Suchergebnisse

Economic development is anti-democratic in several ways. It is anti-democratic in that it requires kinds, conditions, and amounts of labor that people would never choose--and, historically, never have chose--in a state of freedom. Economic development is also anti-democratic because it promotes social inequality. Economic development is anti-democratic for it is a process of establishing and strengthening an undemocratic form of rule over a central aspect of people's lives--their work--and also in that it generates inequality in wealth and power. In addition, it is anti-democratic because people's attention is turned away from political goals and struggles, and are then replaced with "economic" ones. Economic development is anti-democratic in that it is the expansion of a sphere of life from which democracy is to be excluded in principle.

This article explores why it is so difficult to imagine a state without an army. It considers Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, conventional accounts of the sovereign state and the right to legitimate violence, Gandhi's concept of satyagraha, Gandhi's Constitution for a Free India, and Gandhi's understanding of the art of the possible. It concludes with a reading of Gandhi and the sacrificial politics of founding in India.

Describes the results of a contest sponsored by the Society for Promotion of Accuracy in Political Speech, which asked contestants to define "terrorism" as a mode of combat while excluding all US military strategies/tactics. It is noted that most people define "terrorism" as a form of violence while invariably assuming that such actions are limited to extralegal, nongovernmental groups. However, terrorism is not a crime per se but a strategy that can be carried out by states/governments as well as by clandestine groups. The word originally referred to a method used by governments to subjugate citizens but later expanded to include both strategies used by a state to inflict terror on its people & strategies used by people against a state or colonizing power. The difference between terrorism & assassination is pointed out. Special attention is given to US military activities that fall within the definition of terrorism; "psychological effect" as a euphemism for terrorism; & designing terrorism into weapons of mass destruction. Two unusual photographic contest entries are described. J. Lindroth