From New Anarchism to Post-anarchism

Kropotkin ◽  
2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Kinna
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Human Nature ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Class Struggle ◽  
Political Theorist ◽  
Contemporary Politics ◽  
The 1960S

This chapter examines contemporary anarchist critiques of Kropotkin, especially post-anarchist analysis. It argues that science has become a byword to describe Kropotkin's political theory, providing an exemplar for classical anarchism. This theory is described as teleological, based on a particular concept of human nature and linked to a form of revolutionary utopianism that promises the realisation of anarchy. Post-anarchists dissolve the distance between Kropotkin and Bakunin that advocates of his evolutionary theory invented in the 1960s in order to rescue anarchism from its reputation for violence. This repackaging of historical traditions underpins judgments about the irrelevance of anarchism to contemporary politics and political theory. In response, critics of post-anarchism have sought to defend nineteenth-century revolutionary traditions. The result of this argument is that Kropotkin emerges as a political theorist of class struggle. This defence raises significant questions about the coherence of Kropotkin's position on the war in 1914.

Siren canora: the mermaid and the mythical in late nineteenth-century science

2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. BRINK-ROBY
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Focus Of Attention ◽  
British Association ◽  
Social Boundaries ◽  
Late Nineteenth Century ◽  
Darwinian Theory ◽  
Late Nineteenth ◽  
Century Science

This paper argues that, for a number of naturalists and lay commentators in the second half of the nineteenth century, evolutionary – especially Darwinian – theory gave new authority to mythical creatures. These writers drew on specific elements of evolutionary theory to assert the existence of mermaids, dragons and other fabulous beasts. But mythological creatures also performed a second, often contrapositive, argumentative function; commentators who rejected evolution regularly did so by dismissing these creatures. Such critics agreed that Darwin's theory legitimized the mythological animal, but they employed this legitimization to undermine the theory itself. The mermaid, in particular, was a focus of attention in this mytho-evolutionary debate, which ranged from the pages of Punch to the lecture halls of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. Crossing social boundaries and taking advantage of a range of venues, this debate arose in response to the indeterminate challenge of evolutionary theory. In its discussions of mermaids and dragons, centaurs and satyrs, this discourse helped define that challenge, construing and constructing the meanings and implications of evolutionary theory in the decades following Darwin's publication.

Kropotkin

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Kinna
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Human Nature ◽  
Political Change ◽  
Direct Action ◽  
The State ◽  
Social Analysis ◽  
Mutual Aid ◽  
Special Character ◽  
Revolutionary Politics

This book is designed to remove Peter Kropotkin from the framework of classical anarchism. By focusing attention on his theory of mutual aid, it argues that the classical framing distorts Kropotkin's political theory by associating it with a narrowly positivistic conception of science, a naively optimistic idea of human nature and a millenarian idea of revolution. Kropotkin's abiding concern with Russian revolutionary politics is the lens for this analysis. The argument is that his engagement with nihilism shaped his conception of science and that his expeditions in Siberia underpinned an approach to social analysis that was rooted in geography. Looking at Kropotkin's relationship with Elisée Reclus and Erico Malatesta and examining his critical appreciation of P-J. Proudhon, Michael Bakunin and Max Stirner, the study shows how he understood anarchist traditions and reveals the special character of his anarchist communism. His idea of the state as a colonising process and his contention that exploitation and oppression operate in global contexts is a key feature of this. Kropotkin's views about the role of theory in revolutionary practice show how he developed this critique of the state and capitalism to advance an idea of political change that combined the building of non-state alternatives through direct action and wilful disobedience. Against critics who argue that Kropotkin betrayed these principles in 1914, the book suggests that this controversial decision was consistent with his anarchism and that it reflected his judgment about the prospects of anarchistic revolution in Russia.

Other People's Struggles

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Owen
Keyword(s):  
Social Psychology ◽  
Social Movements ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Identity Politics ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
British History ◽  
Original Theory ◽  
The Past ◽  
Contemporary Politics ◽  
Do So

Other People’s Struggles is the first attempt in over forty years to explain the place of “conscience constituents” in social movements. Conscience constituents are people who participate in a movement but do not stand to benefit if it succeeds. Why do such people participate when they do not stand to benefit? Why are they sometimes present and sometimes absent in social movements? Why and when is their participation welcome to those who do stand to benefit, and why and when is it not? The work proposes an original theory to answer these questions, crossing discipline boundaries to draw on the findings of social psychology, philosophy, and normative political theory, in search of explanations of why people act altruistically and what it means to others when they do so. The theory is illustrated by examples from British history, including the antislavery movement, the women’s suffrage and liberation movements, labor and socialist movements, anticolonial movements, antipoverty movements, and movements for global justice. Other People’s Struggles also contributes to new debates concerning the rights and wrongs of “speaking for others.” Debates concerning the limits of solidarity—who can be an “ally” and on what terms—have become very topical in contemporary politics, especially in identity politics and in the new “populist” movements. The book provides a theoretical and empirical account of how these questions have been addressed in the past and how they might be framed today.

