Suchergebnisse

Introduction : a personal example of a temporal script -- The colonizer's time machine and the discourse of "becoming modern" -- The anti-Semitic gaze and the occidentalization of the Jew in Zionist and Israeli nationalism -- The Kemalist acquiescence to the colonizer's time machine -- Arab time-travelers and cultural schizophrenia -- The Islamist time machine -- Women as the sign of the times -- Conclusion : thinking outside the time-space box of colonial modernity.

Taking a multidisciplinary approach to examine the dynamics of ethno-national contestation and colonialism in Israel/Palestine, this book investigates the approaches for dealing with the colonial and post-colonial urban space, resituating them within the various theoretical frameworks in colonial urban studies.The book uses Henry Lefebvre's three constituents of space - perceived, conceived and lived - to analyse past and present colonial cases interactively with time. It mixes the non-temporal conceptual framework of analysis of colonialism using literature of previous colonial case

Taking a multidisciplinary approach to examine the dynamics of ethno-national contestation and colonialism in Israel/Palestine, this book investigates the approaches for dealing with the colonial and post-colonial urban space, resituating them within the various theoretical frameworks in colonial urban studies. The book uses Henry Lefebvre's three constituents of space - perceived, conceived and lived - to analyse past and present colonial cases interactively with time. It mixes the non-temporal conceptual framework of analysis of colonialism using literature of previous colonial cases with the inter-temporal abstract Lefebvrian concepts of space to produce an inter-temporal re-reading of them. Israeli colonialism in the occupied areas of 1967, its contractions from Sinai and Gaza, and the implications on the West Bank are analysed in detail. By illustrating the transformations in colonial urban space at different temporal stages, a new phase is proposed - the trans-colonial. This provides a conceptual means to avoid the pitfalls of neo-colonial and post-colonial influences experienced in previous cases, and the book goes on to highlight the implications of such a phase on the Palestinians. It is an important contribution to studies on Middle East Politics and Urban Geography/ Maha Samman holds an Msc in Urban Planning from Technical University of Delft, the Netherlands, a PhD in Political Geography from University of Exeter, UK and is Assistant Professor at Al-Quds University, Jerusalem. Publisher's note.

To understand the Middle East we must also understand how the West produced a temporal narrative of world history in which westemers placed themselves on top and all others below them. In a landmark reinterpretation of Middle Eastern history, this book shows how Arabs, Muslims, Turks, and Jews absorbed, revised, yet remained loyal to this Western vision. Turkish Kemalism and Israeli Zionism, in their efforts to push their people forward, accepted the narrative almost wholeheartedly, eradicating what they perceived as 'archaic' characteristics of their Jewish and Turkish cultures. Arab nationalists negotiated a more culturally schizophrenic approach to appeasing the colonizer's gaze. But so too, Samman argues, did the Islamists who likewise wanted to improve their societies. But in order to modernize, Islamists prescribed the eradication of Western contamination and reintroduced the prophetic stage that they believe - if the colonizer and their local Arab coconspirators hadn't intervened - would have produced true civilization. Samman's account explains why Islamists broke more radically with the colonizer's insult. For all these nationalists gender would be used as the measuring device of how well they did in relation to the colonizer's gaze.

Last year I published an edited volume called Clickbait Capitalism. The title came as a surprise, even to me. The book was meant to be called Libidinal Economies of Contemporary Capitalism. No one was interested in the volume until I changed the title. This surely tells us something about the publishing industry and how it likes to market the political-economic. A list of recently published books includes the following: Chokepoint Capitalism, Crack-up Capitalism, Cannibal Capitalism. Whatever next? One pundit on Twitter cut to the heart of the matter: "Why not 'capitalist' capitalism?" Anyway, I sent an email out to a few publishers: "I have a book manuscript called Clickbait Capitalism. Do you want to see it? Click here!" And just like that, they were interested. It was almost an accident. At the very least an experiment. There was no mention of clickbait whatsoever up until that point. Then suddenly it became the hook for the entire project.
The post Clickbait capitalism – or, the return to libidinal political economy appeared first on Progress in Political Economy (PPE).

There is no proper place within economic thought for the void. It appears nowhere in the canonical texts of political economy, let alone the discourse of conventional economics. Yet one cannot shake the sense that it is implied in most if not all financial commentary. At the very least, the void exerts a magnetic pull on a range of related terms in the lexicon. Could it be that through these it grounds the financial imagination in fundamental ways?

History in Financial Times is in many ways a book about writing, but one of the questions it leaves hanging is where the power of writing runs out. Throughout the book, I make various claims about the ability of narrative discourse to shape the temporal and historical signatures of contemporary experience, and in so doing, to produce rather than simply record or reflect the sense of development and change we expect from 'history'. Yet when confronted with the thoughts of colleagues generous enough to take part in this forum, I am struck by the difficulty of responding to these in a way that might feel like a step forward, of writing something that pushes past the point at which History in Financial Times cuts off. Whether that is a fault of the book is not yet clear to me, although it seems equally plausible that this is one of its strengths. I will try to explain what I mean by this through a discussion of three questions that emerge in the forum, all of which strike me as not just fundamental questions, but deadlocks of a very peculiar kind - deadlocks we cannot hope to shake off, let alone answer once and for all. These relate to the contemporary status of historical discourse, financial market logics, and above all the figure of the 'strange loop', a conceptual device I borrow from Douglas Hofstadter (2007) and put forward as a means of reorienting the theory and philosophy of history. Before discussing each of these points in turn, it seems appropriate to offer some further, brief remarks on the contours of the book and why it departs from conventional forms of historicism in political economy.

In this rejoinder, I discuss three fundamental 'deadlocks' raised by contributors to this forum. These relate to the status of historical discourse, financial market logics, and above all the figure of the 'strange loop', which I put forward as a means of reorienting historical thought. I also offer some preliminary remarks on why History in Financial Times departs from conventional forms of historicism in political economy, as well as a further set of reflections on the contemporaneity of the book's argumentation.

What can the idea of eternal return tell us about contemporary financial society? In this essay I follow Nietzsche by deploying it as an existential provocation, linking the prospect of endless recurrence to the daily routines of the asset economy. This entails a departure from simple notions of cyclical time, typically associated with political economy and the study of economic history, in favor of a more complex view that sees recurrence and return as figures that organize and reflect the experience of life under the sign of finance. In particular, I argue that the reordering of class around the axis of asset ownership has produced two seemingly distinct structures of feeling- one based on the thrill of endless turnover and return on capital, the other on the drudgery of recurring payment schedules and debt rollovers. Though on the surface at odds with each other, both are anchored in a deeper libidinal economy associated with the asset form and ultimately nihilistic in character. The asset economy should therefore be seen as producing a very peculiar form of eternity based on the abolition of time through repetition. I conclude by foregrounding questions of culture and imagination, exploring these in connection with contemporary forms of on-demand television and the possibility of a time beyond the bad eternity of the asset economy.