there.
Daniel J. Levine is assistant professor at the University of Alabama. Among his recent publications (see below) stands out his book Recovering International Relations.
0 0 1 7019 40009 School of Global Studies/University of Gothenburg 333 93 46935 14.0
Faculty Profile at U-Alabama Read the first chapter of Levine's Recovering IR (2012) here (pdf) Read Barder and Levine's The World is Too Much (Millennium, 2012) here (pdf) Read Levine's Why Morgenthau was not a Critical Theorist (International Relations, 2013) here (pdf) Read Monk and Levine's The Resounding Silence here (pdf)
The issue of the journal opens with an article dedicated to the formation of metrology as government regulated activity in France. The article has discussed the historical process of development of metrological activity in France. It was revealed that the history of metrology is considered as an auxiliary historical and ethnographic discipline from a social and philosophical point of view as the evolution of scientific approaches to the definition of individual units of physical quantities and branches of metrology. However, in the scientific literature, the little attention is paid to the process of a development of a centralized institutional metrology system that is the organizational basis for ensuring the uniformity of measurements. The article by Irena Grebtsova and Maryna Kovalska is devoted to the of the development of the source criticism's knowledge in the Imperial Novorossiya University which was founded in the second half of the XIX century in Odesa. Grounding on a large complex of general scientific methods, and a historical method and source criticism, the authors identified the stages of the formation of source criticism in the process of teaching historical disciplines at the university, what they based on an analysis of the teaching activities of professors and associate professors of the Faculty of History and Philology. In the article, the development of the foundations of source criticism is considered as a complex process, which in Western European and Russian science was the result of the development of the theory and practice of everyday dialogue between scientists and historical sources. This process had a great influence on the advancement of a historical education in university, which was one of the important factors in the formation of source studies as a scientific discipline. The article by Tetiana Malovichko is devoted to the study of what changes the course of the probability theory has undergone from the end of the 19th century to our time based on the analysis of The Theory of Probabilities textbook by VasylP.Ermakov published in 1878. The paper contains a comparative analysis of The Probability Theory textbook and modern educational literature. The birth of children after infertility treatment of married couples with the help of assisted reproductive technologies has become a reality after many years of basic research on the physiology of reproductive system, development of oocyte's in vitro fertilization methods and cultivation of embryos at pre-implantation stages. Given the widespread use of assisted reproductive technologies in modern medical practice and the great interest of society to this problem, the aim of the study authors from the Institute for Problems of Cryobiology and Cryomedicine of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine was to trace the main stages and key events of assisted reproductive technologies in the world and in Ukraine, as well as to highlight the activities of outstanding scientists of domestic and world science who were at the origins of the development of this area. As a result of the work, it has been shown that despite certain ethical and social biases, the discovery of individual predecessor scientists became the basis for the efforts of Robert Edwards and Patrick Steptoe to ensure birth of the world's first child, whose conception occurred outside the mother's body. There are also historical facts and unique photos from our own archive, which confirm the fact of the first successful oocyte in vitro fertilization and the birth of a child after the use of assisted reproductive technologies in Ukraine. In the next article, the authors tried to consider and structure the stages of development and creation of the "Yermak", the world's first Arctic icebreaker, and analyzed the stages of preparation and the results of its first expeditions to explore the Arctic. Systematic analysis of historical sources and biographical material allowed to separate and comprehensively consider the conditions and prehistory for the development and creation of "Yermak" icebreaker. Also, the authors gave an assessment to the role of Vice Admiral Stepan Osypovych Makarov in those events, and analyzed the role of Sergei Yulyevich Witte, Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev and Pyotr Petrovich Semenov-Tian-Shansky in the preparation and implementation of the first Arctic expeditions of the "Yermak"icebreaker. The authors of the following article considered the historical aspects of construction and operation of train ferry routes. The article deals with the analysis and systematization of the data on the historical development of train ferry routes and describes the background for the construction of train ferry routes and their advantages over other combined transport types. It also deals with the basic features of the train ferries operating on the main international train ferry routes. The study is concerned with both sea routes and routes across rivers and lakes. The article shows the role of train ferry routes in the improvement of a national economy, and in the provision of the military defense. An analysis of numerous artefacts of the first third of the 20th century suggests that the production of many varieties of art-and-industrial ceramics developed in Halychyna, in particular architectural ceramic plastics, a variety of functional ceramics, decorative tiles, ceramic tiles, facing tiles, etc. The artistic features of Halychyna art ceramics, the richness of methods for decorating and shaping it, stylistic features, as well as numerous art societies, scientific and professional associations, groups, plants and factories specializing in the production of ceramics reflect the general development of this industry in the first half of the century and represent the prerequisites the emergence of the school of professional ceramics in Halychyna at the beginning of the 20th century. The purpose of the next paper is to analyze the formation and development of scientific and professional schools of art-and-industrial ceramics of Halychyna in the late 19th – early 20th centuries. During the environmental crisis, electric transport (e-transport) is becoming a matter for scientific inquiry, a subject of discussion in politics and among public figures. In the program for developing the municipal services of Ukraine, priorities are given to the development of the infrastructure of ecological transport: trolleybuses, electric buses, electric cars. The increased attention to e-transport on the part of the scientific community, politicians, and the public actualizes the study of its history, development, features of operation, etc. The aim of the next study is to highlight little-known facts of the history of production and operation of MAN trolleybuses in Ukrainian cities, as well as to introduce their technical characteristics into scientific circulation. The types, specific design solutions of the first MAN trolleybus generation and the prerequisites for their appearance in Chernivtsi have been determined. Particular attention has been paid to trolleybuses that were in operation in Germany and other Western European countries from the first half of the 1930s to the early 1950s. The paper traces the stages of operation of the MAN trolleybuses in Chernivtsi, where they worked during 1939–1944 and after the end of the Second World War, they were transferred to Kyiv. After two years of operation in the Ukrainian capital, the trolleybuses entered the routes in Dnipropetrovsk during 1947–1951. The purpose of the article by authors from the State University of Infrastructure and Technologies of Ukraine is to thoroughly analyze unpaved roads of the late 18th – early 19th century, as well as the project of the first wooden trackway as the forerunner of the Bukovyna railways. To achieve this purpose, the authors first reviewed how railways were constructed in the Austrian Empire during 1830s – 