Search results

Issues of identity are central to many historical and current debates in Australia. This superb collection of essays represents a significant rethinking of received ideas on identity, and reveals how issues of identity lie at the heart of Australian political thought, and form the foundation of Australian society and culture. It provides a comprehensive introduction to the political discourse surrounding Australian identity through key themes including identity theory, the manipulation of identity for political ends, gender and sexuality, immigration and national identity, citizenship and Aboriginality, and literature and film. The book rejects many of the assumptions underlying contemporary political debates, including the promulgation of a singular national identity in historical fact or as a political goal. This is a thought-provoking study of identity, its links with nationalism, and its potentially divisive effects

A review essay of books by Peter Beilharz, (1) Labour's Utopias: Bolshevism, Fabianism, Social Democracy (London & New York: Routledge, 1992); (2) Transforming Labor: Labour Tradition and the Labor Decade in Australia (England: Cambridge U Press, 1994); & (3) Postmodern Socialism: Romanticism, City and State (Australia: Melbourne U Press, 1994), as a consideration of the relevance of socialism in the post-1989 period. Because Beilharz's method is to detail the history & application of ideas, rather than be strictly analytical, his arguments are often buried in details. Beilharz's main argument appears to be that socialism is still relevant, perhaps even more so after the collapse of the USSR & the rise of globalization. It is suggested that, taken as a whole, the three books outline a new vision of international socialism that touches not only on labor & production issues, but also on the role of ethics in other social arenas. However, Beilharz might have done more to connect his socialist ethics to the needs & interests of other groups. In terms of concrete political action, this might entail the engagement of international socialist citizens with both governmental & nongovernmental organizations. By grounding its power in the moral force of a shared ethic for humanity, this revised socialism might avoid the problems endemic to past state socialism. 4 References. D. M. Smith

This article examines critically Popper's arguments for a "unity of method" between natural science and social science. It discusses Popper's writings on the goals of science, the objects of scientific inquiry, the logic of scientific method, and the value of objectivity The major argument is that, despite his unifying intention, Popper himself provides good reasons for treating the two sciences differently. Popper proposes that social scientists follow a number of rules that are not required for, and that have no direct equivalent in, natural science. For most of the cases examined here, these requirements are not simply marginal amendments to a basic methodological core; they are essentially moral or ethical in character and mark out a radically different intellectual and political enter prise. From this perspective, much of Popper's work on social science method ology has the character of an ethical treatise. It is argued further that Popper's accounts of the differences between natural and social science, and his call for moral responsibility, are based largely upon his understanding of the distinctive political threat that social science poses for the conduct of critical reason.

Karl Popper's advocacy of freedom and toleration, his belief in the power of ideas, and the possibility of democratic social reform, place him in the more optimistic strand of liberal thought. Yet his awareness of the human needs for regularity and tradition bolster a largely conservative and pessimistic conception of human nature. Epistemologies have a central role in Popper's political programme and theory of history because they influence either the release or suppression of key human capacities. Elucidating Popper's conception of human nature shows the origins of Popper's understanding of dogmatism and violence and indicates the underlying rationale for critical rationalism. But it also explains why Popper prefers revolutions in thought among élites to those in politics among the masses. To the extent that Popper's conception of human nature is problematic, so the political theory and epistemology may also be misconceived.