DOCSLIB.ORG

A Re-Issue of the Text of the May Day Manifesto, with a New Introduction by Michael Rustin

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Re-Issue of the Text of the May Day Manifesto, with a New Introduction by Michael Rustin MAY DAY MANIFESTO1967-68 A re-issue of the text of the May Day Manifesto, with a new introduction by Michael Rustin May 2013 May Day Manifesto 1967-68 A re-issue of the text of the May Day Manifesto, with a new introduction by Michael Rustin May 2013 Note on text May Day Manifesto 1967-8 - Edited by Raymond Williams There are two versions of the May Day Manifesto. The first published in May 1967 was the result of a large group of contributors and edited by Stuart Hall, Edward Thompson and Raymond Williams. The second, a Penguin special was released with Raymond Williams as sole editor. Both versions are copyright the May Day Manifesto Committee of which Michael Rustin was secretary. The 1968 version has been preferred. Typesetting: Ed Sherman Cover: Yoav Segal Project co-ordinator: Ben Little © Mayday Manifesto Committee Published by Soundings With thanks to: Avni Shah Middlesex University ii Contents Note on text ii Revisiting the May Day Manifesto of 1967-68 vi Original preface xxii 1. May Day 1 2. Where the analysis starts 5 3. Social realities 8 4. Poverty today 11 5. The facts of inequality 16 6. Social poverty 19 7. Housing, health and education 23 8. The realities of work 29 9. Communications 34 10. Advertising 36 11. The meaning of modernization 39 12. New capitalist requirements 42 13. The laws of the new market 47 iii Contents 14. The laws of the United States economy 51 15. The economic drive outwards 55 16. America and Europe 58 17. The technological gap 61 18. Effects on the ‘host’ nations 64 19. The new imperialism 68 20. The power of trade 73 21. The power of money 76 22. The international firm 79 23. The effects of aid 81 24. Changes in the Third World 85 25. Elites and armies 88 26. War and Cold War 91 27. The Cold War moves outwards 96 28. Political managers of the world 100 29. Backlash in Europe 105 30. The British crisis 108 31. The position of British industry 114 32. The response of British industry 117 33. Special characteristics of British capitalism 120 34. The role of the State 123 iv Contents 35. But what is the State? 127 36. Labour’s aims and capitalist planning 129 37. Labour and the crisis of the world economy 131 38. The Rake’s Progress 134 39. Devaluation and after 139 40. The power of capital and labour in Britain 143 41. There are alternative policies 146 42. Against managed politics 157 43. Voters, representatives and others 161 44. Two meanings of social democracy 165 45. The Labour Party 171 46. Other radical groupings 178 47. Other socialist groupings 185 48. The unions and politics 192 49. The bearings of change 197 50. The politics of the manifesto 202 v Revisiting the May Day Manifesto of 1967-68 Michael Rustin The May Day Manifesto came out in May 1967, not far short of fifty years ago. It was edited by Stuart Hall, Edward Thompson and Raymond Williams, and appeared with the names of over 70 signatories - writers, academics and activists associated with the New Left. It was republished in an extended form a year later as a Penguin Special, with Raymond Williams as its editor, and sold more than 10,000 copies. Its purpose was to make a comprehensive declaration of opposition to the new capitalism - a ‘managerial’ form of capitalism - which it saw emerging. More specifically, it set out its disappointment and dismay at the retreat of the Labour government which had been elected with high hopes in 1964, as it placed “the protection of a capitalist economic and financial system before jobs, care and extended education.” (p.1) Its emphasis was on confronting this system as a whole. As the editors state in the opening chapter: It is our basic case, in this Manifesto, that the separate campaigns in which we have been active, and the separate issues with which we have all been concerned, run back, in their essence to a single political system and its alternatives. We believe that the system we now oppose can only survive by a willed separation of issues, and the resulting fragmentation of consciousness. Our own first position is that all the issues, industrial and political, international and domestic, economic and cultural, humanitarian and radical, are deeply connected; that what we oppose is a political, economic and social system, vi Revisiting the May Day Manifesto of 1967-68 that what we work for is a different whole society. (p.4) We are again confronting an entire system, now in a state of more severe crisis than that which faced the authors of the May Day Manifesto in 1967. We are republishing this document because we think it is valuable to read a statement which gave such a unified analysis and critique of the ‘new capitalism’ of that time, and urged a joined-up opposition to it. It did this in the name of a socialism which we define “again as humanism: a recognition of the social reality of man in all his activities, and of the consequent struggle for the direction of this reality by and for ordinary men and women.” (p.4) This is a language of socialist aspiration which is today scarcely uttered. At a time when many are coming to see that the triumph of neoliberalism - an unfettered version of capitalism - has come at enormous economic, social and environmental cost, it seems to me that the May Day Manifesto deserves to be read again as a contribution to the project of inspiring a concerted resistance to the system that now dominates much of the world. Later in this introduction, something will be said about the origins of the May Day Manifesto and its place in the history of the New Left which had begun its existence a decade or so earlier, in 1956. But first, the Manifesto’s political analysis. The 1967 critique The May Day Manifesto was addressing in 1967 a crisis very different from that of today. Yet all the same we find in its analysis of the society of its day some remarkable continuities with what we can observe now. The adversary against which the Manifesto set itself was an emerging system, a new capitalism. It saw this system as coming increasingly under the sway of large corporations, whose leading and dominant examples were based in the United States, although they were actively expanding their influence at that time. It believed this semi-monopolistic form of capitalism to be aggressive in its determination to impose its power over all of the economy, government and society. It saw it as a global system, active in fashioning vii Revisiting the May Day Manifesto of 1967-68 new means of imperial influence and control, through the penetration of the economies of developing countries, and also in its confrontation with the Communist world in the Cold War, now extended across many continents. It was written during the Vietnam War and was allied to contemporary resistance to it, for example one of its few quotations is from an Isaac Deutscher speech at the 1966 Berkeley teach-in on the War. The May Day Manifesto insisted that the resistance to the new capitalism, to the new imperialism, and to the Cold War, were connected in terms of explanation, and needed to be joined up in terms of political action. It proposed what was in effect a total break with the dominant system, in all its manifestations, asking its readers to imagine the development of an alternative, democratic, socialist and humanist society. From our current location in history, such an ambition is resonant, urgently needed even, and the text describes symptoms that bear striking similarity to our current conjuncture, but it is important to remember that the system which the Manifesto of 1967-68 confronted was in many respects different from that of the present day. One has the disorienting experience in reading the document, of knowing that the adversary the authors had believed to be so powerful and threatening, was soon to encounter a period of extreme tension, and was to fail in the governmental crisis of the 1970s. The Manifesto feared ‘corporatism’ as an unwelcome and undesirable solution to the economic difficulties it described. It saw some kind of compromise between capital and organised labour as inevitable, if the system was to function in a stable way. There is a pre-echo of later discussions of the ‘Fordist mode of production’, in which it was held that mass production could only be profitable for capital if there were adequate demand to sustain mass consumption. Workers in industry were deemed to hold such powers, as a consequence of full employment and relative prosperity, that trade unions were perceived to have a valuable function for corporate employers in managing the demands of their workforce. The substantial (one quarter) of the national economy then in public ownership was held to have a function which was positive for capital, in providing goods and services for the private sector at below their true costs, with the support of subsidies from viii Revisiting the May Day Manifesto of 1967-68 the state. Some sort of collective stake in the system then seemed necessary to the stability of capitalism itself. The new capitalism was feared for its potential to incorporate and nullify any serious dissension from its world-view. The retreats of the Labour government of the 1960s were read as emblematic of a general tendency within Labourism to become absorbed into the dominant system, offering little more than token resistance to its demands.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • One World Or Three? a Critique of the World-System Theory of Immanuel Wallerstein*
    ONE WORLD OR THREE? A CRITIQUE OF THE WORLD-SYSTEM THEORY OF IMMANUEL WALLERSTEIN* Peter Worsley Our thinking about the process of development has been fundamentally changed in recent years by the emergence of world-system theory, notably in the writings of Andri. Gunder Frank, Immanuel Wallerstein and Samir Amin. It is with the thought of the first two, and primarily Wallerstein, that I shall be concerned here. All of us stand deeply in their debt, not only for the clarity with which they have presented their theoretical frameworks, but also for the serious documentation they have adduced from the historical record. One has only to contrast, for example, the impressionistic account of the 'creation of the world' that I sketched in the first chapter of my book, The Third World, in 1964, to see what a step forward their work represents in terms of theoretical rigour and empirical research. ' World-system theory was initially generated in reaction to 'dualistic' notions which informed most of the development theory of the period following World War 11. The most important theoretical statement of the dualist approach was Arthur Lewis' The Theory of Economic Growth (Allen and Unwin, London, 195 5), for which he has been awarded a Nobel Prize. But in terms of its influence upon government policy, the Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA) achieved much more than did Lewis' abortive venture into planning in Africa and elsewhere. The basic assumption was that the economies of the backward countries could be divided into a modern and a traditional sector respectively. The task of 'modernisation' then consists, it was argued, in shifting resources from the latter to the former; the strategy advocated that of import-substitution.
