Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Hegemony
Kinds of Hegemony Selected AbstractsSpectacles of Modernity: Transnational Imagination and Local Hegemonies in Neoliberal Buenos AiresCULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY, Issue 2 2002Emanuela Guano First page of article [source] Cultural Hegemony of Singapore among ASEAN Countries: Globalization and Cultural PolicyINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF JAPANESE SOCIOLOGY, Issue 1 2004Kenichi Kawasaki The Singapore Government started to call their city a "Global City for the Arts", making numerous cultural policy changes. They also worked on various cultural experiments to establish their cultural leadership or hegemony among Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries. The development of arts policies, cultural industries and people's positive commitment towards cultural exchanges are examples of this change. Singapore therefore is now playing the role of the cultural hub among the ASEAN countries. As an example of this, the present study discusses "Esplanade", which opened as a huge cultural complex in October 2002. Then the paper will also discuss both bright and dark sides of the cultural development in Singapore. As a conclusion, this paper discusses the possibility of the cultural contribution of Singapore to ASEAN countries, in spite of having serious epistemological discontinuity among ASEAN. [source] Global Order, US Hegemony and Military Integration: The Canadian-American Defense RelationshipINTERNATIONAL POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY, Issue 4 2008Bruno Charbonneau This article argues that the contemporary IR literature on global order and American hegemony has limitations. First, the critical discourse on hegemony fails to adequately examine the deeply embedded nature of regularized practices that are often a key component of the acceptance of certain state and social behaviours as natural. Second, much of the (neo)Gramscian literature has given primacy to the economic aspects of hegemonic order at the expense of examining global military/security relations. Lastly, much of the literature on global order and hegemony has failed to fully immerse itself within a detailed research program. This article presents an historical sociology of Canada-US defense relations so as to argue that the integrated nature of this relationship is key to understanding Canada's role in American hegemony, and how authoritative narratives and practices of "military integration" become instrumental and persuasive in establishing a "commonsensical" worldview. The effects of such integration are especially clear in times of perceived international crisis. Our historical analysis covers Canada's role during the Cuban missile crisis, Operation Apollo after 9/11, and the current war in Afghanistan. [source] Global Intellectual Hegemony and the International Development AgendaINTERNATIONAL SOCIAL SCIENCE JOURNAL, Issue 166 2000Branislav Gosovic The worldwide homogenisation of thinking, analysis, and prescription, coupled with the de-legitimisation of social critique, dissent, and alternative thinking in the 1990s, are characteristic of globalisation and of the current international system. The homogenisation is the outcome of global geopolitical changes and the end of the Cold War, with the ascendance of a victorious paradigm. The resulting global intellectual hegemony (GIH) is of special concernto developing countries and to the United Nations. It has undermined the goals and aspirations of the former and contributed to their intellectual disarmament and disempowerment; it has undermined the mandate and role of the latter. This essay discusses GIH in the context of international development cooperation, showing how it is nurtured in many different ways. It is argued that the mechanisms at work are well-known in national politics, in particular inundemocratic societies, and are now projected by new technologies and through the global domination by those with power, a task made easier by the lack of organised and credible opposition. It suggests the need for further study and policy debate of this global phenomenon which seems to have largely passed unnoticed in academic, policy, and public opinion circles. [source] American Hegemony and the Future of East,West RelationsINTERNATIONAL STUDIES PERSPECTIVES, Issue 1 2006DAVID A. LAKE This brief essay sketches a view of international politics as a realm of variegated hierarchy and highlights the importance of authority in the conduct of hegemonic foreign policies. After developing a conception of hierarchy in international relations, the framework is applied to the future East,West relations. Conflict with rising powers, especially China, is not foreordained, but is a function in part of the policy choices made by the United States. In the long run, China will overtake the United States in some aggregate measures of international power. If current trends continue, and the United States attempts to counter this challenge on its own, it will slowly but inexorably lose its supremacy. On the other hand, by building authority, the United States can, at a minimum, face a future Chinese superpower with strong subordinates who benefit from its leadership. At a maximum, it might even succeed in locking China into an American-dominated international order. [source] The Sino,Russian Partnership and U.S. Policy Toward North Korea: From Hegemony to Concert in Northeast AsiaINTERNATIONAL STUDIES QUARTERLY, Issue 3 2005David Kerr This paper presents two sets of arguments: one theoretical and one analytical. The theoretical arguments concern the relationship between regional ordering and systemic change. The paper questions the usefulness of the unipolar conception of the contemporary system arguing that the interaction