1850s. Then, in contrast with the first railway networks that emerged and developed in the Austrian Empire, the authors made an analysis of the condition and characteristics of unpaved roads in Bukovyna. In addition, the authors considered the first attempt to create a wooden trackway as a prototype and predecessor of the Bukovyna railway. ; The issue of the journal opens with an article dedicated to the formation of metrology as government regulated activity in France. The article has discussed the historical process of development of metrological activity in France. It was revealed that the history of metrology is considered as an auxiliary historical and ethnographic discipline from a social and philosophical point of view as the evolution of scientific approaches to the definition of individual units of physical quantities and branches of metrology. However, in the scientific literature, the little attention is paid to the process of a development of a centralized institutional metrology system that is the organizational basis for ensuring the uniformity of measurements. The article by Irena Grebtsova and Maryna Kovalska is devoted to the of the development of the source criticism's knowledge in the Imperial Novorossiya University which was founded in the second half of the XIX century in Odesa. Grounding on a large complex of general scientific methods, and a historical method and source criticism, the authors identified the stages of the formation of source criticism in the process of teaching historical disciplines at the university, what they based on an analysis of the teaching activities of professors and associate professors of the Faculty of History and Philology. In the article, the development of the foundations of source criticism is considered as a complex process, which in Western European and Russian science was the result of the development of the theory and practice of everyday dialogue between scientists and historical sources. This process had a great influence on the advancement of a historical education in university, which was one of the important factors in the formation of source studies as a scientific discipline. The article by Tetiana Malovichko is devoted to the study of what changes the course of the probability theory has undergone from the end of the 19th century to our time based on the analysis of The Theory of Probabilities textbook by VasylP.Ermakov published in 1878. The paper contains a comparative analysis of The Probability Theory textbook and modern educational literature. The birth of children after infertility treatment of married couples with the help of assisted reproductive technologies has become a reality after many years of basic research on the physiology of reproductive system, development of oocyte's in vitro fertilization methods and cultivation of embryos at pre-implantation stages. Given the widespread use of assisted reproductive technologies in modern medical practice and the great interest of society to this problem, the aim of the study authors from the Institute for Problems of Cryobiology and Cryomedicine of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine was to trace the main stages and key events of assisted reproductive technologies in the world and in Ukraine, as well as to highlight the activities of outstanding scientists of domestic and world science who were at the origins of the development of this area. As a result of the work, it has been shown that despite certain ethical and social biases, the discovery of individual predecessor scientists became the basis for the efforts of Robert Edwards and Patrick Steptoe to ensure birth of the world's first child, whose conception occurred outside the mother's body. There are also historical facts and unique photos from our own archive, which confirm the fact of the first successful oocyte in vitro fertilization and the birth of a child after the use of assisted reproductive technologies in Ukraine. In the next article, the authors tried to consider and structure the stages of development and creation of the "Yermak", the world's first Arctic icebreaker, and analyzed the stages of preparation and the results of its first expeditions to explore the Arctic. Systematic analysis of historical sources and biographical material allowed to separate and comprehensively consider the conditions and prehistory for the development and creation of "Yermak" icebreaker. Also, the authors gave an assessment to the role of Vice Admiral Stepan Osypovych Makarov in those events, and analyzed the role of Sergei Yulyevich Witte, Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev and Pyotr Petrovich Semenov-Tian-Shansky in the preparation and implementation of the first Arctic expeditions of the "Yermak"icebreaker. The authors of the following article considered the historical aspects of construction and operation of train ferry routes. The article deals with the analysis and systematization of the data on the historical development of train ferry routes and describes the background for the construction of train ferry routes and their advantages over other combined transport types. It also deals with the basic features of the train ferries operating on the main international train ferry routes. The study is concerned with both sea routes and routes across rivers and lakes. The article shows the role of train ferry routes in the improvement of a national economy, and in the provision of the military defense. An analysis of numerous artefacts of the first third of the 20th century suggests that the production of many varieties of art-and-industrial ceramics developed in Halychyna, in particular architectural ceramic plastics, a variety of functional ceramics, decorative tiles, ceramic tiles, facing tiles, etc. The artistic features of Halychyna art ceramics, the richness of methods for decorating and shaping it, stylistic features, as well as numerous art societies, scientific and professional associations, groups, plants and factories specializing in the production of ceramics reflect the general development of this industry in the first half of the century and represent the prerequisites the emergence of the school of professional ceramics in Halychyna at the beginning of the 20th century. The purpose of the next paper is to analyze the formation and development of scientific and professional schools of art-and-industrial ceramics of Halychyna in the late 19th – early 20th centuries. During the environmental crisis, electric transport (e-transport) is becoming a matter for scientific inquiry, a subject of discussion in politics and among public figures. In the program for developing the municipal services of Ukraine, priorities are given to the development of the infrastructure of ecological transport: trolleybuses, electric buses, electric cars. The increased attention to e-transport on the part of the scientific community, politicians, and the public actualizes the study of its history, development, features of operation, etc. The aim of the next study is to highlight little-known facts of the history of production and operation of MAN trolleybuses in Ukrainian cities, as well as to introduce their technical characteristics into scientific circulation. The types, specific design solutions of the first MAN trolleybus generation and the prerequisites for their appearance in Chernivtsi have been determined. Particular attention has been paid to trolleybuses that were in operation in Germany and other Western European countries from the first half of the 1930s to the early 1950s. The paper traces the stages of operation of the MAN trolleybuses in Chernivtsi, where they worked during 1939–1944 and after the end of the Second World War, they were transferred to Kyiv. After two years of operation in the Ukrainian capital, the trolleybuses entered the routes in Dnipropetrovsk during 1947–1951. The purpose of the article by authors from the State University of Infrastructure and Technologies of Ukraine is to thoroughly analyze unpaved roads of the late 18th – early 19th century, as well as the project of the first wooden trackway as the forerunner of the Bukovyna railways. To achieve this purpose, the authors first reviewed how railways were constructed in the Austrian Empire during 1830s – 1850s. Then, in contrast with the first railway networks that emerged and developed in the Austrian Empire, the authors made an analysis of the condition and characteristics of unpaved roads in Bukovyna. In addition, the authors considered the first