Search results

This piece takes issue with the deployment of Trotsky’s idea of uneven and combined development (UCD) in the Anglophone discipline of International Relations (IR). It argues that this strand of thought makes a theory out of what is really a theorem (a deduction from an axiom), whilst forgetting about the original, actual theory of which it was part, Leon Trotsky’s theory of permanent revolution. IR U&CD, marketed in the discipline as International Historical Sociology (IHS), posits ‘the international’ as the field to which ‘the theory’ must be applied in order to open it up to social theorisation. This is analogous to the late-19th-century subjective turn in social science in which reality is presented as unfathomable, and rationality is merely subjective, an attribute of individual ‘actors’. ‘The international’ in this sense may be compared to ‘the market’ in neoclassical economics. Although it presents itself as Marxist, the U&CD/IHS project was part of a regressive conjuncture in Anglo-American, mainstream IR, as transpires from its attempt to position itself close to the ‘English School’ in IR. I conclude with a variation on Trotsky’s original theory, applying it to the ‘permanent counterrevolution’, of which the current war on terror is the latest stage.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a well-known practice among organizations around the world. It has become a refreshing alternative of conceiving and doing business that encompasses economic, social, and environmental operations for achieving competitive advantage.

There are the interesting words of Myrdal in respect of the universality and commonness of what a scientific problem means:From then on more definitely I came to see that in reality there are no economic, sociological, psychological problems, but just problems and they are all mixed and composite. In research the only permissible demarcation is between relevant and irrelevant conditions. The problems are regularly also political and have moreover to be seen in historical perspective. (Myrdal, 1979, p. 106)

§ 1. My presentation to the Circle. When I presented my theory to the Circle, I found a mixed reception. Schlick, however, slightly shook his head, the mock-smile appeared on his face, and he tried to exchange glances. Only Waismann responded. Kaufmann was too loyal a friend to openly go against me even though he strongly felt that I was wrong. And Carnap was in deep thought.

In these times of globalisation, distances are getting smaller, enhancing the interactions between people of different cultural backgrounds. This is especially true in the area of tourism, a field that is shaped by manifold communication activities. The enormous increases in the numbers of Chinese tourists visiting Europe and other Western destinations require building up intercultural competencies to minimise conflicts and promote mutual understanding. It is therefore necessary to question one’s own cultural view, which is why the debate surrounding de-Westernisation is of crucial importance. The metaphor of the atmosphere – in Chinese qifen – offers a helpful access point to strengthen mutual understanding, because it creates a bridge between eastern and western thinking. Paul Watzlawick (1967) developed his well-known five axioms of communication, the second of which states that every communication has both content and a relational aspect, and the latter classifies the former. This chapter shows why the atmospheric dimension of communication should be established as the third axiom in order to understand communication holistically.