Pub Date : 2023-04-04DOI: 10.1177/00905917231156630
M. Rose
Several contemporary scholars have embraced the aesthetic resources in the Black Radical Tradition for the purpose of revitalizing the democratic project. Ironically, however, many drawn to the radical potential of fugitive escape are concerned about flight or exodus from the democratic project itself resulting in a defense of politics that constricts the possible benefits of fugitive aesthetics for democratic life. This article draws on the work of Alain Locke, a key figure of the Harlem Renaissance, to suggest another way in which we might follow Black fugitive aesthetics. Through an engagement with Locke, I theorize the notion of a fugitive bearing associated with a set of sensibilities that we might cultivate in order to approach the task of democratic transformation as a “reverent vandalism.” This article also challenges dismissive readings of Locke’s aestheticism by closely reexamining his commitment to expressive autonomy in connection with his theory of democracy. His “New Negro” avant-garde, like the fugitive, remains tethered to political life even while seeking a freedom that is unavailable within the strictures of the standing normative order.
{"title":"“His Is a Reverent Vandalism”: Alain Locke’s Aesthetics and Fugitive Democracy","authors":"M. Rose","doi":"10.1177/00905917231156630","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917231156630","url":null,"abstract":"Several contemporary scholars have embraced the aesthetic resources in the Black Radical Tradition for the purpose of revitalizing the democratic project. Ironically, however, many drawn to the radical potential of fugitive escape are concerned about flight or exodus from the democratic project itself resulting in a defense of politics that constricts the possible benefits of fugitive aesthetics for democratic life. This article draws on the work of Alain Locke, a key figure of the Harlem Renaissance, to suggest another way in which we might follow Black fugitive aesthetics. Through an engagement with Locke, I theorize the notion of a fugitive bearing associated with a set of sensibilities that we might cultivate in order to approach the task of democratic transformation as a “reverent vandalism.” This article also challenges dismissive readings of Locke’s aestheticism by closely reexamining his commitment to expressive autonomy in connection with his theory of democracy. His “New Negro” avant-garde, like the fugitive, remains tethered to political life even while seeking a freedom that is unavailable within the strictures of the standing normative order.","PeriodicalId":47788,"journal":{"name":"Political Theory","volume":"51 1","pages":"703 - 735"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41834036","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1177/00905917231155291
Lisa Beard
This essay explores the archive of a 1971 interview of Angela Davis by Swedish journalist Bo Holmström—recorded in Santa Clara County Jail where Davis awaited trial—to examine the relationship between Black radical thought and its social and intellectual mediation, especially when it comes to questions of violence versus nonviolence. Where Holmström invokes the “violence/nonviolence” binary in the interview, Davis pointedly resists its distortions, restoring the record of contemporary and historical conditions of racial terror that both necessitate and criminalize Black self-defense. Decades later, the interview was filtered through the violence/nonviolence binary in editing for the acclaimed 2011 documentary, The Black Power Mixtape 1967-1975, with Davis’s wider conversation with Holmström not only abridged but remixed into a shorter exchange on armed self-defense. Studying the interview from its conditions of possibility through its later remixing, and reading it together with her opening defense statement (1972) and later speeches and writings, the essay excavates and explicates Davis’s original theoretical interventions and indexes a cluster of forces that mediate Black radical thought, Black women’s radical thought more specifically, and prison texts. The final section historicizes Davis’s theorization of the spatial and relational contexts of Black self-defense in Dynamite Hill, Alabama, and in California, and contends that her incisive interventions into the violence/nonviolence binary in 1971 remain critical here and now.
