In an article by Standpoint Magazine Joseph Rachman uses insights from author Umberto Eco to understand the rise of new far right movements. I found the following quote interesting because it describes how the far right now also uses the “Semiological Guerrilla Warfare” tactics that Eco proposed.
Today’s far Right is also counter-cultural, setting itself against existing institutions, seeing the media, universities, courts and parliaments as lost causes or compromised. Far-Right supporters form networks on social media where news is reinterpreted into evidence of the conspiracy they ‘know’ exists. They also show impressive sensitivity to the media’s weaknesses. When the far Right claim, semi-ironically, common symbols such as the OK sign and the Facebook “trash dove” as their own, they garner media attention and force liberals to worry about previously innocuous signs.
Read the full article here.
Listened to two great podcasts from the BCC series “In Our Time” related to political economic theory from the late 18th century:
Both episodes are interesting to understand the historical context and moral elements in their theories. Crudely summarised I would say that both of their theories are dealing with the abrupt transformation of economies during the Industrial Revolution. And both authors bringing their moral philosophy of what should be done in that tumultuous time.
Fisnished watching a documentary from DW Documentary, “The Big Bang that created today’s world”. The two part documentary gives an overview of important events in 1989 that still shape our world today. See the video part 1 and part 2 on Youtube.
1979 was a year that still shapes our world even today. That was when three fundamental forces - the collapse of communism, neoliberalism, and politicized and radicalized religion, fused into a single potent force.
Philosophy Overdose published this short clip of Michel Foucault discussing power in an interview with André Berten from 1981.
In response to the protests of the gillets-jaunes the President Emmanuel Macron has started a “grand débat national” to discuss the grievances. In an opinion piece for AOC-media, Bruno Latour discusses how for the general public describing their problems may difficult however as we are between different visions for civilisation:
La situation créée par les « gilets jaunes » est une occasion rêvée pour rebondir politiquement : c’est en effet la première fois qu’il devient clair pour tout le monde qu’il existe un lien direct entre transition écologique et justice sociale. Inutile de continuer à opposer économie et écologie : il faut les conjoindre, tout en reconnaissant que c’est ouvrir la boite de Pandore. (…) La tension actuelle vient de ce que la société civile n’est pas plus capable que l’État de s’organiser vers ce nouveau régime comme on le voit par l’irréalisme des demandes. Il n’est donc pas facile de passer de la plainte à la doléance (terme entendu au sens ancien des Cahiers de doléance qui décrivaient des territoires en fonction des injustices commises et des moyens d’y remédier par une autre organisation de la fiscalité et du droit). La désorientation est donc générale, d’autant que ce qui reste des anciens partis continue à organiser la dispute selon l’ancien vecteur — identité nationale ou ethnique d’un côté, mondialisation et progrès de l’autre, sans oublier la révolution en costume d’époque enfin, si l’on voulait compléter le désespérant tableau de « l’offre politique ».
An interesting interview with Professor Mark Blyth on the “crisis of globalisation”. His view on commodification of our personal data seems a bit unsophisticated though: how would we actually be able to put a price on the use of our data, and wouldn’t this still leave all the power with the big companies to buy them off from us? But I agree that there is a general problem in governance.
[…] get people to individually license the use of their data to these firms. We auction off the digital spectrum to telephone companies. Why don’t we auction off our personal data? Basically give the data on a ten-year lease that’s revocable.
Another interesting point he made is about global international labour and its effect on wage inequality:
[…] labour’s ability to command its share of the surplus declines to zero. The strike becomes a meaningless weapon. Strikes decline to function—like to zero—in the western world. And you get prolonged wage stagnation, because essentially all the surplus goes to capital. There’s no reason for it not to. So labour’s ability to push up wages goes to zero.
Fifty year ago today the Prague Spring dream was crushed.