Is the more or less grudging involvement of social theorists with the Libyan regime in the 2000s now shown to be an index of naivety, or stupidity, or venality? The involvement of David Held and the LSE has been much discussed this week, via Saif Gaddafi’s PhD, and an optimistic commentary by Anthony Giddens in 2007 unearthed. Rather more interesting perhaps is the democratic theorist Benjamin Barber, whose involvement with the Qadaffi Foundation is long-standing. Here is a comment by Barber in 2007 on the ‘normalisation’ of relations with Libya, around nuclear weapons and the ‘war on terror’ in particular. Barber has now resigned from this organisation, and this involvement is the basis of his rather sobering analysis of the prospects for democratization in Libya whatever the outcome of current events.
- Network of Concerned Geographers. Sign here: actionnetwork.org/petitions/netw… 1 day ago
- After Habitat III: a stronger urban future must be based on the right to the city | Cities | The Guardian theguardian.com/cities/2016/oc… 2 days ago
- Habermas Biography by Stefan Müller-Doohm habermas-rawls.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/haberm… 4 days ago
- RT @SAGEGeography: Really pleased to announce the publication of this next month from Mike Hulme ow.ly/TTRX305bffV #climate #climatec… 5 days ago
- In the Fall: Decolonisation and the rejuvenation of the academic project in South Africa | Daily Maverick dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/20… 1 week ago
- Affect theory: Ruth Leys critique in Critical Inquiry
- Whatever happened to postcolonial theory?
- The Politics of the Global Challenges Research Fund
- Bite Size Theory: The Big Screen
- Is governmentality a dirty word?
- Whatever happened to social theory?
- Class in Human Geography
- Seeing Like a Market and its Problems
- Philip Pettit's Republican Reflections on the 15-M Movement