This book aims to reclaim and rediscover the range of radical, democratic, socialist alternatives to capitalism. Schecter argues that whilst the collapse of the Soviet Union has seen the failure of one type of socialism, it has presented the left with the cance to re-evaluate the contribution of thinkers and movements obscured by the hegemony of Marxism-Leninism.
“A refreshing collection of essays that offers a range of critical and radical voices which are generally marginalized in the critical social studies ‘mainstream’ ... This collection is a good read with valuable insights that can impact teaching practice.”— Canadian Social Studies - Canada’s National Social Studies Journal - Volume 45 Issue 1
The essays selected for this volume show how radical and Marxist criminology has established itself as an influential critique since it emerged in the late 1960s. Unlike orthodox criminology which emphasizes individual level explanations of criminal behavior, radical and Marxist criminology emphasizes power inequality and structures, especially those related to class, as key factors in crime, law and justice. This collection of essays draws attention to the way in which structural forces shape and influence both individual and institutional (for example, governmental) behavior; highlights neglected crime (corporate, governmental, state-corporate and environmental) which causes more extensive damage than the street crimes examined by orthodox criminology; and discusses the ways in which law and criminal justice processes reinforce power structures and contribute to class control.
There has been a lively debate amongst political theorists about whether certain liberal concepts of democracy are so idealized that they lack relevance to ‘real’ politics. Echoing these debates, Lois McNay examines in this book some theories of radical democracy and argues that they too tend to rely on troubling abstractions - or what she terms ‘socially weightless’ thinking. They often propose ideas of the political that are so far removed from the logic of everyday practice that, ultimately, their supposed emancipatory potential is thrown into question. Radical democrats frequently maintain that what distinguishes their ideas of the political from others is the fundamental concern with unmasking and challenging unrecognized forms of inequality and domination that distort everyday life. But this supposed attentiveness to power is undermined by the invocation of rarefied models of political action that treat agency as an unproblematic given and overlook certain features of the embodied experience of oppression. The tendency of radical democrats to define democratic agency in terms of dynamics of perpetual flux, mobility and agonism passes over too swiftly the way in which objective structures of oppression are often taken into the body as subjective dispositions, leaving individuals with the feeling that they are unable to do little more than endure a state of affairs beyond their control. Drawing on the work of Adorno, Bourdieu and Honneth, amongst others, McNay argues that in order to make good the critique of power, radical democratic theory should attend more closely to a phenomenology of negative social experience and what it can reveal about the social conditions necessary for effective political agency.
In the sixth century B.C.E., the Greek philosopher Anaximander theorized that Earth was at the center of the cosmos. That idea became ingrained in scientific thinking and Christian religious beliefs for more than one thousand years. Defiance of church doctrine could mean death, so no one dared dispute this long-accepted idea. No one except a handful of courageous scientists. In the 1500s and 1600s, men like Nicolaus Copernicus, Johanned Kepler, Galileo Galilei, and Isaac Newton began to ask questions. What if Earth actually orbited the sun, instead of the other way around? What if the universe was much bigger than anyone imagined? These scientists risked their reputations—even their lives—to challenge the very heart of Catholic dogma and scientific tradition. Yet, in less than 200 years, their radical thinking overturned theories that had lasted more than a millennium. Join these bold thinkers on the journey of discovery that forever changed our understanding of the cosmos.
Shedding light on the relationship between violence and contemporary society, this volume explores the distinctive but little-known theories of violence in the work of Georges Bataille and Jean Baudrillard, applying these to a range of violent events - events often labelled ‘inexplicable’ - in order to show how even the most extreme of acts can be seen as socially meaningful. The book offers an understanding of violence as fundamental to social relations and social organisation, departing from studies that focus on individual offenders and their psychological states to concentrate instead on the symbolic relations or exchanges between agents and between agents and the structures they find themselves inhabiting. Developing the notion of symbolic economies of violence to emphasise the volatility and ambivalence of social exchanges, Violence, Society and Radical Theory reveals the importance to our understanding of violence, of the relationship between the structural or systemic violence of consumer capitalist society and forms of ‘counter-violence’ which attack this system. A theoretically rich yet grounded expansion of that which can be considered meaningful or thinkable within sociological theory, this ground-breaking book will appeal to scholars and students of social and political theory and contemporary philosophy.
“This country's leading hell-raiser" (The Nation) shares his impassioned counsel to young radicals on how to effect constructive social change and know “the difference between being a realistic radical and being a rhetorical one.” First published in 1971 and written in the midst of radical political developments whose direction Alinsky was one of the first to question, this volume exhibits his style at its best. Like Thomas Paine before him, Alinsky was able to combine, both in his person and his writing, the intensity of political engagement with an absolute insistence on rational political discourse and adherence to the American democratic tradition.