{"title":"From Dynamite Hill to The Black Power Mixtape: Angela Davis on the Violence/Nonviolence Binary and the Mediation of Black Political Thought","authors":"Lisa Beard","doi":"10.1177/00905917231155291","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917231155291","url":null,"abstract":"This essay explores the archive of a 1971 interview of Angela Davis by Swedish journalist Bo Holmström—recorded in Santa Clara County Jail where Davis awaited trial—to examine the relationship between Black radical thought and its social and intellectual mediation, especially when it comes to questions of violence versus nonviolence. Where Holmström invokes the “violence/nonviolence” binary in the interview, Davis pointedly resists its distortions, restoring the record of contemporary and historical conditions of racial terror that both necessitate and criminalize Black self-defense. Decades later, the interview was filtered through the violence/nonviolence binary in editing for the acclaimed 2011 documentary, The Black Power Mixtape 1967-1975, with Davis’s wider conversation with Holmström not only abridged but remixed into a shorter exchange on armed self-defense. Studying the interview from its conditions of possibility through its later remixing, and reading it together with her opening defense statement (1972) and later speeches and writings, the essay excavates and explicates Davis’s original theoretical interventions and indexes a cluster of forces that mediate Black radical thought, Black women’s radical thought more specifically, and prison texts. The final section historicizes Davis’s theorization of the spatial and relational contexts of Black self-defense in Dynamite Hill, Alabama, and in California, and contends that her incisive interventions into the violence/nonviolence binary in 1971 remain critical here and now.","PeriodicalId":47788,"journal":{"name":"Political Theory","volume":"51 1","pages":"645 - 673"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44902843","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-17DOI: 10.1177/00905917231157468
William R. Cameron
This paper re-examines the idea of political vanguardism—long consigned to the dustbin of defunct scientific socialist ideology—to shed light on the theory of democratic representation. The discussion connects the use of the term “vanguard” by two prominent early socialist thinkers to what it terms the “cosmological” dimension of their writings. It shows how each author figured vanguard agency as fomenting different visions of the intellectual progress required for representative government, and that these visions were sustained by analogies to the origin and development of astronomical objects. The “utopian” socialist Henri Saint-Simon (1770–1825) first invoked the vanguard metaphor to describe a way of thinking about scientific progress that would naturalize a new governing elite. The revolutionary communist Auguste Blanqui (1805–1881) then appropriated the vanguard idea to reimagine scientific authority in a way that would preserve and expand citizens’ capacities to hold their representatives accountable. The article pursues three goals. First, it provides a revisionist history of well-known scientistic attempts to stabilize mass democracy in the nineteenth century, revealing how claims to scientific authority were contested from within a socialist republican tradition usually seen as complicit in such agency-inhibiting ideologies. Second, the concept of vanguardism it reconstructs from this history, as a response to the “usurpation” of a vigilant attitude between citizens and office holders, offers new resources for theorizing democratic representation. Finally, it draws attention to the importance of cosmological rhetoric in the history of modern republican and socialist political thought.
{"title":"Cosmology and Vigilance: Political Vanguardism in Saint-Simon and Blanqui","authors":"William R. Cameron","doi":"10.1177/00905917231157468","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917231157468","url":null,"abstract":"This paper re-examines the idea of political vanguardism—long consigned to the dustbin of defunct scientific socialist ideology—to shed light on the theory of democratic representation. The discussion connects the use of the term “vanguard” by two prominent early socialist thinkers to what it terms the “cosmological” dimension of their writings. It shows how each author figured vanguard agency as fomenting different visions of the intellectual progress required for representative government, and that these visions were sustained by analogies to the origin and development of astronomical objects. The “utopian” socialist Henri Saint-Simon (1770–1825) first invoked the vanguard metaphor to describe a way of thinking about scientific progress that would naturalize a new governing elite. The revolutionary communist Auguste Blanqui (1805–1881) then appropriated the vanguard idea to reimagine scientific authority in a way that would preserve and expand citizens’ capacities to hold their representatives accountable. The article pursues three goals. First, it provides a revisionist history of well-known scientistic attempts to stabilize mass democracy in the nineteenth century, revealing how claims to scientific authority were contested from within a socialist republican tradition usually seen as complicit in such agency-inhibiting ideologies. Second, the concept of vanguardism it reconstructs from this history, as a response to the “usurpation” of a vigilant attitude between citizens and office holders, offers new resources for theorizing democratic representation. Finally, it draws attention to the importance of cosmological rhetoric in the history of modern republican and socialist political thought.","PeriodicalId":47788,"journal":{"name":"Political Theory","volume":"51 1","pages":"741 - 766"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46530705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-17DOI: 10.1177/00905917231155277
M. Shafer
Friedrich Engels’s “History of the Rifle” was among the longest and most detailed studies of technological development that either he or Marx produced. Yet the piece has been almost entirely forgotten. I recover Engels’s essay as a model for the historiography of technology and for the study of the politics of the technical object today, demonstrating its continuity with the larger critical project he was engaged in with Marx in these years. In a famous footnote to Capital, Marx suggested that the method appropriate to a “critical history of technology” in society should be developed by analogy to Darwin’s revolutionary history of organic life. I show that Engels’s study of the rifle works out such a method in practice, recasting technological development as a nondeterministic interplay between the successive mutations of the artifact and the pressures of its social environment. Moreover, Engels’s technological materialism has a socially engaged and emancipatory end, for it is here directed against a particularly pernicious form of the commodity fetish: the fetishism of weapons.
