Suchergebnisse

This article sets the current crisis of universities in the UK in its recent historical, post–1960s context. It argues that an expansionary and initially broadly progressive phase of development from the 1960s onwards, lasting for twenty-five or so years, has come in the recent
neoliberal decades to be seen as a threat to the dominant social order, in the context of a broader resistance to the egalitarian and democratic trends of post-war British society. Since the 1980s this now large sector of social and cultural production and reproduction has been subject to
a purposeful restructuring, to render it consistent with the norms of a society dominated by capital. This restructuring can be broadly understood as taking place within a neoliberal framework of assumptions. Unless this wider situation, and the changes which have led to them, is understood,
in historically and theoretically coherent terms, resistance to what is happening is unlikely to succeed. The article first discusses the phase of university expansion, the forces which brought it about, and the social and cultural changes and opportunities to which it gave rise. It then discusses
the counter-reaction, and the attempts to remodel the practices and institutions of higher education that constitute its active elements. Finally it explores what might be involved in resetting this path of development in a more positive direction, and considers the many theoretical and political
difficulties involved in imagining this and making it possible. Here it argues the need for a dismantling of the graduate meritocracy over society, and for bringing into being an educated democracy. It is crucial to create the conditions for a broad debate on the place and function of universities
in our society, in which these larger issues of direction and purpose can be debated. The author notes, however, that only in a society that becomes less grossly unequal than ours is it possible to imagine education being designed or indeed allowed to serve these generally democratic and enabling
purposes.

Thomas Piketty's Capitalism and Ideology is the 1150-page 2020 sequel to Capital in the Twentieth Century, a best-selling publishing sensation in 2014 that described the inexorable growth of inequality under capitalism. Capitalism and Ideology develops the thesis of the earlier
volume into a micro-historical account of the development of property-based societies. It proposes a strong programme for their reform in the direction of a renewed social democracy. In offering an historical account of the development of capitalism it enables us to reopen debates about political
futures, and to locate proposals for change within this trajectory: it historicises the present as a way of arguing that things could be otherwise. Possibly because of its explicitly socialist political argument, it has not so far received the attention and acclaim of its predecessor.

How should a political party that is primarily focused on winning elections respond when it suffers a catastrophic electoral defeat? Some tactical steps have been taken by Keir Starmer, but there has been little engagement in the task of seeking an understanding of the deeper context
of events and exploring new and memorable political ideas. One resource for a transformative perspective are the ideas of Raymond Williams: in particular the idea of the 'long revolution', and of the central role of culture and processes of learning. Labour needs to focus some energy on considering
such questions: among its other roles, a progressive party needs to have an educative purpose and a diagnostic capacity.

This article revisits debates about agency: what and where are the forces and agents that might bring about change? In the past liberals and socialists broadly shared a belief in social enlightenment and progress, but liberals believed that this could be achieved gradually, through
education, while Marxists believed that self-organisation by the working class was the way forward. A third, more recent, approach argues that changes in information technology are making it possible for society to shift from hierarchical to lateral patterns of connection. These three different
approaches to agency are critically discussed. Among the thinkers discussed are Karl Marx, Raymond Williams, Eric Hobsbawm, Robin Murray, Manuel Castells, Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri. The rethinking and renewal of institutions that modern societies now need calls for deep engagement with
these issues, and both 'new' and 'old' conceptions of agency are relevant to this task. Part of the critical terms series