This article presents proposals for a new social settlement – a framework for deciding how people live together and what they expect from government, now and for the future. The proposed settlement has three goals: social justice, environmental sustainability, and a more equal distribution of power. To achieve these goals we have identified a set of objectives too often ignored in mainstream debates: achieving prosperity without depending on economic growth; shifting investment and action upstream to prevent harm rather than coping with the consequences; strengthening the “core economy” of unpaid work, everyday wisdom, and social connections; and fostering solidarity and an understanding of how individuals depend on each other to achieve shared goals. The article draws on a report from the New Economics Foundation, which focuses on the United Kingdom but offers a framework for developing policy and practice that may be useful in other countries, especially in the developed world.
Toward a New Social Settlement
A Critique of Rawls
Susan Stedman Jones
Durkheim's account of the categories is re-examined, in a critique of the fundamentally mistaken and philosophically uninformed interpretation put forward in Rawls's Epistemology and Practice (2004). This converts Durkheim into a pragmatist, even a behaviourist, more or less reducing conscience to an epiphenomenon of sounds, movements, and socially generated raw emotions. She bypasses the key role of representations and symbols, while her emphasis on collective 'forces' ignores Durkheim's concern with power as puissance and with the creativity of an effervescent fusion of energies. Thus action is central to his account of the categories, but not in the terms offered by Rawls. For action involves the full range of the functions of conscience. And these come into play through the power of representations and symbols, as an integral part of a whole creative fusion of energies and consciences in the 'dynamogenics' of collective action.
Guy van de Walle
Among the many theories of socialization, that of Durkheim stands out. While most analyses of socialization are individualistic, that of Durkheim is holistic. This singularity presents a challenge to the modern mind, which is dominated by individualism. Reading Durkheim's analysis of socialization, like the rest of his work, requires the difficult task of overcoming one's natural tendency to do so through an individualistic lens. This paper is an attempt to restore the original holistic meaning of this analysis. It aims to correct some of Durkheim's commentators' re-interpretations of his views and the everyday language that he uses in individualistic terms. Particular attention is given to Durkheim's distinction between authority and power. This distinction has huge implications for Durkheim's interpretation of socialization, which he sees as a process that primarily involves a particular relationship - one that he describes in terms of 'submission' - with the authority of society.
the young and late Sartre. 6 We will also see the manner in which the concepts of rights, duties, and power that Sartre develops in this chapter are independent of the Polis . As such, Sartre has redefined certain of the fundamental concepts found in
Sartre and Barthes on Memory and Fascination
consciousness believes the object has a power over itself – this is what Sartre calls ‘magic’. Unlike utility, magic is a mode of being-in-the-world where appearances and consciousness work upon one another without mediation. Rather, emotion and a
Toward a New Legally Oriented Environment at a Global Level
Giovanni Tartaglia Polcini
multifarious implementation. The concept of rule of law is distinct from rule by law. The difference is that in the former, the law is preeminent and can serve as a check against the abuse of power. As such, the law is a tool for building a new legally
A Critical Realist Approach
bossy, superior in power and position, insulting, and property occupying” ( Cheng et al. 2011: 228 ). Historically, the appearance of anti-bullying policy could be also seen as a legacy of party politics and political governance as represented in school
Shlomit C. Schuster
Hope Now, Benny Lévy’s interviews with Sartre, conveys Sartre’s thoughts during the years immediately before his death. Published in March 1980, a month before Sartre died, the work was intended as the outline of the Sartre-Lévy book ‘Power and Freedom’. The Conversations between Sartre and Beauvoir were tape-recorded in 1974, but were not published until a year after Sartre’s death in 1981.
Natascha H. Lancaster
In this article, I argue that Sartre’s biography of Jean Genet, Saint Genet Actor and Martyr, can serve as an instrument of liberation for pariahs living today. Like Sartre, I define the word “pariah” to mean people who have suffered trauma in their lives and who are internally and socially oppressed as a consequence. Saint Genet’s power to free us arises paradoxically out of the conservative aspects for which it has been criticized in the last few years.
It might seem that Sartre's thought is no longer relevant in understanding and combating the maelstrom unleashed by triumphant neoliberalism. But we can still draw inspiration from Sartre's hatred of oppression and his project to understand how his most famous theme of individual self-determination and responsibility coexists with our social belonging and determination by historical forces larger than ourselves. Most important today is Sartre's understanding in Critique of Dialectical Reason of how isolated, serial individuals form into groups to resist oppression, and the ways in which these groups generate social understandings and collective power.