    [Show full text]
  • Stuart Hall Bibliography 25-05-2021
    Stuart Hall (3 February 1932 – 10 February 2014) Editor — Universities & Left Review, 1957–1959. — New Left Review, 1960–1961. — Soundings, 1995–2014. Publications (in chronological order) (1953–2014) Publications are given in the following order: sole authored works first, in alphabetical order. Joint authored works are then listed, marked ‘with’, and listed in order of co- author’s surname, and then in alphabetical order. Audio-visual material includes radio and television broadcasts (listed by date of first transmission), and film (listed by date of first showing). 1953 — ‘Our Literary Heritage’, The Daily Gleaner, (3 January 1953), p.? 1955 — ‘Lamming, Selvon and Some Trends in the West Indian Novel’, Bim, vol. 6, no. 23 (December 1955), 172–78. — ‘Two Poems’ [‘London: Impasse by Vauxhall Bridge’ and ‘Impasse: Cities to Music Perhaps’], BIM, vol. 6, no. 23 (December 1955), 150–151. 1956 — ‘Crisis of Conscience’, Oxford Clarion, vol. 1, no. 2 (Trinity Term 1956), 6–9. — ‘The Ground is Boggy in Left Field!’ Oxford Clarion, vol. 1, no 3 (Michaelmas Term, 1956), 10–12. 1 — ‘Oh, Young Men’ (Extract from “New Landscapes for Aereas”), in Edna Manley (ed.), Focus: Jamaica, 1956 (Kingston/Mona: The Extra-Mural Department of University College of the West Indies, 1956), p. 181. — ‘Thus, At the Crossroads’ (Extract from “New Landscapes for Aereas”), in Edna Manley (ed.), Focus: Jamaica, 1956 (Kingston/Mona: The Extra-Mural Department of University College of the West Indies, 1956), p. 180. — with executive members of the Oxford Union Society, ‘Letter: Christmas Card Aid’, The Times, no. 53709 (8 December 1956), 7. 1957 — ‘Editorial: “Revaluations”’, Oxford Clarion: Journal of the Oxford University Labour Club, vol.
    [Show full text]
  • The Anthropology of Frank Girling and Okot P'bitek
    Introduction Colonial Encounters in Acholiland and Oxford: The Anthropology of Frank Girling and Okot p’Bitek Tim Allen The work of Frank Girling on the Acholi of Uganda and the prose works of Okot p’Bitek about Acholi customs should be recognised as seminal. Written at the time when the classic texts were being published about other Ugandan groups, such as the Alur and the Lugbara, they are the most significant publications on Acholi ways of life from the late Protectorate and early independence era. Both scholars wrote their Doctorate of Philosophy theses as students at Oxford, and were both taught by Professor E.E. Evans-Pritchard (one of the founding figures of British Social Anthropology). Yet their ethnographic publications are commonly ignored. The problem is not that they are lacking in perception or are hard to read – on the contrary. In the case of Frank Girling, it is obvious why his work is neglected. Although he managed to secure his D. Phil in 1952, he had fallen foul of the Protectorate authorities in Uganda, failed to find an academic job in an anthropology depart- ment, and to date there has never been a widely available version of The Acholi of Uganda (1960). Moreover, Girling himself became disillusioned with the kind of anthropological approach his African work represented, and openly disparaged it as a neo-colonial product. Some international researchers focussing on the Acholi region appear not to have read it, and it is largely unknown to Acholi people themselves. Scholars based at Gulu University, located in the largest town in the Acholi region, have told me that they have never heard of his book.
