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.
- RT @summerbee67: Fantastic launch of our 'Humans, animals and biopolitcs: the more than human condition' in UiO Oslo this week, with Thomas… 4 hours ago
- Study finds 7m Britons in poverty despite being from working families theguardian.com/society/2016/d… 8 hours ago
- The Dangerous Myth That Hillary Clinton Ignored the Working Class theatlantic.com/business/archi… 22 hours ago
- A prize to celebrate 'ugliness, nihilism and narcissism & the tragic emptiness of now'? Wouldn't Michael Gove win? bbc.co.uk/news/entertain… 1 day ago
- RT @BerghahnAnthro: Access these journal articles on Claude Lévi-Strauss for free for a limited time: ht.ly/tc5n306IpXk https://t.co/… 2 days ago
- Affect theory: Ruth Leys critique in Critical Inquiry
- The Politics of the Global Challenges Research Fund
- Whatever happened to postcolonial theory?
- The Uses of Social Science
- Neoliberalism as radical political economy
- Bad Foucault
- Alternative Urbanisms
- Bite Size Criticism
- Elections as inference machines