Why We Disagree About Human Nature

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Human Nature ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Animal Cognition ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Biological Anthropology ◽  
Human Sciences ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Disciplinary Boundaries ◽  
Nature Play

Is human nature something that the natural and social sciences aim to describe, or is it a pernicious fiction? What role, if any, does ‘human nature’ play in directing and informing scientific work? Can we talk about human nature without invoking—either implicitly or explicitly—a contrast with human culture? It might be tempting to think that the respectability of ‘human nature’ is an issue that divides natural and social scientists along disciplinary boundaries, but the truth is more complex. The contributors to this collection take very different stances with regard to the idea of human nature. They come from the fields of psychology, the philosophy of science, social and biological anthropology, evolutionary theory, and the study of animal cognition. Some of them are ‘human nature’ enthusiasts, some are sceptics, and some say that human nature is a concept with many faces, each of which plays a role in its own investigative niche. Some want to eliminate the notion altogether, some think it unproblematic, others want to retain it with reforming modifications. Some say that human nature is a target for investigation that the human sciences cannot do without, others argue that the term does far more harm than good. The diverse perspectives articulated in this book help to explain why we disagree about human nature, and what, if anything, might resolve that disagreement.

Feminism

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy J. Hirschmann
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Contemporary Politics ◽  
History Of ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Opening Up ◽  
The Way

The topic of feminism within the history of political philosophy and political theory might seem to be quite ambiguous. Feminists interested in the history of political philosophy did not urge the abandonment of the canon at all, but were instead protesting the way in which political philosophy was studied. They thus advocated “opening up” the canon, rather than its abolishment. There have been at least five ways in which this “opening” of the canon has been developed by feminists in the history of political philosophy. All of them do not only demonstrate that the history of political philosophy is important to feminism; they also demonstrate that feminism is important to the history of political philosophy. A two-tiered structure of freedom, with some conceptualizations of freedom designated for men and the wealthy, and other conceptualizations designated for laborers and women, shows that class and gender were important dimensions to be explored when examining the history of political philosophy. One way in which feminism has opened up the canon is its relevance to contemporary politics.

scholarly journals Džon i Žaklina Kenedi: politika, kultura i „nova granica“ odevanja

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 857
Author(s):  
Simona Čupić
Keyword(s):  
Political Affiliation ◽  
Social Changes ◽  
Specific Kind ◽  
The Public ◽  
Contemporary Politics ◽  
Internal Politics ◽  
Art And Culture ◽  
History Of ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
The Cold War

Jacqueline Kennedy’s style is one of the mainstays of the history of fashion and popular culture, as well as contemporary politics. John Kennedy’s way of dressing garnered much less attention. Even though, at first glance, not as interesting as the first lady’s “fashion sense”, the president’s style was no less thought-out. If, however, we view the changes in clothing as social changes and a determinant of various kinds of social differentiation: marital status, sex, occupation, religious and political affiliation, the way in which the Kennedys were presented to the public becomes more interesting – from the (carefully planned) photos and appearances to art and culture. Having in mind that the 1960s were a time when the appropriation of popular and fictional came back into modern art, and that general changes inherent in the new lifestyle, as well as a layered image of American internal politics, and the cold war map of the world, the carefully thought-out image of the presidential couple can be viewed as a specific kind of metaphor for a complicated time.

scholarly journals MARXISMO, SUJEITO E SUBJETIVIDADE. NEGRI DIANTE DO ANTI-HUMANISMO ALTHUSSERIANO

Sapere Aude ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (19) ◽  
pp. 250-273
Author(s):  
Émerson Pirola
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Social Class ◽  
Structural Dynamics ◽  
Class Struggle ◽  
Louis Althusser ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Abstract Notion ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
The One ◽  
Antonio Negri

