Another brick in the wall

Author(s):  
Thomas Docherty

Between 1945-1989 we can trace a growing conflation of economic liberalism with social and cultural liberalism, such that social liberalism becomes engulfed by neoliberal capital and subsumed under market fundamentalism. As a consequence, there emerges a political debate about liberal societies – in Popper’s terms, ‘open societies’ – and their relation to authoritarian and totalitarian regimes and institutions. However, this misses the point that, when social values are essentially monetized, the institutional values of academic freedom – characterised by an ‘open university’ - are potentially compromised. The chapter examines the historical constitution of the UK’s ‘Open University’ – as an explicitly democratising institution - and sets that against the contemporary logic of zero-sum competition, which envisages the failure and closure of some universities as a sign of the success of the national and global system. The paradox is that, as more universities open, so the range of intellectual options for critical thinking actually diminishes. The consequence is the enclosure of the intellectual commons, and the re-establishment of protected privilege and the legitimization of structural social inequality. Organisations such as the Russell Group embody this entrenching of inequality.

2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-41
Author(s):  
David Erdos

AbstractThis article argues that three factors have framed elite political debate and outcomes on a Bill of Rights in Britain – the degree of commitment to an ideology of social liberalism, the executive/non-executive power orientation of key actors and the phenomenon of policy drag. These factors explain not only the overall historical contours of political debate but also (1) Labour's ‘aversive’ conversion to the Bill of Rights agenda and passage of the Human Rights Act (1998); and (2) the Conservatives’ more positive recent attitude to the Bill of Rights agenda.


2011 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
WANDA VRASTI

AbstractThis article responds to issues raised about global governmentality studies by Jan Selby, Jonathan Joseph, and David Chandler, especially regarding the implications of ‘scaling up’ a concept originally designed to describe the politics of advanced liberal societies to the international realm. In response to these charges, I argue that critics have failed to take full stock of Foucault's contribution to the study of global liberalism, which owes more to economic than political liberalism. Taking Foucault's economic liberalism seriously, that is, shifting the focus from questions of natural rights, legitimate rule, and territorial security to matters of government, population management, and human betterment reveals how liberalism operates as a universal, albeit not yet global, measure of truth, best illustrated by the workings of global capital. While a lot more translation work (both empirical and conceptual) is needed before governmentality can be convincingly extended to global politics, Foucauldian approaches promise to add a historically rich and empirically grounded dimension to IR scholarship that should not be hampered by disciplinary admonitions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 122-140
Author(s):  
Matteo Albanese

Argentina became a laboratory for a neofascist project. The country’s long and deeply rooted tradition of Peronism, its Nazi and Fascist connections, and the authoritarian and totalitarian regimes that took hold in the country during the second half of the twentieth century all help explain why Argentina offered fertile ground for this neofascist project. This article explores how Italians who migrated to Argentina for political reasons, and in search of a new fatherland, as described by Federica Bertagna, Marco Tarchi and other scholars, shaped the political debate in Argentina during the period between 1946 and the beginning of the dictatorship. It also considers how this political community established relations with other neofascist actors, individuals and groups, around the globe and with former fascist and Nazi militants who lived in Argentina.


Author(s):  
Robin Redhead ◽  
Stephen Hood

This chapter explores the basic assumptions of liberal ideology. It first traces the origins of liberalism before discussing some key concepts and values of a liberal ideology such as liberty, democracy, rights, and tolerance. It then considers two of the most important, yet contrasting, strands within liberalism: economic liberalism, which supports policies of privatization and laissez-faire economics, and social liberalism, whose concern for individual freedom is coupled with a commitment to social equality. The chapter also looks at some key criticisms of liberal ideas, focusing on the liberal vision of a just society, as well as the influence of liberalism on social movements and political parties in the United Kingdom and other parts of the world. Finally, it illustrates the pervasiveness of liberalism and how it is related to other ideologies.


Author(s):  
Antonios Broumas

What are the characteristics and manifestations of the intellectual commons? This chapter investigates the dialectics between commons-based and monetary values, in an effort to specify the mutual influences between them and to answer this question. It proceeds with an analysis of the dialectics between commons-based and monetary values, as recorded in the study. It also deals with the comparison of value circulation between the offline and online communities of the sample. Its key finding is that commons-based value circuits are in constant contestation with monetary values in communities of the intellectual commons. Furthermore, the chapter offers a view of the actual forms that such contestation takes and its impact on the evolution of the intellectual commons. As a corollary, the current chapter on commons-based and monetary value dialectics reveals that communities of the intellectual commons formulate their own specific modes of value circulation and value pooling, which come into contentious interrelation with the corresponding mode of commodity and capital circulation and accumulation. Such a confrontation at the core of this dialectic permeates and frames the communities of the intellectual commons that are suppressed by the dominant value system of commodity markets and its universal equivalent of value in the form of money. Such pressure, may even lead to the extinction of intellectual commons communities, comes into contradiction with the overall conclusion regarding their social value and potential. Yet communities of the intellectual commons contain and emanate a wealth of social values, which ought to be protected through legal means.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel G. B. Johnson

AbstractZero-sum thinking and aversion to trade pervade our society, yet fly in the face of everyday experience and the consensus of economists. Boyer & Petersen's (B&P's) evolutionary model invokes coalitional psychology to explain these puzzling intuitions. I raise several empirical challenges to this explanation, proposing two alternative mechanisms – intuitive mercantilism (assigning value to money rather than goods) and errors in perspective-taking.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document