of the Great Powers cannot be understood without reference to regional dynamics. Thus, a unipolar system implies considerable potential for U.S. hegemonic intervention at the regional level but in East Asia, we find an equilibrium constructed out of both material and normative forces, defined as a concert, which presents a considerable restraint on all powers, including the U.S. The paper then proceeds to examine these claims through an analysis of the foreign policies of the U.S., Russia, and China over the North Korean nuclear problem that emerged after 2002. It finds that China and Russia have substantive common interests arising from internal and external re-ordering in which they look to strategic partnerships, regional multilateralism, and systemic multipolarization as inter-locking processes. The paper finds that they have collaborated over the Korean crisis to prevent a U.S. unilateral solution but that this should not be construed as a success for an open counterhegemonic strategy as it was only under the constraining conditions of East Asian concert, including the dynamics within the U.S. alliance systems, that this collaboration was successful. Nevertheless, the paper concludes that regional multipolarity and systemic unipolarity are contradictory: a system that exhibits multipolarization at the regional level cannot be characterized as unipolar at the global level. [source] US Hegemony in a Unipolar World: Here to Stay or Sic Transit Gloria?INTERNATIONAL STUDIES REVIEW, Issue 4 2009Christopher Layne First page of article [source] American Orientalism and American Exceptionalism: A Critical Rethinking of US HegemonyINTERNATIONAL STUDIES REVIEW, Issue 2 2009Meghana V. Nayak In this essay, we argue that critical International Relations (IR) scholars must consider American Orientalism in tandem with American Exceptionalism in order to better understand US identity, foreign policymaking, and hegemony. We claim that American Exceptionalism is a particular type of American Orientalism, a style of thought about the distinctions between the "West" and the "East" that gives grounding to the foundational narrative of "America." While Exceptionalism and Orientalism both deploy similar discursive, ontological, and epistemological claims about the "West" and its non-western "Others," Exceptionalism is also rooted specifically in American political thought that developed in contradistinction to Europe. As such, we demonstrate that different logics of othering are at work between the West and the non-West, and among Western powers. We implore critical IR scholars to interrogate how the United States and Europe alternatively collude and clash in wielding normative power over their non-Western Others. We claim such research is important for exploring the staying power of American hegemony and understanding the implications of European challenges to American foreign policy, particularly given recent concerns about a so-called transatlantic divide. [source] Fooling Oneself: The Mythology of HegemonyINTERNATIONAL STUDIES REVIEW, Issue 1 2009Charles F. Doran First page of article [source] Hegemony and Its Discontents: A Symposium,INTERNATIONAL STUDIES REVIEW, Issue 4 2005Steven Lamy First page of article [source] American Hegemony or Global Governance?INTERNATIONAL STUDIES REVIEW, Issue 4 2005Competing Visions of International Security First page of article [source] A Realist Theory of HegemonyJOURNAL FOR THE THEORY OF SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR, Issue 2 2000Jonathan Joseph A new approach to understanding hegemony is developed based on the method of critical realism. Breaking from the traditional interpretations that emphasise inter-subjective, superstructural and cultural aspects of hegemony, this article looks at hegemony's structural context and the conditions for its possibility. A realist conception of hegemony relates hegemonic projects to structural reproduction and transformation via Bhaskar's transformational model of social activity. In doing so this model is itself modified to incorporate hegemony as the political moment of social reproduction. A distinction is made between hegemony in its structural aspect, and specific hegemonic projects as emergent possibilities. [source] Households and Hegemony: Early Creek Prestige Goods, Symbolic Capital, and Social Power by Cameron WessonAMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST, Issue 1 2010David Hally No abstract is available for this article. [source] Judicial Hegemony: Dworkin's Freedom's Law and the Spectrum of Constitutional DemocraciesRATIO JURIS, Issue 3 2002Brian Donohue Ronald Dworkin's Freedom's Law offers a solution to a thorny problem in American constitutional law. He argues that the authority of the American Supreme Court to make the final determination on constitutional questions is consistent with democratic principles. In this paper, I try to show that his solution is unsatisfactory because it permits the possibility of a judicial usurpation of authority that is inconsistent with his characterization of democratic principles. Freedom's Law is also a bold attempt to offer prescriptions for constitutional democracies generally. By drawing a distinction between two concepts of authority, I object to this effort. I argue that Dworkin's analysis assumes the operation of a conception of authority that I label the pyramid model. I also introduce a bipolar model of authority and try to show its application to the Canadian constitutional scheme. On this basis, I conclude that his prescriptions are relevant only for a portion of the spectrum of constitutional democracies. [source] Preemptive Self-defense: Hegemony, Equality and Strategies of Legal Change,THE JOURNAL OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, Issue 2 2003Michael Byers First page of article [source] On NCATE Standards and Culture at Work: Conversations, Hegemony, and (Dis-)Abling ConsequencesANTHROPOLOGY & EDUCATION QUARTERLY, Issue 1 2007Hervé Varenne Many are unaware of the power of the NCATE standards for the accreditation of schools of education. In this article, I first trace the development of the political authority of these standards, and their imposition on hundreds of schools of education. I then focus on the discourse of these standards, particularly the emphasis on "knowledge, skills and dispositions" as personal properties to control. I conclude with a call to highlight the struggles in which all involved are engaged. [source] US Hegemony and the Obama Administration: Towards a New World Order?ANTIPODE, Issue 2 2010Allan Watson First page of article [source] Struggle for Hegemony: A Reply to Aynsley Kellow's Review of Arenas of PowerAUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, Issue 1 2010Theodore J. Lowi First page of article [source] Rezension: American Hegemony and the Postwar Reconstruction of Science in Europe von John KrigeBERICHTE ZUR WISSENSCHAFTSGESCHICHTE, Issue 4 2009Helke Rausch No abstract is available for this article. [source] Introduction: Nationalism, the Left and Hegemony in Latin AmericaBULLETIN OF LATIN AMERICAN RESEARCH, Issue 3 2007MICHAEL GOEBEL First page of article [source] State Project Europe: The Transformation of the European Border Regime and the Production of Bare LifeINTERNATIONAL POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY, Issue 1 2010Sonja Buckel Giorgio Agamben refers to a basic problem in the constitution of the modern nation state: the state as a nation implies that "bare life" becomes the foundation of sovereignty. With the loss of their citizenship, refugees lose not only all their rights, but more fundamentally the "right to have rights" (Arendt). This dilemma of modern statehood does not vanish under conditions of European integration; it is rather re-scaled. Applying a state-theoretical approach to the European border regime, we will concentrate on the two main techniques by which the EU produces "bare life": the "camp" and the invisible "police state." It will become apparent that the institutionalization of "the right of every human being to belong to mankind" is still lacking. Yet, in contrast to Agamben, we do not trace this constellation back to the collapse of the concept of human rights, but to hegemonies and power relations. [source] Discipline and the Arts of Domination: Rituals of Respect in Chimborazo, EcuadorCULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY, Issue 1 2005Barry J. Lyons Mestizo and indigenous authorities on 20th-century highland Ecuadorian haciendas exercised authority through culturally hybrid practices of ritual discipline. Rather than opposing force to persuasion, I argue that hacienda discipline used coercion as part of a strategy of persuasion. This argument is tied to a social-structural as well as cultural notion of hegemony: By regulating internal social relations, authorities linked their power to the notion of morality and "respect" held by subordinates, thereby also shaping the latter's understanding of resistance. [source] Learning from Difference: Considerations for Schools as CommunitiesCURRICULUM INQUIRY, Issue 3 2000Carolyn M. Shields In today's highly complex and heterogeneous public schools, the current notion of schools as homogeneous communities with shared beliefs, norms, and alues is inadequate. Drawing on Barth's (1990) question of how to use ifference as a resource, I take up ideas from feminism, multiculturalism, and inclusive education to consider the development of community in schools. I argue that despite the valuable contributions of these theoretical perspectives, each lso includes the potential for increased fragmentation and polarization. As we consider how to use differences as a foundation for community, it is important ot to reify any particular perspective, thus marginalizing others and erecting new barriers. Explicitly embracing the need to identify and respect difference, being open to new ideas without taking an exclusionary position, and committing to ongoing participation in dialogical processes may help schools to develop as more authentic communities of difference. Among the dominant issues identified in today's climate of turbulent educational reform are concerns about how to restructure schools to ensure equality of student opportunity and excellence of instruction (Elmore, 1990; Lieberman, 1992; Murphy, 1991). Many proposals include modifying present leadership and governance structures, overcoming the hegemony of existing power bases, developing mechanisms for accountability, enhancing professionalism, and co-ordinating community resources. One of the suggestions frequently made to address these issues is to change from a focus on schools as organizations to a recognition of schools as communities (Barth, 1990; Fullan, 1993; Lupart & Webber, 1996; Senge, 1990). However, despite the widespread use of the metaphor of community as an alternative to the generally accepted concept of schools as rational or functional organizations, there seems to be little clarity about the concept of community, what it might look like, how it might be implemented, or what policies might sustain it. Indeed, theories about schools as communities have often drawn from Tönnies (1887/1971) concept of gemeinschaft,a concept which perhaps evokes a more homogeneous and romanticized view of the past than one which could be helpful for improving education in today's dynamic, complex, and heterogeneous context (Beck & Kratzer, 1994; Sergiovanni, 1994a). More recently, several writers (Fine et al., 1997; Furman, 1998; Shields & Seltzer, 1997) have advanced the notion of communities of otherness or difference. These