    [Show full text]
  • Hobart and William Smith Colleges L>*>€
    HOBART AND WILLIAM SMITH COLLEGES L>*>€. GENEVA, NEW YORK November 2, 1962 Dear *>aula: Thank you for your letter. I was touched by your comment on "loving each other more, but write less". I can only echo such sentiments. At the moment I am, as usual, up to my earlaps in work - work of all sorts. Some of it is of popular value, other stuff more esoteric. The really BIG things of moment is two paperbacks of mine to be is­ sued February 1st - one called THE NKW CIVILIAN MILITARISTS is timely, topical, and can even be understood by normal people; the other is the work of Mills which I have edited with an introduction to be called POWER, POLITICS AND ^EOPLE. We shall probably have an author's party in New York City - I hope you will be able to come. What a clown I am: a wedding party I never had, but a book party yes. vSo goes the life. y plans are a trifle on the grandiose side at the moment. I plan on being at Brooklyn College next year (if all goes well) as a Visiting Professor; and the following year to ditto this at the University of Buenos Aires. Both would be at figures substantially above what I am now making, and if a two-year leave of absence cannot be obtained, well, I shall have to move along anyhow. Apparently my writing has caught on sufficiently in pop-kitsch cir­ cles to warrant getting an agent. I have a big-fallow who handles some important folks, and he promises me results.
    [Show full text]
  • In Spite of History? New Leftism in Britain 1956 - 1979
    In Spite of History? New Leftism in Britain 1956 - 1979 Thomas Marriott Dowling Thesis Presented for the Degree of PhD Department of History University of Sheffield August 2015 ii iii Contents Title page p. i Contents p. iii Abstract p. vi Introduction p. 1 On the Trail of the New Left p. 5 Rethinking New Leftism p. 12 Methodology and Structure p. 18 Chapter One Left Over? The Lost World of British New Leftism p. 24 ‘A Mood rather than a Movement’ p. 30 A Permanent Aspiration p. 33 The Antinomies of British New Leftism p. 36 Between Aspiration and Actuality p. 39 The Aetiology of British New Leftism p. 41 Being Communist p. 44 Reasoning Rebellion p. 51 Universities and Left Review p. 55 Forging a Movement p. 58 CND p. 63 Conclusion p. 67 iv Chapter Two Sound and Fury? New Leftism and the British ‘Cultural Revolt’ of the 1950s p. 69 British New Leftism’s ‘Moment of Culture’? p. 76 Principles behind New Leftism’s Cultural Turn p. 78 A British Cultural Revolt? p. 87 A New Left Culture? p. 91 Signifying Nothing? p. 96 Conclusion p. 99 Chapter Three Laureate of New Leftism? Dennis Potter’s ‘Sense of Vocation’ p. 102 A New Left ‘Mood’ p. 108 The Glittering Coffin p. 113 A New Left Politician p. 116 The Uses of Television p. 119 History and Sovereignty p. 127 Common Culture and ‘Occupying Powers’ p. 129 Conclusion p. 133 Chapter Four Imagined Revolutionaries? The Politics and Postures of 1968 p. 135 A Break in the New Left? p.
    [Show full text]
  • Colonial Encounters in Acholiland and Oxford: The
    Introduction - colonial encounters in Acholiland and Oxford: the anthropology of Frank Girling and Okot p'Bitek LSE Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102545/ Version: Published Version Book Section: Allen, Tim (2019) Introduction - colonial encounters in Acholiland and Oxford: the anthropology of Frank Girling and Okot p'Bitek. In: Allen, Tim, (ed.) Lawino's People: the Acholi of Uganda. Classics in African Anthropology. LIT Verlag, Berlin, Germany. ISBN 9783643905383 Reuse Items deposited in LSE Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the LSE Research Online record for the item. [email protected] https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/ Introduction Colonial Encounters in Acholiland and Oxford: The Anthropology of Frank Girling and Okot p’Bitek Tim Allen The work of Frank Girling on the Acholi of Uganda and the prose works of Okot p’Bitek about Acholi customs should be recognised as seminal. Written at the time when the classic texts were being published about other Ugandan groups, such as the Alur and the Lugbara, they are the most significant publications on Acholi ways of life from the late Protectorate and early independence era. Both scholars wrote their Doctorate of Philosophy theses as students at Oxford, and were both taught by Professor E.E. Evans-Pritchard (one of the founding figures of British Social Anthropology).