{"title":"Rifle Theory: Engels and the History of Technology","authors":"M. Shafer","doi":"10.1177/00905917231155277","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917231155277","url":null,"abstract":"Friedrich Engels’s “History of the Rifle” was among the longest and most detailed studies of technological development that either he or Marx produced. Yet the piece has been almost entirely forgotten. I recover Engels’s essay as a model for the historiography of technology and for the study of the politics of the technical object today, demonstrating its continuity with the larger critical project he was engaged in with Marx in these years. In a famous footnote to Capital, Marx suggested that the method appropriate to a “critical history of technology” in society should be developed by analogy to Darwin’s revolutionary history of organic life. I show that Engels’s study of the rifle works out such a method in practice, recasting technological development as a nondeterministic interplay between the successive mutations of the artifact and the pressures of its social environment. Moreover, Engels’s technological materialism has a socially engaged and emancipatory end, for it is here directed against a particularly pernicious form of the commodity fetish: the fetishism of weapons.","PeriodicalId":47788,"journal":{"name":"Political Theory","volume":"51 1","pages":"597 - 617"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49239693","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-06DOI: 10.1177/00905917231155289
Jaan S. Islam
This paper analyzes the reception of decolonial and neo-Marxist thought in a jihadist critique of the modern state. The author argues that a study of Abū Qatāda al-Filisṭīnī, a prominent theorist of modern Jihadism and Salafism, reveals his nuanced interaction with theories of hegemony, ideology, and decolonization. An examination of Abū Qatāda’s critique of modern state institutions and ideology shows that he engages with philosophical critiques of sovereignty, hegemony, capitalism, and the nation-state and utilizes both neo-Marxist and decolonial thought. This paper explores how Abū Qatāda theorizes the modern state as a colonial project, leading him to rationalize jihad, or violent resistance, as the only solution to realize paradigmatic change. It further shows how Abū Qatāda justifies opposition to the modern state and hegemony with seamless deployment of scripture and Islamic jurisprudence and insists that his political project builds on premodern Islamic theories of knowledge and government necessary for decolonization, albeit often without offering details. This study reveals a feature of jihadist thought that has remained largely unnoticed in the literature and is the first to explore the interactions between Salafism and critiques of the modern state.
{"title":"A Jihadi Critique of the Modern State: Abū Qatāda in Conversation with Decolonial and (neo-)Marxist Thought","authors":"Jaan S. Islam","doi":"10.1177/00905917231155289","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917231155289","url":null,"abstract":"This paper analyzes the reception of decolonial and neo-Marxist thought in a jihadist critique of the modern state. The author argues that a study of Abū Qatāda al-Filisṭīnī, a prominent theorist of modern Jihadism and Salafism, reveals his nuanced interaction with theories of hegemony, ideology, and decolonization. An examination of Abū Qatāda’s critique of modern state institutions and ideology shows that he engages with philosophical critiques of sovereignty, hegemony, capitalism, and the nation-state and utilizes both neo-Marxist and decolonial thought. This paper explores how Abū Qatāda theorizes the modern state as a colonial project, leading him to rationalize jihad, or violent resistance, as the only solution to realize paradigmatic change. It further shows how Abū Qatāda justifies opposition to the modern state and hegemony with seamless deployment of scripture and Islamic jurisprudence and insists that his political project builds on premodern Islamic theories of knowledge and government necessary for decolonization, albeit often without offering details. This study reveals a feature of jihadist thought that has remained largely unnoticed in the literature and is the first to explore the interactions between Salafism and critiques of the modern state.","PeriodicalId":47788,"journal":{"name":"Political Theory","volume":"51 1","pages":"618 - 644"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44423200","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-27DOI: 10.1177/00905917231154422
P. Cockburn, Jonathan Preminger
Debates around the state-firm analogy as a route to justifying workplace democracy tend toward a static view of both state and firm and position workplace democracy as the objective. We contend, however, that states and firms are connected in ways that should alter the terms of the debate, and that the achievement of workplace democracy raises a new set of political issues about the demos in the democratic firm and “worker migration” at the boundaries of the firm. Our argument thus contains two key steps: first, drawing on an empirical case study of a worker-owned firm, we enrich the state-firm analogy by developing a more dynamic view of both, focusing on the creation of workplace democracies, worker movement in and out of them, the dynamic meanings of “citizenship” within them, and the status of the unemployed in a world of democratic workplaces. Second, we then argue that in moving to a more sociological view of the state, the things we were comparing begin to show their real-world connections to one another. By going beyond the idealized view of states that has distorted the state-firm analogy debates, we arrive at a more robust view of how widespread workplace democracy might reconfigure basic political relationships in society.