authors have suggested that rather than thinking of schools as communities that exist because of a common affiliation to an established school ethos or tradition, it might be more helpful to explore an alternative concept. A school community founded on difference would be one in which the common centre would not be taken as a given but would be co-constructed from the negotiation of disparate beliefs and values as participants learn to respect, and to listen to, each other. In this concept, bonds among members are not assumed, but forged, and boundaries are not imposed but negotiated. Over the past eight years, as I have visited and worked with a large number of schools trying earnestly to address the needs of their diverse student bodies, I have become increasingly aware of the limitations of the concept of community used in the gemeinschaft sense with its emphasis on shared values, norms, and beliefs, and have begun to reflect on the question framed by Barth (1990): ,How can we make conscious, deliberate use of differences in social class, gender, age, ability, race, and interest as resources for learning?' (p. 514). In this article, I consider how learning from three of these areas of difference: gender, race, and ability, may help us to a better understanding of educational community. This article begins with some illustrations and examples from practice, moves to consider how some theoretical perspectives may illuminate them, and concludes with reflections on how the implications of the combined reflections on practice and theory might actually help to reconceptualize and to improve practice. While it draws heavily on questions and impressions which have arisen out of much of my fieldwork, it is not intended to be an empirical paper, but a conceptual one,one which promotes reflection and discussion on the concept of schools as communities of difference. The examples of life in schools taken from longitudinal research studies in which I have been involved demonstrate several common ways in which difference is dealt with in today's schools and some of the problems inherent in these approaches. Some ideas drawn from alternative perspectives then begin to address Barth's question of how to make deliberate use of diversity as a way of thinking about community. Taken together, I hope that these ideas will be helpful in creating what I have elsewhere called ,schools as communities of difference' (Shields & Seltzer, 1997). [source] Synthesis and separation in the history of "nature" and "nurture"DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOBIOLOGY, Issue 8 2007Cheryl A. Logan Abstract For much of the 20th century scientific psychology treated the relative contributions of nature and nurture to the development of phenotypes as the result of two quite separate sources of influence. One, nature, was linked to biological perspectives, often manifest as "instinct", while the other, nurture, was taken to reflect psychological influences. We argue that this separation was contingent on historical circumstance. Prior to about 1920, several perspectives in biology and psychology promoted the synthesis of nature and nurture. But between 1930 and 1980 that synthetic consensus was lost in America as numerous influences converged to promote a view that identified psychological and biological aspects of mind and behavior as inherently separate. Around 1960, during the hegemony of behaviorism, Daniel Lehrman, Gilbert Gottlieb, and other pioneers of developmental psychobiology developed probabilistic epigenesis to reject predeterminist notions of instinct and restore a synthesis. We describe the earlier and later periods of synthesis and discuss several influences that led to the separation of nature and nurture in the middle of the 20th century. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Dev Psychobiol 49: 758,769, 2007. [source] A Brief Commentary on the Hegelian-Marxist Origins of Gramsci's ,Philosophy of Praxis'EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY AND THEORY, Issue 6 2009Debbie J Hill Abstract The specific nuances of what Gramsci names ,the new dialectic' are explored in this paper. The dialectic was Marx's specific ,mode of thought' or ,method of logic' as it has been variously called, by which he analyzed the world and man's relationship to that world. As well as constituting a theory of knowledge (epistemology), what arises out of the dialectic is also an ontology or portrait of humankind that is based on the complete historicization of humanity; its ,absolute "historicism"' or ,the absolute secularisation and earthliness of thought', as Gramsci worded it (Gramsci, 1971, p. 465). Embracing a fully secular and historical view of humanity, it provides a vantage point that allows the multiple and complex effects of our own conceptual heritage to be interrogated in relation to our developing ,nature' or ,being'. The argument presented in this paper is that the legacy of both Hegel and Marx is manifest in the depth of Gramsci's comprehension of what he termed the ,educative-formative' problem of hegemony. It is precisely the legacy of this Hegelian-Marxist radical philosophical critique that is signified in his continuing commitment to the ,philosophy of praxis' and the historical-dialectical principles that underpin this worldview. [source] The role of political myth in the international conflict over genetically modified foods and cropsENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GOVERNANCE, Issue 6 2007Sarah Lieberman Abstract Although the controversy over genetically modified (GM) foods and crops has generated some well known myths, such as ,frankenfoods', there has been little analysis of the political role played by these myths. Yet the significance of myth in the GM debate is considerable: indeed, by reflecting and reinforcing the political stances of the major protagonists, myths have themselves become important components in the conflict. With the aid of theoretical tools derived from Laclau, we examine the notion of political myth, and find that it has three levels: factual error, social meaning and political hegemony. We apply this theory to the GM controversy, distinguishing between substantive GM myths, such as frankenfoods, and procedural GM myths, such as the EU moratorium on GM products. We conclude that if such political myths become powerful enough, they could transform themselves into dominant hegemons , i.e. what Laclau calls social imaginaries , and begin to dictate GM policies across the globe. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment. [source] Mortuary Rituals in Japan: The Hegemony of Tradition and the Motivations of IndividualsETHOS, Issue 3 2006Yohko Tsuji Despite rapid social change, traditional mortuary rituals persist in contemporary Japan, and most Japanese ascribe their continuous compliance with tradition to cultural hegemony. In this article, I explore various other motivational forces behind their actions and illustrates how external pressures and individuals' internal motivations are intricately intertwined to generate human behavior. To do so, I consider the social and personal significance of Japanese funerals, examining rituals not only as an embodiment of sociocultural order but also as a culturally prescribed means to legitimize individuals' actions and define their identity. I also demonstrate the multiplicity and fluidity of cultural discourse and the malleability of tradition as well as individuals' active roles in perpetuating and altering mortuary tradition. Primary data were gathered from participant-observation research in Japan since 1988. [funerals, gift exchange, culture and the individual, motivations, identity, Japan] [source] The network of global corporations and elite policy groups: a structure for transnational capitalist class formation?GLOBAL NETWORKS, Issue 1 2003William K. Carroll This study situates five top transnational policy,planning groups within the larger structure of corporate power that is constituted through interlocking directorates among the world's largest companies. Each group makes a distinct contribution towards transnational capitalist hegemony both by building consensus within the global corporate elite and by educating publics and states on the virtues of one or another variant of the neo,liberal paradigm. Analysis of corporate,policy interlocks reveals that a few dozen cosmopolitans , primarily men based in Europe and North America and actively engaged in corporate management , knit the network together via participation in transnational interlocking and/or multiple policy groups. As a structure underwriting transnational business activism, the network is highly centralized, yet from its core it extends unevenly to corporations and individuals positioned on its fringes. The policy groups pull the directorates of the world's major corporations together, and collaterally integrate the lifeworld of the global corporate elite, but they do so selectively, reproducing regional differences in participation. These findings support the claim that a well,integrated global corporate elite has formed, and that global policy groups have contributed to its formation. Whether this elite confirms the arrival of a transnational capitalist class is a matter partly of semantics and partly of substance. [source] American foundations and the development of international knowledge networksGLOBAL NETWORKS, Issue 1 2002Inderjeet Parmar This article examines the role and influence of three American foundations , Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford , in developing international knowledge networks that significantly impacted upon the Third World, helping to consolidate US hegemony after 1945, fostering pro-US values, methods and research institutions. The international networks were modelled on prior domestic initiatives resulting in the effective intellectual hegemony of ,liberal internationalism', of empirical scientific research methods, and of policy-oriented studies. Such domestic hegemony constructed a key basis of America's rise to globalism, which after 1945 required a continuing and enhanced foundation role, especially with the onset of the Cold War. The article, which examines the role of the US foundations in relation to intellectual hegemony construction in Latin America, Indonesia, and Africa, concludes that the evidence is best explained by Gramscian theory, and calls for further empirical research in this vital area. [source] Cultural Hegemony of Singapore among ASEAN Countries: Globalization and Cultural PolicyINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF JAPANESE SOCIOLOGY, Issue 1 2004Kenichi Kawasaki The Singapore Government started to call their city a "Global City for the Arts", making numerous cultural policy changes. They also worked on various cultural experiments to establish their cultural leadership or hegemony among Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries. The development of arts policies, cultural industries and people's positive commitment towards cultural exchanges are examples of this change. Singapore therefore is now playing the role of the cultural hub among the ASEAN countries. As an example of this, the present study discusses "Esplanade", which opened as a huge cultural complex in October 2002. Then the paper will also discuss both bright and dark sides of the cultural development in Singapore. As a conclusion, this paper discusses the possibility of the cultural contribution of Singapore to ASEAN countries, in spite of having serious epistemological discontinuity among ASEAN. [source] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||