attempt to create a wooden trackway as a prototype and predecessor of the Bukovyna railway. ; The issue of the journal opens with an article dedicated to the formation of metrology as government regulated activity in France. The article has discussed the historical process of development of metrological activity in France. It was revealed that the history of metrology is considered as an auxiliary historical and ethnographic discipline from a social and philosophical point of view as the evolution of scientific approaches to the definition of individual units of physical quantities and branches of metrology. However, in the scientific literature, the little attention is paid to the process of a development of a centralized institutional metrology system that is the organizational basis for ensuring the uniformity of measurements. The article by Irena Grebtsova and Maryna Kovalska is devoted to the of the development of the source criticism's knowledge in the Imperial Novorossiya University which was founded in the second half of the XIX century in Odesa. Grounding on a large complex of general scientific methods, and a historical method and source criticism, the authors identified the stages of the formation of source criticism in the process of teaching historical disciplines at the university, what they based on an analysis of the teaching activities of professors and associate professors of the Faculty of History and Philology. In the article, the development of the foundations of source criticism is considered as a complex process, which in Western European and Russian science was the result of the development of the theory and practice of everyday dialogue between scientists and historical sources. This process had a great influence on the advancement of a historical education in university, which was one of the important factors in the formation of source studies as a scientific discipline. The article by Tetiana Malovichko is devoted to the study of what changes the course of the probability theory has undergone from the end of the 19th century to our time based on the analysis of The Theory of Probabilities textbook by VasylP.Ermakov published in 1878. The paper contains a comparative analysis of The Probability Theory textbook and modern educational literature. The birth of children after infertility treatment of married couples with the help of assisted reproductive technologies has become a reality after many years of basic research on the physiology of reproductive system, development of oocyte's in vitro fertilization methods and cultivation of embryos at pre-implantation stages. Given the widespread use of assisted reproductive technologies in modern medical practice and the great interest of society to this problem, the aim of the study authors from the Institute for Problems of Cryobiology and Cryomedicine of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine was to trace the main stages and key events of assisted reproductive technologies in the world and in Ukraine, as well as to highlight the activities of outstanding scientists of domestic and world science who were at the origins of the development of this area. As a result of the work, it has been shown that despite certain ethical and social biases, the discovery of individual predecessor scientists became the basis for the efforts of Robert Edwards and Patrick Steptoe to ensure birth of the world's first child, whose conception occurred outside the mother's body. There are also historical facts and unique photos from our own archive, which confirm the fact of the first successful oocyte in vitro fertilization and the birth of a child after the use of assisted reproductive technologies in Ukraine. In the next article, the authors tried to consider and structure the stages of development and creation of the "Yermak", the world's first Arctic icebreaker, and analyzed the stages of preparation and the results of its first expeditions to explore the Arctic. Systematic analysis of historical sources and biographical material allowed to separate and comprehensively consider the conditions and prehistory for the development and creation of "Yermak" icebreaker. Also, the authors gave an assessment to the role of Vice Admiral Stepan Osypovych Makarov in those events, and analyzed the role of Sergei Yulyevich Witte, Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev and Pyotr Petrovich Semenov-Tian-Shansky in the preparation and implementation of the first Arctic expeditions of the "Yermak"icebreaker. The authors of the following article considered the historical aspects of construction and operation of train ferry routes. The article deals with the analysis and systematization of the data on the historical development of train ferry routes and describes the background for the construction of train ferry routes and their advantages over other combined transport types. It also deals with the basic features of the train ferries operating on the main international train ferry routes. The study is concerned with both sea routes and routes across rivers and lakes. The article shows the role of train ferry routes in the improvement of a national economy, and in the provision of the military defense. An analysis of numerous artefacts of the first third of the 20th century suggests that the production of many varieties of art-and-industrial ceramics developed in Halychyna, in particular architectural ceramic plastics, a variety of functional ceramics, decorative tiles, ceramic tiles, facing tiles, etc. The artistic features of Halychyna art ceramics, the richness of methods for decorating and shaping it, stylistic features, as well as numerous art societies, scientific and professional associations, groups, plants and factories specializing in the production of ceramics reflect the general development of this industry in the first half of the century and represent the prerequisites the emergence of the school of professional ceramics in Halychyna at the beginning of the 20th century. The purpose of the next paper is to analyze the formation and development of scientific and professional schools of art-and-industrial ceramics of Halychyna in the late 19th – early 20th centuries. During the environmental crisis, electric transport (e-transport) is becoming a matter for scientific inquiry, a subject of discussion in politics and among public figures. In the program for developing the municipal services of Ukraine, priorities are given to the development of the infrastructure of ecological transport: trolleybuses, electric buses, electric cars. The increased attention to e-transport on the part of the scientific community, politicians, and the public actualizes the study of its history, development, features of operation, etc. The aim of the next study is to highlight little-known facts of the history of production and operation of MAN trolleybuses in Ukrainian cities, as well as to introduce their technical characteristics into scientific circulation. The types, specific design solutions of the first MAN trolleybus generation and the prerequisites for their appearance in Chernivtsi have been determined. Particular attention has been paid to trolleybuses that were in operation in Germany and other Western European countries from the first half of the 1930s to the early 1950s. The paper traces the stages of operation of the MAN trolleybuses in Chernivtsi, where they worked during 1939–1944 and after the end of the Second World War, they were transferred to Kyiv. After two years of operation in the Ukrainian capital, the trolleybuses entered the routes in Dnipropetrovsk during 1947–1951. The purpose of the article by authors from the State University of Infrastructure and Technologies of Ukraine is to thoroughly analyze unpaved roads of the late 18th – early 19th century, as well as the project of the first wooden trackway as the forerunner of the Bukovyna railways. To achieve this purpose, the authors first reviewed how railways were constructed in the Austrian Empire during 1830s – 1850s. Then, in contrast with the first railway networks that emerged and developed in the Austrian Empire, the authors made an analysis of the condition and characteristics of unpaved roads in Bukovyna. In addition, the authors considered the first attempt to create a wooden trackway as a prototype and predecessor of the Bukovyna railway.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Blogbetreiber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie einen Blog Beitrag zitieren möchten.
The existing trajectory of U.S. policy risks sacrificing Western Europe for the sake of Ukraine, and U.S. policymakers need to wake up to this risk. If this were to happen, it would be one of the worst bargains in the entire history of U.S. strategy. Western and Central Europe, and not Ukraine, are and have been for more than a century the area of truly vital U.S. interests on the European continent. Moreover, the crippling of Western Europe and the European Union would destroy Ukraine's own real chances of future democratic prosperity and stability; for these depend chiefly on links to the E.U., not the United States. All the evidence at present suggests that the Ukrainian counter-offensive has failed, with only very small gains and enormous losses. Nor is there any evidence-based reason to hope for greater Ukrainian success next year, given the balance of military and economic forces between Ukraine and Russia. Faced with this reality, there is increasing official and unofficial talk of arming and supporting Ukraine for an indefinite struggle (though of course this cannot in fact be guaranteed given the opposition of one faction of the Republican Party). An analogy has been made to the case of Israel, which developed as a prosperous and secure quasi-democracy while remaining in a state of frozen conflict and unresolved territorial disputes with its neighbors.Quite apart from the dreadful events of recent days, there are many reasons why this idea is profoundly foolish. They include the fact that if Syria were Russia, Israel would not be Israel. In other words, if Israel had bordered not on a shambolic and impoverished country with a fraction of its GDP and technological capacity, but a nuclear armed power with fourteen times its GDP, Israel would most certainly not have developed as a successful and prosperous democracy. There is no way that the U.S. can secure Ukraine permanently in an open-ended war with Russia.Perhaps most important of all however is the way in which this vision totally ignores the effects on Europe, and U.S. interests in Europe. This would not matter much if European countries were economically successful and politically stable, but this is rapidly ceasing to be the case.In the old heartland of the EU, liberal democratic politics are crumbling. Italy is ruled by a radical conservative government. Opinion polls in France suggest that if elections were held today, Marine Le Pen would win by a wide margin. In Sweden — almost unbelievably for someone who lived through the long dull summer of Abbaesque Swedish social democracy — the army is being called on for help in combating violence by immigrant drug gangs, and the radical nationalist Sweden Democrats are the second largest party. Above all, there is Germany, without which no stable and successful European Union is possible. As German historian Tarik Cyrul Amar has written: "Germany's perfect adherence to Western policy on Russia and China has an ominous price…We have assumed that the first country to buckle under the economic strain of the war over Ukraine would be Russia. But what if it is Germany that stumbles first? Germans stressed about their economy, distrusting their elites as favoring foreign interests, and disenchanted with centrist values and methods— a picture too familiar for comfort." The state elections in Bavaria and Hesse this month showed a surge in support for the right-wing nationalist Alternative fuer Deutschland (AfD) and Freie Waehler (Free Voter) parties. According to opinion polls, AfD now has the second largest support nationwide, behind the Christian Democrats but pushing the Social Democrats into third place, and far ahead of the Greens and the Liberals.Up to now, all the traditional mainstream parties have been united in their refusal to form coalitions with the AfD. If continued, the rise in the party's support will however make this approach increasingly unworkable. Either the CDU will have to form governing coalitions with the AfD (as the CDU's sister party, the Christian Social Union, has already done with the Freie Waehler in Bavaria), or all the mainstream parties will have to form permanent coalitions to keep them out of office.The latter course would recall the last years of the Weimar Republic, and would almost certainly strengthen the radical parties still further, since critics of government policies would have nowhere else to go. The most radical proposal is to dub AfD a neo-Nazi party and ban it, but this would lead to massive protests and drive its supporters towards violence. Whatever happens, Germany seems set for a prolonged period of deep political instability and polarization.The original roots of support for AfD and similar parties in Europe lie in fear of mass migration and hostility to the centralizing (and sometimes dictatorial) tendencies of the European Union. Their support has however been greatly increased by the deepening economic recession into which Germany has been plunged by the rise in energy prices consequent on the war in Ukraine. German economic success in recent decades was largely built on cheap, plentiful and reliable Russian gas.This factor helped mask worsening structural defects in the German economy, which the present crisis is exposing. Coupled with the end of the Chinese boom and U.S.-driven economic warfare against China, the result is that there is now serious talk in Germany of "de-industrialization." Should this in fact occur, the political, social, cultural and psychological results could be catastrophic; for the rebuilding of the German national identity after 1945 took place largely on the basis of the "economic miracle," and the belief that this reflected a superior German model of cooperation between capital and labor, and a strong industry-based middle class (the so called Mittelstand). If belief in these collapses, we could be looking at something akin to a national nervous breakdown.An unending semi-frozen war in Ukraine would drastically worsen Germany's — and Europe's – economic decline and consequent political disorder. Especially if coupled with repeated crises in the Middle East, it would make the restoration of stability in energy prices impossible. Such a conflict would inevitably break out periodically into major battles, possibly leading to new Russian victories. There would be the perpetual risk that an unintended collision between Russia and NATO could escalate towards nuclear war. It should not be hard to imagine what this would do to business confidence in Europe.There is a tendency now for Americans to congratulate themselves on the submission of Europe to American strategy as a result of the war in Ukraine. This underestimates the threat to Europe and of U.S. interests there. The threat, as described, is overwhelmingly an internal one, resulting from a deadly cocktail of economic stagnation, uncontrolled migration, and political extremism, worsened by the war in Ukraine. If present patterns continue, the result will be to cripple Europe both economically and politically.Economic prosperity and liberal democracy in Europe form a key pillar of America's own power in the world and therefore a vital U.S. national interest. Without them, America's own economic power will be gravely weakened, and the prestige of democracy in the world shattered. There will be little point in the U.S. presenting itself as the leader of democracy in Asia if it has collapsed in Europe.Moreover, the United States waged two world wars and a Cold War in Europe to prevent the great economies of Western Europe from falling under the control of a hostile great power. Until a decade or so ago, no American ever dreamed of seeing Ukraine in this way. If therefore the U.S. analysis is that Ukraine cannot win, for the sake of Europe and U.S. vital interests there, Washington should lend all its efforts to bring about an early peace.Sophia Ampgkarian contributed to the research for this article.