{"title":"Migration and Demos in the Democratic Firm: An Extension of the State-Firm Analogy","authors":"P. Cockburn, Jonathan Preminger","doi":"10.1177/00905917231154422","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917231154422","url":null,"abstract":"Debates around the state-firm analogy as a route to justifying workplace democracy tend toward a static view of both state and firm and position workplace democracy as the objective. We contend, however, that states and firms are connected in ways that should alter the terms of the debate, and that the achievement of workplace democracy raises a new set of political issues about the demos in the democratic firm and “worker migration” at the boundaries of the firm. Our argument thus contains two key steps: first, drawing on an empirical case study of a worker-owned firm, we enrich the state-firm analogy by developing a more dynamic view of both, focusing on the creation of workplace democracies, worker movement in and out of them, the dynamic meanings of “citizenship” within them, and the status of the unemployed in a world of democratic workplaces. Second, we then argue that in moving to a more sociological view of the state, the things we were comparing begin to show their real-world connections to one another. By going beyond the idealized view of states that has distorted the state-firm analogy debates, we arrive at a more robust view of how widespread workplace democracy might reconfigure basic political relationships in society.","PeriodicalId":47788,"journal":{"name":"Political Theory","volume":"51 1","pages":"557 - 580"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41343652","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-03DOI: 10.1177/00905917221129632
M. Barisione
More than a century after Max Weber’s Vocation Lectures, the idea of charisma is still commonly associated with a leader’s personal qualities. This personalistic and—as I argue—simplistic understanding of the Weberian theory of charisma was perpetuated, especially in leadership studies, during the twentieth century by political scientists, social psychologists, and sociologists. Generally overlooked is the fact that the Weberian notion of charisma comprises diverse and fundamental metapersonal meanings that transcend individual qualities and revolve, among other things, around a specific combination of public positions, temporal contexts, and collective expectations. After framing the ambivalence of the concept of charisma within more fundamental and fertile ambivalences of Max Weber’s epistemological approach, this article demonstrates that metapersonal understandings of charisma actually prevailed in Weber’s writings prior to his late—and pedagogical—Vocation Lectures and series of newspaper articles. In the final part, I deduce from Weber’s writings a repertoire of metapersonal forms of charisma in politics, and I conclude that, when contemporary political leaders seek to activate such charismatic processes in order to pursue essentially charismatic forms of legitimation, important implications can arise regarding the unstable balance among liberal democracies, populisms, and authoritarianisms.
{"title":"Reviving Metapersonal Charisma in Max Weber","authors":"M. Barisione","doi":"10.1177/00905917221129632","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917221129632","url":null,"abstract":"More than a century after Max Weber’s Vocation Lectures, the idea of charisma is still commonly associated with a leader’s personal qualities. This personalistic and—as I argue—simplistic understanding of the Weberian theory of charisma was perpetuated, especially in leadership studies, during the twentieth century by political scientists, social psychologists, and sociologists. Generally overlooked is the fact that the Weberian notion of charisma comprises diverse and fundamental metapersonal meanings that transcend individual qualities and revolve, among other things, around a specific combination of public positions, temporal contexts, and collective expectations. After framing the ambivalence of the concept of charisma within more fundamental and fertile ambivalences of Max Weber’s epistemological approach, this article demonstrates that metapersonal understandings of charisma actually prevailed in Weber’s writings prior to his late—and pedagogical—Vocation Lectures and series of newspaper articles. In the final part, I deduce from Weber’s writings a repertoire of metapersonal forms of charisma in politics, and I conclude that, when contemporary political leaders seek to activate such charismatic processes in order to pursue essentially charismatic forms of legitimation, important implications can arise regarding the unstable balance among liberal democracies, populisms, and authoritarianisms.","PeriodicalId":47788,"journal":{"name":"Political Theory","volume":"51 1","pages":"530 - 556"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49288765","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-01DOI: 10.1177/00905917221127662
Humberto Beck
This essay is part of a special issue celebrating 50 years of Political Theory. The ambition of the editors was to mark this half century not with a retrospective but with a confabulation of futures. Contributors were asked: What will political theory look and sound like in the next century and beyond? What claims might political theorists or their descendants be making in ten, twenty-five, fifty, a hundred years’ time? How might they vindicate those claims in their future contexts? How will the consistent concerns of political theorists evolve into the questions critical for people decades or centuries from now? What new problems will engage the political theorists (or their rough equivalents) of the future? What forms might those take? What follows is one of the many confabulations published in response to these queries.
