Pub Date : 2021-04-16DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2021.1912882
P. Magalhães
ABSTRACT This article analyses the role played by the concept of nation in the interwar writings of Carl Schmitt (1888–1985) and Eric Voegelin (1901–1985). It contends that, although these conservative thinkers were drawn in different ways to the anti-progressive potential of nationalist ideas, the centre of their political and theoretical horizons in that period is occupied by the problems of political unity and authority. Therefore, their nationalism is fundamentally determined by, and instrumental to, their adherence to a monistic and authoritarian conception of the state. This, in turn, leads them to embrace, though not without some reservations, the solutions put forward by the emergent far-right ‘strongmen’ to the interwar crisis of liberal democracy. Each author tested in his own way the porous borders between conservatism, nationalism, and fascism – a topic whose scholarly and political relevance is far from being exhausted.
{"title":"Promise and failure: Nationalism in the interwar thought of Carl Schmitt and Eric Voegelin","authors":"P. Magalhães","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1912882","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1912882","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyses the role played by the concept of nation in the interwar writings of Carl Schmitt (1888–1985) and Eric Voegelin (1901–1985). It contends that, although these conservative thinkers were drawn in different ways to the anti-progressive potential of nationalist ideas, the centre of their political and theoretical horizons in that period is occupied by the problems of political unity and authority. Therefore, their nationalism is fundamentally determined by, and instrumental to, their adherence to a monistic and authoritarian conception of the state. This, in turn, leads them to embrace, though not without some reservations, the solutions put forward by the emergent far-right ‘strongmen’ to the interwar crisis of liberal democracy. Each author tested in his own way the porous borders between conservatism, nationalism, and fascism – a topic whose scholarly and political relevance is far from being exhausted.","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"27 1","pages":"11 - 30"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1912882","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45547472","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-15DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2021.1912880
Seamus Flaherty
ABSTRACT This article shows that in the years between 1937 and 1962 Aldous Huxley adopted a species of anarchism. It demonstrates, first, how in espousing gradualism and pacifism, in stressing the significance of education and meditation as agents of social change, in seeking to construct intentional communities in the here and now, as well as build on pre-existing examples of ‘anarchy in action’ such as consumer and producer cooperatives, in taking a measured view of the state, not rejecting the institution on principle, but only its coercive form, and in making sex central to his vision of utopia as an essential ingredient of a happy and sustainable life, Huxley anticipated the ‘new’ anarchism of the postwar era. Second, it argues that, in rejecting notions of ‘normal’ subjectivity, in seeing the human subject as fundamentally irrational, in viewing power as coextensive with society itself, as a relationship that can only be managed as opposed to abolished, in repudiating grand theory or metanarratives in favour of ‘micro-politics’, and in viewing science as both epistemologically flawed and potentially oppressive, Huxley anticipated postanarchism. Despite his reluctance to adopt a label, it is the contention of this article that Huxley ought to be considered a social anarchist.
{"title":"Aldous Huxley: social anarchist","authors":"Seamus Flaherty","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1912880","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1912880","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article shows that in the years between 1937 and 1962 Aldous Huxley adopted a species of anarchism. It demonstrates, first, how in espousing gradualism and pacifism, in stressing the significance of education and meditation as agents of social change, in seeking to construct intentional communities in the here and now, as well as build on pre-existing examples of ‘anarchy in action’ such as consumer and producer cooperatives, in taking a measured view of the state, not rejecting the institution on principle, but only its coercive form, and in making sex central to his vision of utopia as an essential ingredient of a happy and sustainable life, Huxley anticipated the ‘new’ anarchism of the postwar era. Second, it argues that, in rejecting notions of ‘normal’ subjectivity, in seeing the human subject as fundamentally irrational, in viewing power as coextensive with society itself, as a relationship that can only be managed as opposed to abolished, in repudiating grand theory or metanarratives in favour of ‘micro-politics’, and in viewing science as both epistemologically flawed and potentially oppressive, Huxley anticipated postanarchism. Despite his reluctance to adopt a label, it is the contention of this article that Huxley ought to be considered a social anarchist.","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"27 1","pages":"168 - 187"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1912880","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44426316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-10DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2021.1894698
E. Goes
ABSTRACT The literature on political parties and ideologies tends to highlight the instrumental nature of that relationship. In those accounts, political parties are either constrained by ideology or they use ideology to fit their power-seeking strategies. But there is a third dimension in this relationship that has been overlooked and which reveals key and interesting insights about how political parties contribute to the production of ideologies. This article seeks to contribute to the growing literature on the relationship between political parties and ideologies by proposing a new methodological approach, which combines V. A. Schmidt’s discursive institutionalism and Peter A. Hall’s historical institutionalism, to study how political parties engage in processes of ideological production. This methodological approach, is applied to the analysis of how the idea of ‘predistribution’ shaped party change in the Labour Party under Ed Miliband, shows: a) how political parties use ideas to make sense of the world and to address specific political challenges they face; b) how political parties link zeitgeist ideas to their own ideological traditions; c) how parties try to renew ideological traditions whilst pursuing other goals.
{"title":"Ideas and party change: the role of predistribution in labour’s ideological renewal","authors":"E. Goes","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1894698","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1894698","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The literature on political parties and ideologies tends to highlight the instrumental nature of that relationship. In those accounts, political parties are either constrained by ideology or they use ideology to fit their power-seeking strategies. But there is a third dimension in this relationship that has been overlooked and which reveals key and interesting insights about how political parties contribute to the production of ideologies. This article seeks to contribute to the growing literature on the relationship between political parties and ideologies by proposing a new methodological approach, which combines V. A. Schmidt’s discursive institutionalism and Peter A. Hall’s historical institutionalism, to study how political parties engage in processes of ideological production. This methodological approach, is applied to the analysis of how the idea of ‘predistribution’ shaped party change in the Labour Party under Ed Miliband, shows: a) how political parties use ideas to make sense of the world and to address specific political challenges they face; b) how political parties link zeitgeist ideas to their own ideological traditions; c) how parties try to renew ideological traditions whilst pursuing other goals.","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"26 1","pages":"180 - 200"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1894698","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48367978","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-15DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2021.1885594
Tudi Kernalegenn
ABSTRACT The paper defines a cognitive approach of regionalism and outlines a research agenda, proceeding from the assumption that the region is not a thing in the world, but a perspective on the world. Regionalism is a way of being in the world to which we are all subject. Therefore, instead of defining and describing a region and its identity, I suggest we should wonder how, when and why regionalist social actors interpret their social experience in regional terms. To do this, three cognitive levels are highlighted. Each region, first of all, is characterized by an ideological opportunities structure, which is a cognitive system with both constraints and leeway, defined by a more or less hegemonic ideology and more or less legitimate heterodox ideologies. The regionalist ideology then is characterized by the use of the region as a cognitive tool, notably in order to understand social problems on a regional territorial basis. Finally, the regionalist discourse in interaction during a social movement can take the form of a master frame of regional injustice.
