The Experts below are selected from a list of 264 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Bice Maiguashca - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
reclaiming feminist futures co opted and Progressive Politics in a neo liberal age
Political Studies, 2014Co-Authors: Catherine Eschle, Bice MaiguashcaAbstract:type="main"> This article engages with the influential narrative about the co-optation of feminism in conditions of neo-liberalism put forward by prominent feminist thinkers Nancy Fraser, Hester Eisenstein and Angela McRobbie. After drawing out the twin visions of ‘Progressive’ feminist Politics that undergird this narrative – couched in terms of either the retrieval of past socialist feminist glories or personal reinvention – we subject to critical scrutiny both their substantive claims and the conceptual scaffolding they invoke. We argue that the proleptic imaginings of all three authors, in different ways, are highly circumscribed in terms of the recommended agent, agenda and practices of Progressive Politics, and clouded by conceptual muddle over the meanings of ‘left’, ‘radical’ and ‘Progressive’. Taken together, these problems render the conclusions of Fraser, Eisenstein and McRobbie at best unconvincing and at worst dismissive of contemporary feminist efforts to challenge neo-liberalism. We end the article by disentangling and redefining left, radical and Progressive and by sketching a contrasting vision of Progressive feminist Politics enabled by this re-conceptualisation.
-
reclaiming feminist futures co opted and Progressive Politics in a neo liberal age
Political Studies, 2014Co-Authors: Catherine Eschle, Bice MaiguashcaAbstract:This article engages with the influential narrative about the co-optation of feminism in conditions of neo-liberalism put forward by prominent feminist thinkers Nancy Fraser, Hester Eisenstein and ...
Catherine Eschle - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
reclaiming feminist futures co opted and Progressive Politics in a neo liberal age
Political Studies, 2014Co-Authors: Catherine Eschle, Bice MaiguashcaAbstract:type="main"> This article engages with the influential narrative about the co-optation of feminism in conditions of neo-liberalism put forward by prominent feminist thinkers Nancy Fraser, Hester Eisenstein and Angela McRobbie. After drawing out the twin visions of ‘Progressive’ feminist Politics that undergird this narrative – couched in terms of either the retrieval of past socialist feminist glories or personal reinvention – we subject to critical scrutiny both their substantive claims and the conceptual scaffolding they invoke. We argue that the proleptic imaginings of all three authors, in different ways, are highly circumscribed in terms of the recommended agent, agenda and practices of Progressive Politics, and clouded by conceptual muddle over the meanings of ‘left’, ‘radical’ and ‘Progressive’. Taken together, these problems render the conclusions of Fraser, Eisenstein and McRobbie at best unconvincing and at worst dismissive of contemporary feminist efforts to challenge neo-liberalism. We end the article by disentangling and redefining left, radical and Progressive and by sketching a contrasting vision of Progressive feminist Politics enabled by this re-conceptualisation.
-
reclaiming feminist futures co opted and Progressive Politics in a neo liberal age
Political Studies, 2014Co-Authors: Catherine Eschle, Bice MaiguashcaAbstract:This article engages with the influential narrative about the co-optation of feminism in conditions of neo-liberalism put forward by prominent feminist thinkers Nancy Fraser, Hester Eisenstein and ...
Samuel Stein - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
progress for whom toward what Progressive Politics and new york city s mandatory inclusionary housing
Journal of Urban Affairs, 2018Co-Authors: Samuel SteinAbstract:ABSTRACTIn both its historical Progressive Era roots and its contemporary manifestations, U.S. urban progressivism has evinced a contradictory tendency toward promoting the interests of capital and...
Doug Imig - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
activism inc how the outsourcing of grassroots campaigns is strangling Progressive Politics in america and the art of protest culture and activism from the civil rights movement to the streets of seattle
Perspectives on Politics, 2007Co-Authors: Doug ImigAbstract:Activism Inc.: How the Outsourcing of Grassroots Campaigns Is Strangling Progressive Politics in America. By Dana R. Fisher. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006. 168p. $24.95 cloth. The Art of Protest: Culture and Activism from the Civil Rights Movement to the Streets of Seattle. By T. V. Reed. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005. 362p. $74.95 cloth, $24.95 paper. These two new books bring welcome perspectives to the study of social movements in America. Reed considers the art of collective action: in terms of both the creative repertoire of activists responding to evolving social and political contexts and the cultural arts that are invoked by and associated with social movements. Fisher's book, meanwhile, sheds light on a second dimension of collective action: the nationwide grassroots canvassing organizations that collect donations and [ostensibly] inform concerned citizens about Progressive issues. At first glance, the two books seem to be speaking to aspects of mobilization that are worlds apart. However, their differences help to bring a fuller understanding of the operational field in which social movements are sustained or wither.
Chyeching Huang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Progressive Politics and the courts lessons from the united states
Social Science Research Network, 2017Co-Authors: Chyeching Huang, Brian HighsmithAbstract:In recent years, contested political issues in the US have been subject to strategic judicial challenges that attempt to reopen political debates on a more favorable battleground. For example, twice in the four years after Congress and President Obama enacted health reform, legal challenges subjected this Progressive achievement to a final veto point: the consent of an ideologically fractured Supreme Court. Conservatives attempted to achieve through the courts — citing novel legal doctrines — a policy goal of enormous consequence, which they could not achieve through the legislature. Party actors used the judiciary as an institutional veto for the political process; a final means to block a policy change that American Progressives had for generations fought to secure. Conservatives made similar legal challenges to nearly all of President Obama’s major initiatives, in policy areas including oversight of the financial system, environmental regulation, and immigration. Further, recent Supreme Court decisions — particularly the decision securing nationwide marriage equality — may give the appearance that the US left has done well before the courts on ‘social’ issues, but that success may be overstated. And the perception may prove all the more illusory if we are entering an era in which economic policy issues dominate, or if the courts allow economic rights and powers, decided more in line with conservative values, to trump social ones. The stakes are even higher than particular, monumental policy decisions. Over time, delegating policymaking power to the courts could cause the mechanisms of healthy public participation in democratic decision-making to atrophy. The recent US experience is that the courts are erratic defenders of pillars of democratic participation, such as voting rights and measures against political corruption. Judicial power may also enervate citizens’ knowledge of and participation in far-reaching policy decisions. Judicial policymaking also distorts electoral Politics because it increases the stakes of judicial appointments. These possibilities should concern anyone who values strong citizen participation in public life and a healthy democracy. The left should be especially troubled: when democratic engagement falters and policymaking constricts to litigation, Progressive aims may be most hurt. The UK left may be attracted to constitutional arrangements that give the judiciary greater policymaking power through frustrations with political processes and court decisions on policy issues that advance Progressive aims. But a view from the US — a mature system, in which judges already have much policymaking power — should temper that attraction. Recent US developments suggest that judicial policymaking does not reliably secure Progressive goals, and, in the long run, could enfeeble democratic participation and debate in ways detrimental to democracy as a whole and Progressive aims in particular.