{"title":"Twenty-First-Century Political Theory: A Balance","authors":"Humberto Beck","doi":"10.1177/00905917221127662","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917221127662","url":null,"abstract":"This essay is part of a special issue celebrating 50 years of Political Theory. The ambition of the editors was to mark this half century not with a retrospective but with a confabulation of futures. Contributors were asked: What will political theory look and sound like in the next century and beyond? What claims might political theorists or their descendants be making in ten, twenty-five, fifty, a hundred years’ time? How might they vindicate those claims in their future contexts? How will the consistent concerns of political theorists evolve into the questions critical for people decades or centuries from now? What new problems will engage the political theorists (or their rough equivalents) of the future? What forms might those take? What follows is one of the many confabulations published in response to these queries.","PeriodicalId":47788,"journal":{"name":"Political Theory","volume":"51 1","pages":"18 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47981649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-01DOI: 10.1177/00905917221128897
Paulina Ochoa Espejo
This essay is part of a special issue celebrating 50 years of Political Theory. The ambition of the editors was to mark this half century not with a retrospective but with a confabulation of futures. Contributors were asked: What will political theory look and sound like in the next century and beyond? What claims might political theorists or their descendants be making in ten, twenty-five, fifty, a hundred years’ time? How might they vindicate those claims in their future contexts? How will the consistent concerns of political theorists evolve into the questions critical for people decades or centuries from now? What new problems will engage the political theorists (or their rough equivalents) of the future? What forms might those take? What follows is one of the many confabulations published in response to these queries.
{"title":"Apantli’s Centennial","authors":"Paulina Ochoa Espejo","doi":"10.1177/00905917221128897","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917221128897","url":null,"abstract":"This essay is part of a special issue celebrating 50 years of Political Theory. The ambition of the editors was to mark this half century not with a retrospective but with a confabulation of futures. Contributors were asked: What will political theory look and sound like in the next century and beyond? What claims might political theorists or their descendants be making in ten, twenty-five, fifty, a hundred years’ time? How might they vindicate those claims in their future contexts? How will the consistent concerns of political theorists evolve into the questions critical for people decades or centuries from now? What new problems will engage the political theorists (or their rough equivalents) of the future? What forms might those take? What follows is one of the many confabulations published in response to these queries.","PeriodicalId":47788,"journal":{"name":"Political Theory","volume":"51 1","pages":"205 - 216"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46078278","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-01DOI: 10.1177/00905917221128889
J. Floyd
This essay is part of a special issue celebrating 50 years of Political Theory. The ambition of the editors was to mark this half century not with a retrospective but with a confabulation of futures. Contributors were asked: What will political theory look and sound like in the next century and beyond? What claims might political theorists or their descendants be making in ten, twenty-five, fifty, a hundred years’ time? How might they vindicate those claims in their future contexts? How will the consistent concerns of political theorists evolve into the questions critical for people decades or centuries from now? What new problems will engage the political theorists (or their rough equivalents) of the future? What forms might those take? What follows is one of the many confabulations published in response to these queries.
{"title":"Post-modern Slavery and Post-human Souls: New History for Old Political Theory","authors":"J. Floyd","doi":"10.1177/00905917221128889","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917221128889","url":null,"abstract":"This essay is part of a special issue celebrating 50 years of Political Theory. The ambition of the editors was to mark this half century not with a retrospective but with a confabulation of futures. Contributors were asked: What will political theory look and sound like in the next century and beyond? What claims might political theorists or their descendants be making in ten, twenty-five, fifty, a hundred years’ time? How might they vindicate those claims in their future contexts? How will the consistent concerns of political theorists evolve into the questions critical for people decades or centuries from now? What new problems will engage the political theorists (or their rough equivalents) of the future? What forms might those take? What follows is one of the many confabulations published in response to these queries.","PeriodicalId":47788,"journal":{"name":"Political Theory","volume":"51 1","pages":"86 - 105"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46566448","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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：