Σε όλες τις εποχές ο άνθρωπος ενδιαφέρθηκε για τη θεραπεία των ασθενειών με κάθε δυνατό τρόπο. Στον Ελληνικό κόσμο, που θεωρείται πνευματικός πρόγονος της νεότερης Ευρώπης, κατά τον 6 ° και 5 ° αι. π.Χ. υπήρχαν γενικά δυο διακριτές παραδόσεις: η μια είχε καθαρά ιερουργική καταγωγή και ασκειτο από μια συντεχνία θεραπευτών-ιερέων, που ονομάζονταν Ασκληπιάδες. Η δεύτερη, η Βακχική θεραπευτική, προέρχεται από αυτόχθονους πληθυσμούς του ανατολικού Αιγαίου περίπουτη 2η χιλιετηρίδα π.Χ. Κατ' αυτήν, οι ασθενείς επεδείκνυαν την «ιερή μανία», δηλαδή με χορό, μουσική ή και σωματική καταπόνηση έμπαιναν σε μια άλλη διευρυμένη διάσταση συνείδησης απ' όπου, όταν έβγαιναν, επεδείκνυαν μια «ειρήνευση» και νέαταυτότητα πάλι με βάση την ηθικοπλαστική αντίληψη. Η πρώτη απεμπλοκή από ιερουργίες πραγματοποιείται (στην αρχαία Ελλάδα) από τον Ιπποκράτη (460-370 π.Χ.). Γίνεται η πρώτη τομή προς την επιστημονική ιατρική που έχει ως βάση την κοσμική συντεχνία θεραπευτών. Ο Ιπποκράτης πίστευε στην «αυτο-θεραπευτική δύναμη της φΰσης» που έπρεπε να λαμβάνεται υπ'όψιν, καθώς η ιατρική απορρέει από τη διαταραχή της ισορροπίας ανθρώπου- περιβάλλοντος. Μετά τον Ιπποκράτη παρουσιάζεται ένα κενό 7 περίπου αιώνων (μέχρι τον 3° αι. μ.Χ.) όπου, όμως, μεσολαβούν σημαντικές εξελίξεις που καθορίζουν και τη μετέπειτα πορεία της ιατρικής: 1. Τον 1 ° αι. μ.Χ. ο Διοσκουρίδης στην Αλεξάνδρεια και τον 2° αι. μ.Χ. ο Ασκληπιάδης και ο μεγάλος θεραπευτής και χειρουργός Γαληνός από την Πέργαμο (130-201 μ.Χ.) μετέφεραν την «απόλυτη ιατρική ορθοδοξία» στη Ρώμη, όπου παρέμεινε δόγμα μέχρι τον 16° αι. αιώνα. Αυτή συμπίπτει και με την Αραβική ιατρική και γενικότερα και με τη σύγχρονη ευρωπαϊκή ιατρική. Οι αντιλήψεις του Ιπποκράτη και του Γαληνού έχουν, όμως, και πολλά κοινά στοιχεία με την ανάπτυξη της ιατρικής στην Κίνα και την Ινδία. 2. Αραβες φιλόσοφοι και ιατροί (1038μ.Χ.) ανασυνδέουν την πολιτική και την ιατρική με βασική έννοια την υγιή κοινωνία. 3. Με την επίδραση του Χριστιανισμού στο Μεσαίωνα απαξιώνεται η αξία του σώματος και απαγορεύονται παντελώς η χειρουργική και η ανατομία. Το 1130 μ.Χ. απαγορεύεται η άσκηση από μονάχους της ιατρικής και αυτή αποδίδεται μόνο στον «κοσμικό κλήρο» απ' όπου τελικά πηγάζουν και οι πρώτες σχολές (10-12 μ.Χ. αιώνες) και το σύγχρονο Πανεπιστήμιο (Paris, Oxford, Bologna, Montpellier). Με την Αναγέννηση αρχίζει και η αμφισβήτηση της θεωρίας του Γαληνού. Το αρχέτυπο, όμως, του αναγεννησιακού γιατρού ήταν αναμφίβολα ο Παράκελσος. Ο Παράκελσος επαναφέρει τους συσχετισμούς και την ηθική συμπεριφορά σε σχέση με τα ιατρικά συμπτώματα και η όλη προσέγγιση του ήταν «οικοσυστηματική» ή «ψυχοσωματική». Οι θεραπευτικές αντιλήψεις και πρακτικές του αρχαίου, μεσαιωνικού και ανατολικού κόσμου είναι πολλές και ετερόκλητες και χωρίς να αποτελούν ταυτόσημο φιλοσοφικό μοντέλο, όμως, έχουν τα εξής κοινά σημεία, τα οποία τελικά άλλαξε η «επιστημονική ιατρική» που γεννήθηκε μετά την καρτεσιανή ρήξη: α) αντιστοιχία σώματος και ψυχής β) αλληλεπίδραση οργανισμού και περιβάλλοντος γ) αμοιβαιότητα και ισότητα μεταξύ ασθενούς και θεραπευτή. Οι σημαντικές εξελίξεις μεταξύ 17-18ου αιώνα (ανακάλυψη του μικροσκοπίου, ανάπτυξη των εργαστηρίων και των κλινικών) θα δώσουν τεράστια ώθηση προς την επιστημονική ιατρική που θα επιτρέψει να δοθεί μεγαλύτερη έμφαση στον ασθενή ως άτομο ολοκληρωμένο χάριν της διάγνωσηςκαι του χειρισμού «νόσων και συνδρόμων». Μια ακόμη αναταραχή της ιατρικής επέρχεται με την ανάδυση της βιολογίας ως διακριτής επιστήμης, η οποία επέφερε και την αναζωπύρωση των γνωστών βιταλιστικών αντιλήψεων που τον 18° αιώνα δεν παύουν τελείως να υπάρχουν (G. Stahl, - anima, S. Hahneman- ομοιοπαθητική). Όμως, λόγω της θετικιστικής κατεύθυνσης που έδωσε ο μέγας φυσιολόγος του 19ου αιώνα, ο C. Bernard (1813-1878) - που επέβαλε την ποσοτικοποίηση κατά το πρότυπο των θετικώνεπιστημών και στην ιατρική - και τελεσίδικα επισφράγισε ο L. Pasteur (1822-1895) με την ανακάλυψη του ρόλου των βακτηρίων,τόνωσε πάλι την επιστημονική αυτοπεποίθηση της ιατρικής. Στον 20° αιώνα, η ιατρική αποκτά επιπλέον και εξουσίες καιεμπλέκεται κοινωνικά και μέσω της διογκούμενης φαρμακοβιομηχανίας. Όμως, παρ' όλα αυτά, αδυνατεί ακόμη να ανακουφίσειικανοποιητικά τις ψυχικές διαταραχές, ενώ η εξειδίκευση διευρύνε το φάσμα των ιατρικών εφαρμογών (μοριακή βιολογία, νευροχημεία, γενετική, κατανόηση ανοσοποιητικού -νευρικού -ενδοκρινολογικού μηχανισμού), που όμως, εντάσσονται στο ίδιο μηχανιστικό μοντέλο. Η νοσηρή απόκλιση του μοντέλου αυτοΰ έτεινε προς την εμπλοκή ιατρικής-πολιτικής σε ένα πρόγραμμα πουη πειραματική του εφαρμογή επιτεύχθηκε στα ναζιστικά στρατόπεδα. Όμως, και πάλι, τρία διαδοχικά κύματα υπονόμευσαν τηνιατρική ορθοδοξία σε όλον τον 20° αιώνα: Ο S. Freud (1856-1939) και η ψυχανάλυση, η φαινομενολογική (υπαρξιακή) ιατρική του E. Husserl (1859-1938) και οι σύγχρονες εναλλακτικές θεραπείες (ομοιοπαθητική, βελονισμός). ; At all times, man