{"title":"The region as cognition: an alternative analysis of regionalism","authors":"Tudi Kernalegenn","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1885594","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1885594","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The paper defines a cognitive approach of regionalism and outlines a research agenda, proceeding from the assumption that the region is not a thing in the world, but a perspective on the world. Regionalism is a way of being in the world to which we are all subject. Therefore, instead of defining and describing a region and its identity, I suggest we should wonder how, when and why regionalist social actors interpret their social experience in regional terms. To do this, three cognitive levels are highlighted. Each region, first of all, is characterized by an ideological opportunities structure, which is a cognitive system with both constraints and leeway, defined by a more or less hegemonic ideology and more or less legitimate heterodox ideologies. The regionalist ideology then is characterized by the use of the region as a cognitive tool, notably in order to understand social problems on a regional territorial basis. Finally, the regionalist discourse in interaction during a social movement can take the form of a master frame of regional injustice.","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"27 1","pages":"127 - 147"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1885594","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48861366","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-11DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2021.1885591
J. Faure
ABSTRACT In the 1970s, the Soviet journalist and writer Aleksandr Prokhanov (born 1938) sought to initiate a new literary aesthetic based on a syncretic vision of technology and spirituality. While he represented an isolated position in conservative circles during the Soviet Union, his enthusiasm for technological modernity is now commonplace among contemporary Russian conservatives. Prokhanov has managed to evolve from the position of a fringe ideologue at the margins of the public sphere in the 1990s to a public figure whose ideas are circulated on state mass media and co-opted by political authorities since the late 2000s. This article studies the formation and circulation of Prokhanov’s reactionary modernism across the transition from the Soviet Union to post-Soviet Russia. It claims that Prokhanov’s hybrid ideology stems from his dual commitment to an anticonformist intellectual background and a loyalist state patriotism. It argues that, on top of his ability to popularize extremist ideas through their literary aestheticization, Prokhanov has successfully developed the resources of an ideological entrepreneur with leadership capacity and charismatic authority among anti-liberal milieus. In the 2000s, his discourse gained legitimacy, strategic utility and public visibility when these capacities matched a shift in the cultural and political contexts brought about by Vladimir Putin’s presidency.
{"title":"A Russian version of reactionary modernism: Aleksandr Prokhanov’s ‘spiritualization of technology’","authors":"J. Faure","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1885591","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1885591","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the 1970s, the Soviet journalist and writer Aleksandr Prokhanov (born 1938) sought to initiate a new literary aesthetic based on a syncretic vision of technology and spirituality. While he represented an isolated position in conservative circles during the Soviet Union, his enthusiasm for technological modernity is now commonplace among contemporary Russian conservatives. Prokhanov has managed to evolve from the position of a fringe ideologue at the margins of the public sphere in the 1990s to a public figure whose ideas are circulated on state mass media and co-opted by political authorities since the late 2000s. This article studies the formation and circulation of Prokhanov’s reactionary modernism across the transition from the Soviet Union to post-Soviet Russia. It claims that Prokhanov’s hybrid ideology stems from his dual commitment to an anticonformist intellectual background and a loyalist state patriotism. It argues that, on top of his ability to popularize extremist ideas through their literary aestheticization, Prokhanov has successfully developed the resources of an ideological entrepreneur with leadership capacity and charismatic authority among anti-liberal milieus. In the 2000s, his discourse gained legitimacy, strategic utility and public visibility when these capacities matched a shift in the cultural and political contexts brought about by Vladimir Putin’s presidency.","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"26 1","pages":"356 - 379"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1885591","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45660260","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-09DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2021.1885589
Regina Queiroz
ABSTRACT Neoliberalism relies on a libertarian conception of both the individual and liberty. It is grounded in a conservative understanding of the extra-social source of political order and a tendency to situate individuals in concrete groups. Crucially, it views public restrictions on individual liberty – issuing from a collective, homogeneous person (‘the people’) – as inherently despotic. Neoliberalism thus excludes the concept of ‘the people’ from its ideological corpus and prioritizes individual personal interests. In this article, I argue that individual liberty does not prevent the political tyranny of the individual and is in fact compatible with the concept of the people. As I show, neoliberal populism retains ‘the people’ as a core concept while cloaking its members in the neoliberal conception of the individual, while liberalism understands the people as a collection of individuals who associate their personal well-being with that of others, pursued under freely willed public laws.
{"title":"From the tyranny of the neoliberal individual to neoliberal populism","authors":"Regina Queiroz","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1885589","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1885589","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Neoliberalism relies on a libertarian conception of both the individual and liberty. It is grounded in a conservative understanding of the extra-social source of political order and a tendency to situate individuals in concrete groups. Crucially, it views public restrictions on individual liberty – issuing from a collective, homogeneous person (‘the people’) – as inherently despotic. Neoliberalism thus excludes the concept of ‘the people’ from its ideological corpus and prioritizes individual personal interests. In this article, I argue that individual liberty does not prevent the political tyranny of the individual and is in fact compatible with the concept of the people. As I show, neoliberal populism retains ‘the people’ as a core concept while cloaking its members in the neoliberal conception of the individual, while liberalism understands the people as a collection of individuals who associate their personal well-being with that of others, pursued under freely willed public laws.","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"26 1","pages":"240 - 261"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1885589","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46311607","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-22DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470
Dulyaphab Chaturongkul
ABSTRACT Seemingly intractable social-political divisions involving a range of actors and interests with zero-sum propensities continue to haunt Thailand. This article argues that unmasking the contingent nature of Thailand’s polarized politics helps vindicate the possibility of depolarization in societies steeped in polarization. It proceeds by sketching the development of the so-called ‘Yellow-Red’ divide, identifying it with the hard-edged, ideological bifurcation of ‘right’, i.e. liberalism/conservatism, and ‘left’, i.e. egalitarianism, respectively. The article then demonstrates that while ideologically polarized configurations such as illiberal democracy and undemocratic liberalism/conservatism necessarily sustain the resilience of Yellow and Red, they may be surplus to the range of ideological configurations with which disputants first and foremost identify. The theoretical argument is that holding different ideological viewpoints do not necessitate polarization. Deep polarization is contingent and this is connected to Michael Freeden’s morphological account of ideology. Depolarization reflects less of a rejection and more of a restructuring of the right-left binary along the lines of a continuum running from right to left. To elaborate, by the same logic that structured antagonisms may be superimposed over varied ideologies, thereby triggering ideological mutation, they are also liable to dislodgement .
{"title":"Thailand’s ideological struggle: towards the possibility of depolarizing Thailand’s polarized politics","authors":"Dulyaphab Chaturongkul","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Seemingly intractable social-political divisions involving a range of actors and interests with zero-sum propensities continue to haunt Thailand. This article argues that unmasking the contingent nature of Thailand’s polarized politics helps vindicate the possibility of depolarization in societies steeped in polarization. It proceeds by sketching the development of the so-called ‘Yellow-Red’ divide, identifying it with the hard-edged, ideological bifurcation of ‘right’, i.e. liberalism/conservatism, and ‘left’, i.e. egalitarianism, respectively. The article then demonstrates that while ideologically polarized configurations such as illiberal democracy and undemocratic liberalism/conservatism necessarily sustain the resilience of Yellow and Red, they may be surplus to the range of ideological configurations with which disputants first and foremost identify. The theoretical argument is that holding different ideological viewpoints do not necessitate polarization. Deep polarization is contingent and this is connected to Michael Freeden’s morphological account of ideology. Depolarization reflects less of a rejection and more of a restructuring of the right-left binary along the lines of a continuum running from right to left. To elaborate, by the same logic that structured antagonisms may be superimposed over varied ideologies, thereby triggering ideological mutation, they are also liable to dislodgement .","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"28 1","pages":"16 - 34"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49265937","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-21DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2021.1875655
Saer El-Jaichi
ABSTRACT The burgeoning interest and research in the ideology of the Islamist thinker Sayyid Qutb (d. 1966), since the attacks of 11 September, have been driven by one of the two goals: to demonstrate the crucial role of Qutb’s verdict upon all modern societies as ungodly (jahili) in shaping the worldview of militant Islamists, or, more specifically, to explore the extent of Qutb’s influence in shaping the takfiri rhetoric of late 20th century jihadists. Yet one aspect of Qutb’s verdict against modern societies that might explain the continuing appeal of his ideology to jihadists has received less attention in the literature: how the arguments Qutb employs in formulating this condemnation of modern societies as ungodly leads to a de-territorialization of jihad that explains his refusal to accept the traditional division of the world into ‘land of Islam’ and ‘land of disbelief.’ To drive this argument home, the article revisits Qutb’s theo-political vision of Islam and explores his conception of divine sovereignty (hakimiyya) as a counter-term to jahiliyya to explicate the implications of that vision for his view of jihad. I argue that Qutb’s call for the restoration and submission to divine authority encompasses both a transnational and a national concept of jihad.