Um debate de longa data no interior do marxismo é o entre perspectivas que tenderiam para uma leitura da obra marxiana centrada nas análises sobre a constituição de sujeitos políticos de e em luta, na constituição de uma classe social revolucionária que enfrente a exploração capitalista, e perspectivas centradas nas transformações do capitalismo ou nas dinâmicas estruturais da economia. Podemos dizer, esquematicamente, que as primeiras perspectivas são “subjetivistas” e as segundas “objetivistas”. Nos anos 1960 esse debate se viu determinado pela chamada polêmica do anti-humanismo, lançada por Louis Althusser contra o marxismo por ele criticado como humanista, visto que advogaria por uma noção de Sujeito idealista e abstrata, descolada dos processos estruturais da economia política capitalista. Antonio Negri, por sua vez, deu e dá grande importância para a noção de subjetividade na análise crítica e enfrentamento do capitalismo. Negri, entretanto, não ignora as críticas efetuadas por Althusser ao chamado humanismo, tomando-as como pré-requisito para o desenvolvimento original de sua teoria. Mostramos, portanto, como Althusser desenvolve suas críticas do Sujeito e do humanismo para então desenvolver as posições de Negri diante destas, a construção de sua própria teoria da subjetividade, resgatada do Marx dos Grundrisse, e apontar as limitações do pensamento althusseriano no que concerne à subjetividade.PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Sujeito. Anti-humanismo. Subjetividade. Negri. Althusser. ABSTRACTA long-standing debate within Marxism is the one between perspectives that would tend towards a reading of the Marxian work centered on analyzes of the constitution of political subjects in and in class struggle, the constitution of a revolutionary social class facing capitalist exploitation, and perspectives centered on the transformations of capitalism or the structural dynamics of the economy in general. We can say, schematically, that the first perspective are "subjectivist" and the second one "objectivist". In the 1960s this debate was determined by Louis Althusser's so-called polemic of anti-humanism, in which he criticized certain Marxism as an humanism, since it would advocate for an idealist and abstract notion of subject detached from the structural processes of capitalist political economy. Antonio Negri, in turn, gave and gives great importance to the notion of subjectivity in the dynamics and confrontation of capitalism. Negri, however, does not ignore the criticisms made by Althusser of the humanism, taking them as a prerequisite for the original development of his theory. We thus show how Althusser develops his criticisms of the Subject and humanism to develop Negri's positions for and against them, the construction of his own theory of subjectivity, rescued from Marx’s Grundrisse, and we point out the limitations of Althusser's thought as regards subjectivity.KEYWORDS: Subject. Antihumanism. Subjeticvity. Negri. Althusser.

Background and Foreground: Getting Things in Context

1987 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Knight
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Information Retrieval ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Historical Documents ◽  
The Past ◽  
Modern Reader ◽  
The World ◽  
Exact Reproduction ◽  
The 1960S

Historians generally grumble at the liberties taken with letters and papers by editors and biographers in the past, while reviewers may complain at the professorial pomposities which interfere with the reader's interaction with the text. Certainly, reading is not a mere matter of information retrieval or of source-mining, but a meeting of minds, and any over-zealous editing which makes this more difficult will have failed. Editors, whether of journals or of documents, are midwives of ideas—self-effacingly bringing an author's meaning and style into the world. What reviewers praise is the unobtrusive, and what they damn is ‘a manner at once slapdash and intrusive’, making allowances perhaps for an ‘introduction which is as admirable as his footnotes are useless’. When in the 1960s new technology brought us a flood of facsimile reprints of scientific works, some avoided these problems by appearing naked and unashamed: but for a text on phrenology, or for Goethe's Theory of Colours, a fig leaf or two of commentary is really necessary to help the innocent reader to interact with the book. Facsimiles of nineteenth-century editions of Wilkins' papers, of some Newton correspondence, or of Henry More's poetry are even more problematic; the reader should know that these editors' assumptions cannot be taken for granted, and that their introductions are themselves historical documents. The exact reproduction of misprints and misbindings (giving pages out of order and misnumbered) is of dubious assistance to the modern reader.

Human Nature, Non-human Nature, and Needs

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Biro
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Human Nature ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Frankfurt School ◽  
Instrumental Rationality ◽  
Communicative Rationality ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Human Needs

This chapter assesses the relevance of Frankfurt School critical theory for contemporary environmental political theory. Early Frankfurt School thinkers such as Adorno, Horkheimer, and Marcuse developed a critique of instrumental rationality that provides a powerful framework for understanding the domination of nature in modernity, including an inability to articulate and defend human needs. Habermas subsequently attempts to mitigate this totalizing critique, countering instrumental rationality with a focus on communicative rationality. This Habermasian turn both provides new openings and forecloses certain possibilities for environmental political theory; deliberative democracy is emphasized, but with a renewed commitment to anthropocentrism. The chapter then explores whether Habermas’s communicative turn could be “greened,” either through an expansion of the subjects of communicative rationality, or by critically examining the extent to which human beings themselves can articulate their genuine needs.

Creation, Fall and Political Order — Prussian Conservatism and the Old Testament

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-181
Author(s):  
Laura C. Achtelstetter
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Old Testament ◽  
Role Model ◽  
Biblical Interpretation ◽  
Philosophy Of History ◽  
Political Order ◽  
Early Nineteenth Century ◽  
Religious Wars

Abstract This article examines differences within the theological basis of early nineteenth-century Prussian conservatism. By exploring the usage of the Old Testament in the writings of conservative thought leaders Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach, and Friedrich Julius Stahl, this article contributes to scholarship of both traditions of biblical interpretation and that of the relation of theology and political theory. The focus of this article centers on three concepts of the Old Testament and their implementation in conservative political doctrine. I will discuss Hengstenberg’s concept of biblical historicity and unity of Scripture, Gerlach’s use of the Old Testament as the source of a role model for just religious wars and a theocratic concept of law, as well as Stahl’s bible-based political philosophy of history and the resulting model of political order. Thus, the basis for different, resulting concepts of church, state, and nation that were merged into an overall religion-based political conservative doctrine in pre-1848 Prussia are analyzed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document