was interested in the therapy of diseases in any possible way. In the Hellenic world, that is generally regarded as the spiritual predecessor of recent Europe, two distinct traditions existed: the first had a true sacred origin and was practiced from a corporation or guild of healers/priests named zsAsklipiades. Asklipios, son of Apollo, was considered by them as their generic leader. The second, practiced by Vakhes, comes from indigenous populations of Eastern Aegean area approx. at 2000 B.C. During its practice patients went into a sacred mania ie., with dancing, music, or body exertion went into an extended consciousness from which, when they recovered, they showed a peaceful state and a new identity again due to moral comprehension. The first liberation from sacred ceremonies occurs in ancient Greece from Hippocrates and thus the first step towards scientific medicine occurs and it is practiced by cosmic healers. To Hippokrates we owe the meaning of "method" for the observation and development of the disease and its symptoms (there is a distinction between them). He believed in "the self healing capability of nature" that had to be taken into account, because medicine comes from the disruption of the balance between man and environment. After Hippocrates there is a gap of approx. 7 eons (till 3rd century D.C.) during which period important developments occur that will determine later the path of medicine: 1. During the 1st century B.C., Dioscouridis from Alexandria and in the 2ndcentury D.C. Asklipiadis and the great healer and surgeon from Pergamos, Galinos, transplanted the "absolute medical orthodoxy" in Rome where it remained as a dogma until the 16th century D.C. This is similar to Arab and recent European medicine. Hippocrates and Galinos beliefs have a lot in common with the growth of medicine in China and India. 2.Arab philosophers and healers reconnect medicine with politics and their base is the healthy society. 3. In Christianity, in the Middle Ages, the human body is discarded as not * worthy and surgery and anatomy are prohibited. In 1130 D.C. the practice of medicine by monks isprohibited and this is passed on to "cosmic clergy" from where the first schools of medicine and recent Universities originate (Paris, Oxford, Bologna, Montpellier). With Renaissance starts the questioning of the Galino's theory. The main archetype of the healer of this period was undoubtedly Paracelsus. He brings back the correlations of symptoms and moral attitude and his whole comprehension was "ecosystematic" and "psychosomatic". The healing ideas and practices of the Middle Ages and Eastern world are various and come from different origins without being an identical philosophical model, but they have the following similar points changed eventually by the "scientific medicine" born after the Cartesian debate: a) there is a bond between body and psyche, b) there is a bond of interaction between the human body and the environment, c) there is a mutual bond of equality and trust between the patient and the healer. The important developments between the 17th - 18th centuries (discovery of the microscope, growth of laboratories and clinics) will give a tremendous push to this scientific medicine and will allow to discard the patient as a whole person for the favour of the diagnosis and the manipulation of "diseases and syndromes". Another disruption from this course of scientific medicine occurs with the emergence of biology as a distinct science, which brought the uprising of the usual vitalistic beliefs that during in the 18th century did not totally stop to exist (G. Stahl-anima, S. Hahneman- homeopathy). However, due to the positivistic direction that the great physiologist of the 19th century, C. Bernard (who established in medicine the quantification according to the prototype of positive Sciences) and finally L. Pasteur established with the discovery of the bacterial role, strengthened again the self confidence of the classical/ scientific medicine. In 20th century, medicine gains also powers and is connected socially also with the growing pharmaceutical, but still is unable to heal satisfactory the mental / psychological illnesses; meantime, the recent specialization opened up a new horizon of medical applications (molecular biology, neurochemistry, clear understanding of the immunological-nervous-endocrinological mechanism) that are, however, part of the same mechanical model. The malpractice of this model involved attachment of medicine and politics in a programme that experimentally was performed in the Nazis camps. Again, three subsequent currents of developments questioned the medical orthodox theory during most of 20th century: S. Freud and psychoanalysis, the phenomenological medicine of E. Husserl and modern alternative medicines (homeopathy, acupuncture).