{"title":"Ignorance or sovereignty: the de-territorialization of Jihad in Sayyid Qutb’s theo-political vision","authors":"Saer El-Jaichi","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1875655","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1875655","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The burgeoning interest and research in the ideology of the Islamist thinker Sayyid Qutb (d. 1966), since the attacks of 11 September, have been driven by one of the two goals: to demonstrate the crucial role of Qutb’s verdict upon all modern societies as ungodly (jahili) in shaping the worldview of militant Islamists, or, more specifically, to explore the extent of Qutb’s influence in shaping the takfiri rhetoric of late 20th century jihadists. Yet one aspect of Qutb’s verdict against modern societies that might explain the continuing appeal of his ideology to jihadists has received less attention in the literature: how the arguments Qutb employs in formulating this condemnation of modern societies as ungodly leads to a de-territorialization of jihad that explains his refusal to accept the traditional division of the world into ‘land of Islam’ and ‘land of disbelief.’ To drive this argument home, the article revisits Qutb’s theo-political vision of Islam and explores his conception of divine sovereignty (hakimiyya) as a counter-term to jahiliyya to explicate the implications of that vision for his view of jihad. I argue that Qutb’s call for the restoration and submission to divine authority encompasses both a transnational and a national concept of jihad.","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"27 1","pages":"112 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1875655","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48237596","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-13DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2021.1871801
S. Phelan
ABSTRACT The concept of neoliberalism has been central to critiques of the dominant social order over the last 20 years. The use of the term itself is often a focus of repetitive debates, between those who affirm its conceptual validity and those who highlight its vagueness. Informed by Laclau’s concepts of antagonism and heterogeneity, this article offers a theoretical account of how the term is articulated, especially in left-wing discourses (including scholarly discourses) that prioritize neoliberalism as an object of critique. I affirm the use of neoliberalism as a critical shorthand for naming an oppressive social order, but also highlight the potential political and strategic problems with catch-all critiques of neoliberalism from within a radical left imaginary. I suggest another mode of critiquing neoliberalism that is cultivated through an ability to talk about how different social phenomena that might be one-dimensionally named as ‘neoliberal’ could be reconstituted in a coherent anti-neoliberal programme.
{"title":"What’s in a name? Political antagonism and critiquing ‘neoliberalism’","authors":"S. Phelan","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1871801","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1871801","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The concept of neoliberalism has been central to critiques of the dominant social order over the last 20 years. The use of the term itself is often a focus of repetitive debates, between those who affirm its conceptual validity and those who highlight its vagueness. Informed by Laclau’s concepts of antagonism and heterogeneity, this article offers a theoretical account of how the term is articulated, especially in left-wing discourses (including scholarly discourses) that prioritize neoliberalism as an object of critique. I affirm the use of neoliberalism as a critical shorthand for naming an oppressive social order, but also highlight the potential political and strategic problems with catch-all critiques of neoliberalism from within a radical left imaginary. I suggest another mode of critiquing neoliberalism that is cultivated through an ability to talk about how different social phenomena that might be one-dimensionally named as ‘neoliberal’ could be reconstituted in a coherent anti-neoliberal programme.","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"27 1","pages":"148 - 167"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1871801","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47762229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2021.1863586
M. Humphrey, M. Freeden
{"title":"Editorial and post-editorial","authors":"M. Humphrey, M. Freeden","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1863586","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1863586","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"26 1","pages":"1 - 2"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1863586","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45059406","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：