Search results

It is widely accepted among critical human–animal scholars that an absolute ontological distinction between humans and animals, the human–animal dualism, is an ideological construction. However, even some of the most radical animalists make use of a softer version of it when they explain animal exploitation and domination in capitalism. By criticizing the reintroduction of the human–animal dualism through the back door, I reopen the terrain for a historical–materialist explanation of bourgeois animal exploitation and domination that does not conceptualize them as a matter of species in the first place. Rather, with reference and in analogy to ecosocialist arguments on the greenhouse effect, it is demonstrated that a specific faction of capital – animal capital – which uses animals and animal products as means of production, is the root cause, key agent, and main profiteer of animal exploitation and domination in the current mode of production. Thus, the reworked concept of animal capital presented here differs from the original, postoperaist notion introduced by Nicole Shukin since it is based on a classic sociorelational and value theoretical understanding of capitalism. According to this approach, animals are integrated socioeconomically into the capitalist class society via a relation of superexploitation to capital, which can be called the capital–animal relation.

THE greatly increased interest in historical studies since the second world war has been, I hope, a welcome challenge to librarians, but it has been very difficult to meet it. That the librarians of our new universities should have had little research material to offer was only to be expected. Unfortunately, research scholars have discovered that our older libraries were also deficient, that source materials had either not been purchased, in the years when they were readily available, or had been acquired only to be discarded at a later date. Recently, therefore, both old libraries and new have found themselves in competition for a small and dwindling supply of out‐of‐print publications.

It is now over twelve years since I presented a paper to the Northern Branch of Aslib comparing the working of an industrial library with that of a public library. Since then, there has been a considerable growth in the number of special libraries and this, together with the counter attractions of employment openings elsewhere created by the industrial situation, has resulted in considerable difficulty in obtaining the desired type of library staff. The present time, therefore, would appear to be appropriate to re‐examine the staffing problem, particularly as it affects special libraries.

Drawing upon Alfred Sohn-Rethel's work, we argue that, just as capitalism produces abstract labor, it coproduces both abstract mind and abstract life. Abstract mind is the split between mind and nature and between subject/observer and observed object that characterizes scientific epistemology. Abstract mind reflects an abstracted objectified world of nature as a means to be exploited. Biological life is rendered as abstract life by capitalist exploitation and by the reification and technologization of organisms by contemporary technoscience. What Alberto Toscano has called “the culture of abstraction” imposes market rationality onto nature and the living world, disrupting biotic communities and transforming organisms into what Finn Bowring calls “functional bio-machines.”

After such an inspiring address by Sir Edward Boyle and the brilliant lecture by Lord Verulam I am really left rather breathless and I expect your capacity for taking any more is almost negligible.

This chapter explores the domestication of Marx's critique of political economy within Marxist-oriented environmental sociology, and treadmill of production (ToP) theory, in particular. The aim is to explicate the theoretical resources for a rigorous critique of capital-induced planetary degradation. Shortcomings of ToP theory pertaining to the conceptualization of capital and value are identified. The reasons for these shortcomings, including how they might be addressed, are elaborated by reconsidering key aspects of Marx's critical theory of modern capitalist society. The chapter contributes to current discussions in both critical theory and environmental sociology by demonstrating the continued relevance of Marx's critical theory for understanding the political-economic, social, and ideational dimensions of planetary degradation. In contrast to ToP theory, which critically examines the production of wealth by counterposing finitude and limits against the expansionary tendencies of economic growth, the critical theory approach advanced in this chapter conceptualizes the acceleration of environmental degradation following World War II in terms of a ToP of value, whereby the necessity of the value form is continuously established in the present. The chapter discusses how Marxian critical theory facilitates a critical examination of the widespread growth of environmentalism as concomitant with the spread of neoliberal capitalism.

In this paper an attempt is made to calculate the cost of equipment and staff for an industrial technical library, with a view to providing in accessible, tabulated form data which might be useful in planning new libraries, or organizing those already established. The detailed tables are set out at the end of the text, and are clearly cross‐referenced.

The appearance of Mr. J. Burkett's pamphlet Microrecording in Libraries provides an incentive to pause to consider the present position of microphotography as a library tool. In his short study Mr. Burkett has succeeded in concentrating much information which has hitherto been scattered in periodicals. He is brief, he is up‐to‐date and comprehensive. He covers forms of microphotographic record, reading machines, publishing facilities and uses. Recourse to his work will often save the necessity to consult such familiar guides as Lewis and Offenhayer or The Manual of Document Reproduction.

This chapter addresses two identified weaknesses in entrepreneurial ecosystem studies: there is a lack of focus on the relationships between the components of entrepreneurial ecosystems and little understanding of the underlying processes that determine how entrepreneurial ecosystems change over time. Both entrepreneurial ecosystems and solutions ecosystems from social entrepreneurship studies are place-based complex adaptive systems that are emergent in nature. While neither of these ecosystem types can be controlled, they can be influenced and guided to follow a direction by designing conditions for emergence and transitions. In this chapter, the proposition that an online tool, that is used to strengthen solution ecosystems and support their emergence and transition, could also be used to strengthen entrepreneurial ecosystems and guide their emergence and transition is examined. Two cases are used to investigate this proposition: a food security solution ecosystem case study that demonstrates how the online tool is used for solution ecosystems, and an impact economy entrepreneurial ecosystem case study that highlights how the online tool could be used for an entrepreneurial ecosystem. It is demonstrated in this chapter that the online tool can be used to address the current weaknesses of entrepreneurial ecosystem studies. In addition, it is suggested that by combining solution ecosystems with an impact economy entrepreneurial ecosystem, the online tool can be used to support the creation of conditions for social entrepreneurial places to emerge that are capable of addressing the most pressing problems that places face including the sustainable development goals.