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 @rpbellamy1: Surprise surprise - Labour needs to become the Opposition on the central issue of the day and target the remain vote https:… 2 hours ago
- More on the ambivalences of GCRF - Budget wheeze could be double whammy for aid and research | THE timeshighereducation.com/comment/budget… 23 hours ago
- Thx @LeedsUniMedia for friendly & incisive questions in response to my talk @hesmondthing media.leeds.ac.uk/events/profess… 1 day ago
- The dangers of ‘housing at the centre’ - Marie Huchzermeyer - shar.es/19U03j 2 days ago
- RT @jameswilsdon: New @beisgovuk group on Brexit, unis, S&I has 5 STEM bodies & 0 social sci or A&H. Why @JoJohnsonMP @stianwestlake? https… 2 days ago
- Affect theory: Ruth Leys critique in Critical Inquiry
- Is governmentality a dirty word?
- Whatever happened to postcolonial theory?
- Critical spatial theory: my thoughts
- Things to Read
- It's not the city, it's the weather we love
- On the milieu of security: Paper and discussion in Dialogues in Human Geography
- Whatever happened to social theory?
- On difficulty: Derek Parfit's new book is published