Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism

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

The Limits to Capital

List of Boxes. List of Tables and Figure. Preface. Abbreviations. Introduction. 1. Capitalism and the Capitalist Type of State. 2. The Keynesian Welfare National State. 3. The Schumpeterian Competition State. 4. Social Reproduction and the Workfare State. 5. The Political Economy of State Rescaling. 6. From Mixed Economy to Metagovernance. 7. Towards Schumpeterian Workfare Postnational Regimes?. Notes. References. Index.

The Future of the Capitalist State.

The anthropology of neoliberalism has become polarised between a hegemonic economic model anchored by variants of market rule and an insurgent approach fuelled by derivations of the Foucaultian notion of governmentality. Both conceptions obscure what is ‘neo’ about neoliberalism: the reengineering and redeployment of the state as the core agency that sets the rules and fabricates the subjectivities, social relations and collective representations suited to realising markets. Drawing on two decades of field-based inquiries into the structure, experience and political treatment of urban marginality in advanced society, I propose a via media between these two approaches that construes neoliberalism as an articulation of state, market and citizenship that harnesses the first to impose the stamp of the second onto the third. Bourdieu's concept of bureaucratic field offers a powerful tool for dissecting the revamping of the state as stratification and classification machine driving the neoliberal revolution from above and serves to put forth three theses: (1) neoliberalism is not an economic regime but a political project of state-crafting that puts disciplinary ‘workfare’, neutralising ‘prisonfare’ and the trope of individual responsibility at the service of commodification; (2) neoliberalism entails a rightward tilting of the space of bureaucratic agencies that define and distribute public goods and spawns a Centaur-state that practises liberalism at the top of the class structure and punitive paternalism at the bottom; (3) the growth and glorification of the penal wing of the state is an integral component of the neoliberal Leviathan, such that the police, courts and prison need to be brought into the political anthropology of neoliberal rule.

/pdf/three-steps-to-a-historical-anthropology-of-actually-5gke7p6956.pdf

Three steps to a historical anthropology of actually existing neoliberalism

Neo-liberalism is an oft-invoked but ill-defined concept in the social sciences. This article conceptualizes neo-liberalism as a sui generis ideological system born of struggle and collaboration in three worlds: intellectual, bureaucratic and political. Emphasizing neo-liberalism’s third ‘face’, it argues that a failure to grasp neo-liberalism as a political form imposes two limitations on understanding its effects: (i) fostering an implicit assumption that European political elites are ‘naturally’ opposed to the implementation of neo-liberal policies; and (ii) tending to preempt inquiry into an unsettling fact—namely, that the most effective advocates of policies understood as neo-liberal in Western Europe (and beyond) have often been elites who are sympathetic to, or are representatives of, the left and centre-left. Given that social democratic politics were uniquely powerful in Western Europe for much of the post-war period, neo-liberalism within the mainstream parties of the European left deserves particular attention.

What is neo-liberalism?

The present article mobilizes the concepts of “weak field” and “avatar” to explain Europe’s historically variable meanings, analyzing two successful reinventions (as a “community of law” and a “single market”) and one failure (“social Europe”). Focusing on law and economics, the authors first show that the weak field of EU studies serves as a crossroads between nationally anchored scholarly professions and Europe’s political field; second, they show that under certain conditions legal and economic constructions have exerted performative effects via scholarly avatars. Depending on their strategic positioning, scholarly avatars facilitate symbolic exchange across political, technocratic, and scholarly boundaries and endow theoretical constructions with performative potential.

/pdf/building-europe-on-a-weak-field-law-economics-and-scholarly-37rdtsqavk.pdf

Building Europe on a Weak Field: Law, Economics, and Scholarly Avatars in Transnational Politics1

Professional appointments (post-PhD) 2018-present Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, University of California, Davis, 2009-2018 Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, University of California, Davis 2013 -2014 Research Fellow, Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute (SPERI), UK 2008-2009 Postdoctoral Fellow, Max Planck Institute (MPIfG), Cologne, Germany 2007-2008 Max Weber Fellow, European University Institute (EUI), Florence, Italy

Leftism Reinvented: Western Parties from Socialism to Neoliberalism

The classical sociology of parties was born alongside parties themselves. It explored their dynamic interrelationships with states and society, as well as the tensions inherent in the fact that parties are simultaneously representatives and power seekers. Despite these rich foundations, from the 1960s the sociological approach came to be narrowly identified with a one-dimensional conception of parties, and political sociologists focused their attention elsewhere. This review contributes to efforts that began in the 1990s to reclaim the political party as a full-fledged sociological object. To this end, we track the hourglass-shaped trajectory of the sociology of parties: from broad Marxian and Weberian roots, to narrowing and near-eclipse after the 1960s, to a reemergence that reclaims the breadth of the classical traditions. We conclude by suggesting six lines of inquiry that we believe would be fruitful, emphasizing both classical concerns that deserve more attention and innovative approaches that point...

Political Parties and the Sociological Imagination: Past, Present, and Future Directions

The European Central Bank (ECB), like all European institutions, poses basic problems of definition and comparability. Mobilizing Bourdieusian field theory (BFT) to resolve them, we map out the ECB...

Stephanie L. Mudge

Papers

What is neo-liberalism?

Building Europe on a Weak Field: Law, Economics, and Scholarly Avatars in Transnational Politics1

Leftism Reinvented: Western Parties from Socialism to Neoliberalism

Political Parties and the Sociological Imagination: Past, Present, and Future Directions

Fielding supranationalism: the European Central Bank as a field effect