    [Show full text]
  • Conservative Economic Policy-Making, 1974-79
    Farewell to prices and incomes policies: Conservative economic policy-making, 1974-79 Adrian Williamson University of Cambridge [email protected] CWPESH no. 9 Abstract: From 1960 to 1979, Prices and Incomes Policy (“PIP”) was central to Labour and Tory attempts to manage the economy. Since 1979, no Government has attempted direct controls on wages or prices. The Conservatives moved away from controls in the late 1970s. This paper considers two aspects of that change: the move away from PIP and the debates over joining the EMS. In the 1970s, the Conservatives were playing out in microcosm the central economic debates which had tormented policymakers since the 1960s and which were to preoccupy them throughout the 1980s and beyond. In contrast to the Wilson, Heath and Callaghan governments, they were moving away from PIP but they were doing so uncertainly. By default, they decided that markets should fix wages and prices, but with a little discreet assistance from a ‘forum’. Whether that would turn back into PIP remained to be seen. They embarked upon, but did not resolve, a key question that then arose: should economic management depend upon close linkage with Europe and the Deutschmark? Or was the UK to be a monetarist island, ‘entire of itself’? It is tempting to think that the abandonment of PIP, and British refusal to join the EMS, were inevitable. But this is not so. By 1979, the Conservatives had posed many questions about inflation, but they had arrived at very few answers. 2 Introduction Between about 1960 and 1979, Prices and Incomes Policy was a central feature of attempts by successive British Governments, of both parties, to manage the economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Much Has Been Written About Stuart Hall in the Short Space of Time Since
    Socialist Studies / Études socialistes 10 (1) Summer 2014 Copyright © 2014 The Author(s) Feature Contribution STUART HALL: AN EXEMPLARY SOCIALIST PUBLIC INTELLECTUAL? Herbert Pimlott,1 Department of Communication Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University Abstract Most assessments of the influence of scholars and public intellectuals focus on their ideas, which are based upon an implicit assumption that their widespread circulation are a result of the veracity and strength of the ideas themselves, rather than the processes of production and distribution, including the intellectual’s own contribution to the ideas’ popularity by attending conferences and public rallies, writing for periodicals, and so on. This concise article offers an assessment of the late Stuart Hall’s role as a socialist public intellectual by connecting the person, scholar and public intellectual to the organisations, institutions and publications through which his contributions to both cultural studies and left politics were produced and distributed. This article includes an emphasis on Hall’s ‘Thatcherism’ thesis and his public interventions via the periodical, Marxism Today, during the 1980s. Much has been written about Stuart Hall in the short space of time since his death on 10 February 2014, a lot of which encompasses the range of feelings of admiration and respect that I, too, have for him as a person, scholar and public intellectual. For me, it is not only that his work is significant for socialists and scholars, but also that he was a model socialist public intellectual, which is the case I want to make in this reflection. Most assessments of the influence of scholars and public intellectuals tend to focus on their ideas, by which there is an implicit assumption that the widespread circulation of those ideas are based upon some sense of the veracity and strength of the ideas themselves, rather than the processes of production and distribution, including the scholar’s or intellectual’s own contribution to their ideas’ popularity by attending conferences, public rallies and so on.
    [Show full text]
  • The Making of the First New Left in Britain
    THE MAKING OF THE FIRST NEW LEFT IN BRITAIN Jacob Clark Thurman Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in the Department of History, Indiana University December 2011 Accepted by the Faculty of Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. Jason M. Kelly, Ph.D., Chair Kevin Cramer, Ph.D. Master’s Thesis Committee Michael D. Snodgrass, Ph.D. ii Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 1 ..................................................................................................................................................... 13 Chapter 2 ..................................................................................................................................................... 32 Chapter 3 ..................................................................................................................................................... 52 Chapter 4 ..................................................................................................................................................... 82 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 100 References ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • University of Leeds Catalogue of the Correspondence and Papers of the Rt Hon Edward Charles Gurney Boyle, Baron Boyle of Handswo
    Handlist 81 part 2 UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS CATALOGUE OF THE CORRESPONDENCE AND PAPERS OF THE RT HON EDWARD CHARLES GURNEY BOYLE, BARON BOYLE OF HANDSWORTH, C H (1923 - 1981) Part 2 (Index) Leeds University Special Collections MS 660 Aaronovitch, David, Vice-President NUS: letter from, 50831 Abbott, Eric Symes, Dean of Westminster: correspondence, 48500, 48503 48898- 48900, 48902, 48904, 49521, 49524 Abbott, Frank, chairman ILEA: correspondence, 38825, 47821-2 Abbott, Gill, chairman Liverpool NUS Committee: correspondence, 26830-3, 26839, 26841 Abbott, J R, secretary Nottingham & District Manufacturers' Association: letter from, 26638 Abbott, Joan, sociologist: correspondence, 8879, 8897, 8904 Abbott, Simon, Editor Race: correspondence, 37667-9, 47775-6 Abbott, Stephen: paper by, 23426, 23559 Abbott, Walter M, Editor America: letter from, 4497 Abel, Deryck, Free Trade Union : correspondence, 3144, 3148 Abel, K A, Clerk Dorset CC: letter to Oscar Murton, 23695 Abel Smith, Henriette Alice: correspondence, 5618, 5627 Abercrombie, Nigel James: correspondence, 18906, 18924, 34258, 34268-9, 34275, 34282, 34292-3, 34296-8, 34302, 34305, 34307-8, 34318-20; Copy from Harold Rossetti, 34274; Copies correspondence with Sir Joseph Lockwood, 34298, 34303 Aberdare, 4th baron: see Bruce, Morys George Lyndhurst Abhyankhar, B, Indian Association: correspondence, 9951, 9954-6 Ablett, R G, Hemsworth High School, Pontefract: letter from, 45683 Abolition of earnings rule (widowed mothers): 14935, 14938 14973-4, 15015, 15034, 16074, 16100, 16375, 16386 Abortion:
    [Show full text]
  • Confronting the Margaret Mead Legacy
    Confronting the Margaret Mead Legacy Confrontingthe Margaret Mead Legacy Scholarship, Empire, and the South Pacific Edited by Lenora Foerstel and Angela Gilliam ill Temple University Press • Philadelphia Temple University Press, Philadelphia 19122 Copyright © 1992by Temple University. All rights reserved Published 1992 Printed in the United States of America @)The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Confronting the Margaret Mead legacy: scholarship, empire, and the South Pacific / edited by Lenora Foerstel and Angela Gilliam. p. ern. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-87722-886-8(alk. paper) 1. Ethnology-Oceania. 2. Mead, Margaret, 1901-1978. 2. Anthropology-Government policy-Oceania. I. Foerstel, Lenora, 1929- . II. Gilliam, Angela, 1936- GN662.C64 1992 306' .0995-dc20 91-16194 This book is dedicated in loving memory to Eleanor Leacock (~ONTENTS Foreword Peter Worsley ix Preface Angela Gilliam and Lenora Foerstel xix Acknowledgments xxxiii PARTl The Margaret Mead Legacy 1 Anthropologists in Search of a Culture: 3 Margaret Mead, Derek Freeman, and All the Rest of Us Eleanor Leacock 2 Leaving a Recordfor Others: An Interview 31 with Nahau Rooney Angela Gilliam 3 Margaret Meadfrom a Cultural-Historical 55 Perspective Lenora Foerstel 4 The Stigma of New Guinea: Reflections on 75 .Anthropology and Anthropologists Warilea Iamo 5 Margaret Mead's Contradictory Legacy 101 Angela Gilliam and Lenora Foerstel viii CONTENTS PART II Empire and Independence 6 For an Independent Kanaky 159 Susanna Ounei 7 The United States Anthropologist in 173 Micronesia: Toward a Counter-Hegemonic Study of Sapiens Glenn Alcalay 8 Anthropology and Authoritarianism in the 205 Pacific Islands Simione Durutalo 9 Tugata: Culture, Identity, and 233 Commitment John D.
    [Show full text]
  • Marx and Marxism, Revised Edition
    MARX and Marxism Karl Marx probably had more influence on the political course of the last century than any other social thinker. There are many different kinds of Marxism, and the twentieth century saw two huge Marxist states in total opposition to one another. In the West, Marxism has never presented a revolutionary threat to the established order, though it has taken root as the major theoretical critique of capitalist society in intellectual circles, and new interpretations of Marx’s thought appear each year. Peter Worsley discusses all these major varieties of Marxism, distinguishing between those ideas which remain valid, those which are contestable, and those which should now be discarded. Rather than treating Marxism purely as a philosophy in the abstract, he concentrates upon the uses to which Marxism has been put and emphasizes the connections between the theoretical debates and political struggles in the real world. Peter Worsley was formerly Professor of Sociology at the University of Manchester. KEY SOCIOLOGISTS Edited by Peter Hamilton Now reissued, this classic series provides students with concise and readable introductions to the work, life and influence of the great sociological thinkers. With individual volumes covering individual thinkers, from Emile Durkheim to Pierre Bourdieu, each author takes a distinct line, assessing the impact of these major figures on the discipline as well as the contemporary relevance of their work. These pocket-sized introductions will be ideal for both undergraduates and pre-university
    [Show full text]