The article deals with the comparative analysis of philosophic and aesthetic positions of H. Cohen and early M. M. Bakhtin. It considers in detail the place of configuration of concepts of completion and aesthetic love (borrowed by Bakhtin from Gohen's aesthetics) in the aesthetics of each thinker. It shows the radical rethinking of the meaning and contents of these notions and reaccentuating their place in Bakhtin's aesthetics particularly on connection with the question of relation between art and religion where thinkers take opposed positions, and also in connection with general Bakhtin's philosophic provisions, treating being as interaction between two consciousnesses. It is concluded that this rethinking conditioned by Bakhtin's surmounting of transcendental approach in philosophy and going over from philosophy of consciousness to philosophy of being, and in aesthetics – from aesthetics of consciousnesses to aesthetics of event. ; В статье проводится сравнительный анализ философских и эстетических по-зиций Г. Когена и раннего М. М. Бахтина. Подробно рассматривается место конфигурации понятий завершения и эстетической любви (заимствованной Бах-тиным из эстетики Когена) в эстетике каждого из мыслителей. Показано ради-кальное переосмысление содержания этих понятий и их места в эстетике Бах-тиным, в частности, в связи с вопросом об отношении между религией и искус-ством, в котором мыслители занимали противоположные позиции, а также в связи с общими философскими положениями Бахтина, пониманием бытия как взаимодействия между двумя сознаниями. Показано, что это переосмысление обусловлено преодолением Бахтиным трансцендентального подхода в философии и, соответственно, с переходом от философии сознания к философии бытия, а в эстетике – от эстетики сознания к эстетике события.СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫБахтин (2003): Бахтин, М. М. Собрание сочинений: В 7-ми тт.; Т. 1: Философская эстетика 1920-х годов. Москва: Русские словари; Языки славянской культуры, 2003, 960 с.Бонецкая (1994): Бонецкая, Н.К. «М. Бахтин в 1920-е годы». В: Диалог. Карнавал. Хроно-топ, 1994, № 1, С. 16–62.Етимологічний словник (2003): Етимологічний словник української мови: У 7 тт.; Т. 4: Н–П. Київ: Наукова думка, 2003, 656 с.Исупов (1990): Исупов, К. Г. «О философской антропологии М.М. Бахтина». В: Бахтинский сборник, Вып. I: Сб. ст. Москва: Прометей, 1990, С. 30–46.Исупов (2010): Исупов, К. Г. Судьбы классического наследия и философско-эстетическая культура Серебряного века. Санкт-Петербург: Русская христианская гуманитарная академия, 2010, 592 с.Каган (1991): Каган, М.С. «Идея диалога в философско-эстетической концепции М. Бахтина: закономерности формирования, духовный контекст и социокультурный смисл». В: М.М. Бахтин и философская культура ХХ века (Проблемы бахтинологии), Вып. 1, Часть 1. Санкт-Петербург: Образование, 1991, С. 17–31.Каган (2010): Каган, Ю.М. Люди не нашего времени. Михаил Михайлович Бахтин. Москва: РОССПЭН, 2010, С. 34–46.Пул (1997): Пул, Б. «Роль М.И. Кагана в философии М.М. Бахтина (от Германа Когена к Максу Шелеру)». В: Бахтинский сборник. Выпуск 3. Отв. ред. В.Л. Махлин. Москва: Лабиринт, 1997, С. 162–181.Пуль (1995): Пуль, Б. «"Назад к Кагану"». В: Диалог. Карнавал. Хронотоп, 1995, № 1(10), С. 38–48.Словник (1974): Словник української мови, т. 5: Н–О. Київ: Наукова думка, 1974, 840 с.Сокулер (2008): Сокулер, З.А. Герман Коген и философия диалога. Москва: Прогресс-Традиция, 2008, 312 с.Столович (1989): Столович, Л.Н. «М.М. Бахтин и проблема ценности». В: Эстетика М.М. Бахтина и современность. Саранск: Изд. Морд. ГУ, 1989, С. 25–27.Фохт (2003): Фохт, Б.А. Избранное (из философского наследия). Москва: Прогресс-Традиция, 2003, 456 с.Фридман (1992): Фридман, И.Н. «Незавершенная судьба естетики завершения». В: М.М. Бахтин как философ. Москва: Наука, 1992, С. 51–67.Яковенко (1910): Яковенко, Б. «О теоретической философии Германа Когена». B: Логос. Книга первая. Москва: Мусагет, 1910, С. 199–249.Brandist (2002): Brandist, C. The Bakhtin Circle: Philosophy, Culture and Politics. London: Pluto Press, 2002, 221 p.Clark (1984): Clark, K., Holquist, M. Mikhail Bakhtin. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard UP, 1984, 398 р.Coates (1999): Coates, R. Christianity in Bakhtin: God and the Exiled Author (Cambridge Studies in Russian Literature). Cambridge, Eng.; New York, US: Cambridge UP, 1999, (xiv) 204 p.Holquist (2002): Holquist, M. Dialogism. Bakhtin and his World. London & NY: Routledge, 2002, 224 р.Cohen (1889): Cohen, H. Kants Begründung der Aesthetik. Berlin: Ferd. Dümllers Verlagsbuch-handlung, 1889, 434 S.Cohen (1912): Cohen, H. System der Philosophie. T. 3: Ästhetik des reinen Gefühls, Bd. 1, Berlin: Cassirer, 1912, xiv, 402 S.Copleston (1994): Copleston, F.A History of Philosophy. Volume 7: Modern Philosophy, from the Post-Kantian Idealists to Marx, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche. New York: Image Books, 1994, 496 p.Poma (1997): Poma, A. The Critical Philosophy of Hermann Cohen. Albany: SUNY Press, 1997, 320 p.Poma (2006): Poma, A. Yearning for Form and Other Essays on Hermann Cohen's Thought, Dordrecht: Springer, 2006, xiii, 388 p.Renz (2003): Renz, U. Critical Idealism and the Concept of Culture. Hermann Cohen's Critical Idealism. Еd. by Reinier Munk. Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media, 2006, Р. 327–356. ; У статті проводиться порівняльний аналіз філософських та естетичних позицій Г. Когена та раннього М. М. Бахтіна. Детально розглядається місце конфігурації понять завершення й естетичної любові (запозиченої Бахтіним з естетики Когена) в естетиці кожного з мислителів. Показано радикальне переосмислення значення й змісту цих понять та переакцентування їх місця в естетиці Бахтіним, зокрема, у зв'язку з питанням про стосунки між релігією та мистецтвом, в якиму мислителі займали протилежні позиції, а також у зв'язку із загальними філософськими положеннями Бахтіна, розумінням буття як взаємодії між двома свідомостями. Показано, що це переосмислення зумовлене подоланням Бахтіним трансцендентального підходу у філософії, відповідно, з переходом від філософії свідомості до філософії буття, а в естетиці – від естетики свідомості до естетики події.СПИСОК ЛІТЕРАТУРИБахтин (2003): Бахтин, М. М. Собрание сочинений: В 7-ми тт.; Т. 1: Философская эстетика 1920-х годов. Москва: Русские словари; Языки славянской культуры, 2003, 960 с.Бонецкая (1994): Бонецкая, Н.К. «М. Бахтин в 1920-е годы». В: Диалог. Карнавал. Хроно-топ, 1994, № 1, С. 16–62.Етимологічний словник (2003): Етимологічний словник української мови: У 7 тт.; Т. 4: Н–П. Київ: Наукова думка, 2003, 656 с.Исупов (1990): Исупов, К. Г. «О философской антропологии М.М. Бахтина». В: Бахтинский сборник, Вып. I: Сб. ст. Москва: Прометей, 1990, С. 30–46.Исупов (2010): Исупов, К. Г. Судьбы классического наследия и философско-эстетическая культура Серебряного века. Санкт-Петербург: Русская христианская гуманитарная академия, 2010, 592 с.Каган (1991): Каган, М.С. «Идея диалога в философско-эстетической концепции М. Бахтина: закономерности формирования, духовный контекст и социокультурный смисл». В: М.М. Бахтин и философская культура ХХ века (Проблемы бахтинологии), Вып. 1, Часть 1. Санкт-Петербург: Образование, 1991, С. 17–31.Каган (2010): Каган, Ю.М. Люди не нашего времени. Михаил Михайлович Бахтин. Москва: РОССПЭН, 2010, С. 34–46.Пул (1997): Пул, Б. «Роль М.И. Кагана в философии М.М. Бахтина (от Германа Когена к Максу Шелеру)». В: Бахтинский сборник. Выпуск 3. Отв. ред. В.Л. Махлин. Москва: Лабиринт, 1997, С. 162–181.Пуль (1995): Пуль, Б. «"Назад к Кагану"». В: Диалог. Карнавал. Хронотоп, 1995, № 1(10), С. 38–48.Словник (1974): Словник української мови, т. 5: Н–О. Київ: Наукова думка, 1974, 840 с.Сокулер (2008): Сокулер, З.А. Герман Коген и философия диалога. Москва: Прогресс-Традиция, 2008, 312 с.Столович (1989): Столович, Л.Н. «М.М. Бахтин и проблема ценности». В: Эстетика М.М. Бахтина и современность. Саранск: Изд. Морд. ГУ, 1989, С. 25–27.Фохт (2003): Фохт, Б.А. Избранное (из философского наследия). Москва: Прогресс-Традиция, 2003, 456 с.Фридман (1992): Фридман, И.Н. «Незавершенная судьба естетики завершения». В: М.М. Бахтин как философ. Москва: Наука, 1992, С. 51–67.Яковенко (1910): Яковенко, Б. «О теоретической философии Германа Когена». B: Логос. Книга первая. Москва: Мусагет, 1910, С. 199–249.Brandist (2002): Brandist, C. The Bakhtin Circle: Philosophy, Culture and Politics. London: Pluto Press, 2002, 221 p.Clark (1984): Clark, K., Holquist, M. Mikhail Bakhtin. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard UP, 1984, 398 р.Coates (1999): Coates, R. Christianity in Bakhtin: God and the Exiled Author (Cambridge Studies in Russian Literature). Cambridge, Eng.; New York, US: Cambridge UP, 1999, (xiv) 204 p.Holquist (2002): Holquist, M. Dialogism. Bakhtin and his World. London & NY: Routledge, 2002, 224 р.Cohen (1889): Cohen, H. Kants Begründung der Aesthetik. Berlin: Ferd. Dümllers Verlagsbuch-handlung, 1889, 434 S.Cohen (1912): Cohen, H. System der Philosophie. T. 3: Ästhetik des reinen Gefühls, Bd. 1, Berlin: Cassirer, 1912, xiv, 402 S.Copleston (1994): Copleston, F.A History of Philosophy. Volume 7: Modern Philosophy, from the Post-Kantian Idealists to Marx, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche. New York: Image Books, 1994, 496 p.Poma (1997): Poma, A. The Critical Philosophy of Hermann Cohen. Albany: SUNY Press, 1997, 320 p.Poma (2006): Poma, A. Yearning for Form and Other Essays on Hermann Cohen's Thought, Dordrecht: Springer, 2006, xiii, 388 p.Renz (2003): Renz, U. Critical Idealism and the Concept of Culture. Hermann Cohen's Critical Idealism. Еd. by Reinier Munk. Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media, 2006, Р. 327–356.