Hegemony Now: How Big Tech and Wall Street Won the World (And How We Win it Back)

Product Information

They remind us that even though “class interests” are the driving force of historical materialism, there was an explicit rejection of this concept as crudely deterministic after the 1980s. While they trace the origins of this rejection, their aim is to give the notion of interests explanatory power over identity. Indeed, one of the goals if a 21st-century socialism is to prevail, must be to wrest control of the major platforms from monopoly corporate control. However, they recognise that this will require major international, intra-governmental coordination and high levels of participation by platform users. They suggest a viral campaign or mass global boycott, although they don’t see this happening any time soon.

Schenoni, Luis (2019). "Hegemony". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies. Oxford University Press. [ ISBNmissing] Howson, Richard, ed. (2008). Hegemony: Studies in Consensus and Coercion. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0-415-95544-7 . Retrieved 24 February 2016. In the process of clarifying and updating the often misunderstood (and occasionally maligned) concept of hegemony, Gilbert and Williams also provide us with a valuable analysis of the "long 1990s": an account of its constitution, a diagnosis of its crisis and a map for its overcoming. Anyone committed to the latter must engage with this book. Rodrigo Nunes, author of Neither Vertical Nor Horizontal: A Theory of Political Organisation Whose world are we living in? The clear answer is the tech entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley and the sections of finance capital most closely allied to them. In Hegemony Now, Jeremy Gilbert and Alex Williams ask: How did this historic bloc of Wall Street and Silicon Valley establish their control over contemporary global culture? The second section is probably the most interesting, but also the one that wanders around a little. The most interesting part comes with the concept of platforms as the fundamental neoliberal structure of modern society and economy, meaning that any progressive successor will have to "contend the succession to neoliberalism within its own hollowed out body, a hegemonic battle among its gleaming bones and rotting organs." (p.205).Allday, L. (no date) The British in T he Gulf: An Overview. Available at: https://www.qdl.qa/en/british-gulf-overview (Accessed: 23 December 2019). In Europe, Germany, rather than Britain, may have been the strongest power after 1871, but Samuel Newland writes: The task for socialists is to live without illusions without becoming disillusioned. Gilbert and Williams have written a timely contribution in how the left acts strategically - learning from the successes and failures of the last decade. -- Aaron Bastani Ouellette, Laurie; Gray, Jonathan, eds. (2017). Keywords for Media Studies. NYU Press. doi: 10.2307/j.ctt1gk08zz. ISBN 978-1-4798-1747-4. Zolo, D. (2007) ‘Contemporary Uses of The Notion of “Empire”’, The Monist. JSTOR, 90(1), pp. 48–64.

Kissinger, Henry (1994). Diplomacy. New York: Simon & Schuster. pp. 137–38. ISBN 0-671-65991-X. European coalitions were likely to arise to contain Germany's Nazis growing, potentially dominant, power As well as p. 145: "Unified Germany was achieving the strength to dominate Europe all by itself—an occurrence which Great Britain had always resisted in the past when it came about by conquest". Krasner, Stephen D. (1976). "State Power and the Structure of International Trade." World Politics 28 (3): 317–347.Instead, it is still left mostly to the national political party to be the main protagonist of change. And while the importance of this is not to be diminished, the fact that a Green New Deal shouldn’t seem contentious but seems to have fallen off the agenda, means that the wholesale critique of neoliberalism that Gilbert and Williams call for appears unlikely. Kindleberger, C. P. (1978) Government and International Trade. International Finance Section, Department of Economics, Princeton University. Encyclopædia Britannica, "Greeks, Romans, and barbarians (from Europe, history of)": "Fusions of power occurred in the shape of leagues of cities, such as the Peloponnesian League, the Delian League, and the Boeotian League. The efficacy of these leagues depended chiefly upon the hegemony of a leading city (Sparta, Athens, or Thebes)"

Perry Cooper Sands, The Client Princes under the Republic, New York: Arno Press, 1975, pp. 114, 160. Davis, P. K. (2001) 100 Decisive Battles: From Ancient Times to The Present. Oxford University Press, USA. Theoretically sophisticated with an emphasis on the spatial realization of American economic power and influence, this is an important recent contribution to the literature. See Snidal, Duncan (1985). "The Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory." International Organization 39 (4): pp. 580–614.We warmly welcome you to join us on our Colchester campus, room NTC.2.04on Thursday 2 November 2023 at 1pm. Brutt-Griffler, J., in Karlfried Knapp, Barbara Seidlhofer, H. G. Widdowson, Handbook of Foreign Language Communication and Learning, Walter de Gruyter, 2009, p. 264.

Webb, M. C. and Krasner, S. D. (1989) ‘Hegemonic Stability Theory: An Empirical Assessment’, Review of International Studies. Cambridge University Press, 15(2), pp. 183–198. Pentagon strategist Edward Luttwak, in The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire, [57] outlined three stages, with hegemonic being the first, followed by imperial. In his view the transformation proved to be fatal and eventually led to the fall of the Roman Empire. His book gives implicit advice to Washington to continue the present hegemonic strategy and refrain from establishing an empire. Hilderbrandt, R., US Hegemony: Global Ambitions and Decline: Emergence of the Interregional Asian Triangle and the Relegation of the US as a Hegemonic Power, the Reorientation of Europe, Peter Lang, 2009, p. 14. (Author's italics). Nonetheless, this book repays close attention: in particular, Gilbert and Williams stage a courageous mission to rescue the materialist concept of interests from the swamp of identity politics.a b Keohane, Robert O. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [ ISBNmissing] From the 11th to the late 15th centuries the Italian maritime republics, in particular Venice and Genoa held hegemony in the Mediterranean, dominating trade between Europe and the Orient for centuries, and having naval supremacy. [40] However, with the arrival of the Age of Discovery and the Early modern period, they began to gradually lose their hegemony to other European powers. [41] 16th–19th centuries [ edit ] The Iberian Union in 1598, under Philip II, King of Spain and Portugal Any society today – Britain included – needs more, not less, political solidarity. Complex global problems, from climate change and population movements down, require new alliances, radical new forms of cooperation that won’t happen unless more people feel confident in working together with those whose detailed opinions they may not share. Fractious local problems, like the Brexit aftermath, require more solidarity too. But what if the social landscape built by digital platforms is toxic for solidarity? Then we have a problem with the very preconditions of positive politics that needs fixing urgently. A really useful work using the concept of hegemony as theorised by Gramsci and others to analyse the current state of society and politics in (primarily) the UK and US and set out a future strategy for the left, broadly conceived. The first section builds a picture of the current state of things in the early twenty first century, and in particular how large finance and technology concerns built a world that suited their interests. The second section then theorises this using concepts including hegemony along with the theories of Deleuze and Guattari (which I'm aware of but not in any way familiar with) to build an understanding of how this power is constructed and has continued to be supported by political parties that win elections despite seemingly not being hugely popular in general. The final section then sets out a proposal for strategies that the left should pursue based largely on the principle of understanding what is pragmatically possible and creating the coalitions that will allow realistic goals to be achieved in practice. Given that Gramsci’s perspective relies on coalition building and the understanding that counter power is built and contested on multiple levels, these omissions are unexpected. Especially, as the authors themselves argue, that: