From a world history perspective, the most noticeable trend in the history of the late 19th century was the domination of Europeans over Non­Europeans. This domination took many forms ranging from economic penetration to outright annexation. No area of the globe, however remote from Europe, was free of European merchants, adventurers, explorers or western missionaries. Was colonialism good for either the imperialist or the peoples of the globe who found themselves subjects of one empire or another? A few decades ago, the answer would have been a resounding no. Now, in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the more or less widespread discrediting of Marxist and Leninist analysis, and the end of the Cold War, political scientists and historians seem willing to take a more positive look at Nineteenth Century Imperialism. One noted current historian, Niall Ferguson has argued that the British Empire probably accomplished more positive good for the world than the last generation of historians, poisoned by Marxism, could or would concede. Ferguson has argued that the British Empire was a \" liberal \" empire that upheld international law, kept the seas open and free, and ultimately benefited everyone by ensuring the free flow of trade. In other words, Ferguson would find little reason to contradict the young Winston Churchill's assertion that the aim of British imperialism was to: give peace to warring tribes, to administer justice where all was violence, to strike the chains off the slave, to draw the richness from the soil, to place the earliest seeds of commerce and learning, to increase in whole peoples their capacities for pleasure and diminish their chances of pain. It should come as no surprise that Ferguson regards the United States current position in the world as the natural successor to the British Empire and that the greatest danger the U.S. represents is that the world will not get enough American Imperialism because U.S. leaders often have short attention spans and tend to pull back troops when intervention becomes unpopular. It will be very interesting to check back into the debate on Imperialism about ten years from now and see how Niall Ferguson's point of view has fared! The other great school of thought about Imperialism is, of course, Marxist. For example, Marxist historians like E.J. Hobsbawm argue that if we look at the l9th century as a great competition for the world's wealth and …

The New Imperialism

/pdf/the-precariat-the-new-dangerous-class-3tq7b7h7fg.pdf

The Precariat. The New Dangerous Class

政治自由主义 = Political liberalism

This is really going to save you time and your money in something should think about. If you're seeking then search around for online. Without a doubt there are several these available and a lot of them have the freedom. However no doubt you receive what you spend on. An alternate way to get ideas would be to check another nothing about us without us disability oppression and empowerment. Seeking certified reading sources? We have nothing about us without us disability oppression and empowerment to read, not just review, however likewise download them or perhaps check out online. Find this great book writtern by now, simply below, yeah just below. Get the data in the kinds of txt, zip, kindle, word, ppt, pdf, and also rar. Once again, never ever miss out on to check out online and download this publication in our site below. Click the web link.

Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment

Crip Theory: Cultural Signs of Queerness and Disability

Europe is experiencing rapidly accelerating poverty and social exclusion, following half a decade of financial crisis and austerity politics. The key problem behind Europe's malaise, in our view, is the economic disenfranchisement of large parts of its population in the winner-takes-all-society. This article proposes that we examine the contribution of republican political theory as a distinctive approach that provides us with the conceptual and normative resources to reclaim what we call the political economy of democracy, the constellation of political and economic institutions aimed at promoting broad economic sovereignty and individuals’ capacities to govern their own lives. This article identifies three key ideas that together constitute a distinctively republican approach to political economy: (1) establish an economic floor; (2) impose an economic ceiling to counter excess economic inequality; and (3) democratize the governance and regulation of the main economic institutions.

/pdf/republicanism-and-the-political-economy-of-democracy-sws0044o60.pdf

Republicanism and the political economy of democracy

The republican tradition revolves around the idea that freedom requires the enjoyment of a certain set of material assets granting individuals socioeconomic independence from others. This material independence constitutes a necessary condition to build and consolidate individuals’ positions as free choosers – their capacity for making choices in all domains of life with the security that, thanks to a particular social and institutional design, nobody will have the remotest chance of arbitrarily interfering in their individual life plan decisions. The picture republicanism paints of social life shows a dense network of social relations intersected by all sorts of asymmetries of power likely to cause bonds of dependence. Therefore, Philip Pettit asserts that “if a republican state is committed to advancing the cause of freedom as non-domination among its

Basic Income and the Republican Ideal: Rethinking Material Independence in Contemporary Societies

Kingdom of Spain

This article outlines a republican perspective on disability. We argue that a commitment to ensuring the republican freedom of disabled citizens offers a promising account of what disabled citizens are owed as a matter of justice. A republican perspective offers a particular diagnosis of the injustice of disability disadvantage, both in relation to individuals (dominium) and the state (imperium), that is congenial to prominent concerns voiced by the disability rights movement. This article also offers a brief outline of three republican remedies: the right of social participation, the right of opportunities for civic contribution, and the right of democratic contestation. These remedies constitute key guidelines for the robust institutional protection of disabled citizens’ republican freedom.

/pdf/a-life-of-one-s-own-republican-freedom-and-disability-3sgip7llxl.pdf

A life of one’s own: republican freedom and disability

Let us understand economic democracy as the fourfold capacity (i) to decide what social relations we wish to “enter” in order to work; (ii) to determine the (im)material nature of the space where we decide to stay and work, which requires the capacity of having a “voice” that is effectively listened to; (iii) to opt for “exiting” this space in case its nature and functioning go against what we wish for our lives; and (iv) in case we opt for leaving, to resort to an outside-the-previous-workplace offering tools for second and subsequent opportunities, that is, to effectively “restart” our (re)productive lives in other terms and conditions. Basic income can play a crucial role in fostering such capacity. Because of its unconditionality, and thanks to bargaining power deriving from it, basic income is a sort of income that is convertible in terms of (a) time to conceive of (and put into practice) projects of one’s own, be it individually and/or collectively; (b) a capacity to explore alternative options and take promising risks; and (c) the right to credit, in the twofold sense of the right to financial resources and the right to social trust. As noticed and appreciated by some post-crash social movements, there are some spheres where such democracy-enhancing bargaining power may unfold: wage-earning work, the decommodification of labour force and the possible subsequent constitution of cooperatives and other self-managed (re)productive spaces, the household, entrepreneurship, socio-political participation, etc. In sum, more flexible combinations of different kinds of work may emerge when individuals and groups enjoy an income stream that is guaranteed as a right, which echoes both classical and contemporary discourses on the need for humans to have the democratic right to autonomously choose and determine work(s) all along the life cycle.

/pdf/economic-sovereignty-as-the-democratization-of-work-the-role-5f0mzcqasv.pdf

David Casassas

Papers

Republicanism and the political economy of democracy

Basic Income and the Republican Ideal: Rethinking Material Independence in Contemporary Societies

Kingdom of Spain

A life of one’s own: republican freedom and disability

Economic Sovereignty as the Democratization of Work: The Role of Basic Income