Search results

The narratives that would give meaning to at least four generations of scholars and practitioners are amplified in the discourse growing out of the elements of technical rationality, pragmatism, evolution, and the rush of different ideas and new institutions that punctuate the Progressive period. The narratives explored below persist in public administration from the beginning of the twentieth century: preparation for the rise of national institutions, the citizen-state relationship, reconciling democracy and administration, and science and scientific management. Throughout the paper, the author's interest in the reconciliation of freedom and order is explored in the relationship between self and community, citizen and nation, and politics and administration.

Walter Lippmann is widely acknowledged as the Father of modern American Journalism and one of the most profound public thinkers of the twentieth century. Though he extensively corresponded with economists, political philosophers, political scientists, and statesmen on both sides of the Atlantic, Lippmann’s interest in political economy has only come under serious academic investigation within the last 20 years. When Lippmann has been explored in the history of economic thought, he has generally been considered to be a propagator and popularizer of others’ ideas rather than a serious theorist in his own right, particularly his role in spreading Keynesianism as one of the early supporters of the New Deal. This chapter directly challenges this dominant interpretation on two fronts. First, it acknowledges and explores Lippmann’s role as a contributor to the economic discourse of his time. Second, it challenges categorizing Lippmann as a Keynesian by highlighting the closeness of many of his ideas to the Austrian school of thought. It accomplishes this by giving a holistic view of Lippmann’s thought, not only in the Great Depression and New Deal Era, but how he evolved from a student sympathetic to socialism at Harvard in 1910 to a theorist concerned with epistemological problems of good political, social, and economic order. The development of Lippmann’s thought in this broader lens parallels much of the work of Hayek, Mises, and others during this period, and presents rich new research opportunities for both modern Austrian economists as well as historians of economic thought.

The aim of this work is to explore Edward L. Bernays' early evolution in thought concerning the rationale for public relations and to briefly discuss how these emergent ideological concepts have proven foundational for contemporary public relations.

Bernays' ideological development in the decade after the First World War is traced through: his very early tactical work; his exposure to significant writings concerning the use of persuasion to manage the masses; and his own writings.

Bernays, widely considered a pioneer in the field of public relations, exhibited a somewhat halting evolution in thought concerning the role of the new public relations professional. From 1920 through 1927, he normally described the public relations counsel as using propaganda to move masses toward the acceptance of good causes. However, by the end of the decade, his concept of the public relations person shifted toward emphasizing using propaganda as a pro‐social mechanism to convey the ideas of minority voices to targeted audiences. The latter view is a precursor to modern‐day understandings of public relations as an endeavor that attempts to build mutually beneficial relationships between a client and its relevant audiences.

This paper offers a distinctive look at how, during a crucial decade, a pathfinder in US public relations developed rationales for the emergent field. The exploration of his evolving ideology provides a deeper view of how Bernays contributed to enduring concepts of a socially constructive practice of public relations.

The modern concept of labor hoarding emerged in early 1960s, and soon became a standard part of mainstream economists’ explanation of the working of labor markets. The concept represents the convergence of three important elements: an empirical finding that labor productivity was procyclical; a framing of this finding as a “puzzle” or anomaly for the basic neoclassical theory of the firm, and a proposed resolution of the puzzle based on optimizing behavior of the firm in the presence of costs of hiring, firing, and training workers. This paper recounts the history of each of these elements, and how they were woven together into the labor hoarding concept. Each history involves people associated with various research traditions and motivated by an array of questions, many of which were unrelated to the questions that the modern labor hoarding concept was ultimately created to address.

Walter Lippmann in his 1922 classic “Public Opinion” noted that “the news media are a primary source of those pictures in our heads about the larger world of public affairs, a world that for most citizens is “out of reach, out of sight, out of mind.” Indeed, among the different roles that the mass media performs is one of an information provider and interpreter of world events and policy decisions. The power of the mass media to mould public opinion on issues of national and international significance is well documented. Our knowledge and priorities about public affairs are based on what the media decides to feed us with. In this context, the present chapter seeks to analyze the crucial role essayed by the mass media in ensuring human security by promoting favorable public opinion toward the cause of nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament. S. Rashid Naim enunciates in “Nuclear Proliferation in South Asia” that a nuclear attack between India and Pakistan even limiting itself to military targets would cause approximately 577,000 deaths in Pakistan and 604,000 deaths in India apart from substantial number of injuries and destruction of property. The knowledge about this impending havoc should reach the grassroots level and this can be accomplished only by the mass media. With global efforts being channelized toward nonproliferation of nuclear weapons, the media and its trend-setting abilities can be harnessed to enlighten the average public about the disasters of a nuclear war. As the role of the mass media becomes more prominent in managing conflicts all over the world, the time is ripe to utilize its immense powers to dilute the level of possible nuclear clashes. A more proactive role of the media is envisioned through the establishment of a “global communication center” dedicated to the publication and broadcast of information advocating the cause of total nuclear disarmament. This center will be the locus of information dissemination and advocacy directed toward nations that possess nuclear weapons and those that are likely to get their hands on them in the near future. While the mass media is certainly not the only actor in the process of nuclear disarmament, it can be a decisive force for nations to choose between “atom for peace” or “atom for war.”

Father Patrick Primeaux has written an intriguing and ambitious book. Furthermore, unlike many other new books of this genre, which often do little more than re-visit the past expositions of other theorists, his book strives to make both a new and unique contribution to the study of business ethics. In reviewing such a book, it is therefore worth noting Jung's observation that ‘no book that makes an essentially new contribution to knowledge enjoys the privilege of being thoroughly understood’ (Jung, 1989, p. xiv). Having thus at the outset, rendered some excuse for whatever shortcomings of mine might follow, I will proceed.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the relative absence of a theoretical underpinning to modern neoliberalism. Tracing the history of the term, it becomes clear that modern economics has only a tenuous relationship to the type of economics the term “neoliberalism” originally described. Furthermore, modern neoliberalism appears to be strengthened by the crisis it creates. Particular qualities of the orthodoxy make it at the same time both vague and omnipresent, allowing it to operate to exacerbate a pattern of crisis, resulting in profound socio-political consequences, such as the election of Donald Trump and in the rise of populist movements generally.

Critical analysis rejects the premise that prevailing knowledge is ultimately true, but rather seeks to trace the basis of knowledge to structural inequalities at significant junctions in history. The premise of interpretative research is that social phenomena have mutually impacting relationships with social contexts and human activities. Using a critical interpretive research methodology, this paper contends that there are critical social and theoretical issues which have contributed to the resilience of modern neoliberalism, even where it has manifest crisis. Furthermore, unique qualities of the orthodoxy have operated to oppress and manipulate social processes that would challenge or curtail its reach.

This paper contends that, first, modern neoliberalism has an inverted relationship to crisis in that it is ultimately able to leverage the crisis it creates to its advantage. Second, this is partly a result of the theoretical ambiguity associated with the orthodoxy, and finally, the rise of the populist right in various political forums and contexts is connected in some way to the failure of the left and to respond effectively to it.

The subject of the paper helps to explain and analyse the way that the neoliberal orthodoxy is able to leverage crisis to its advantage, and why, therefore, it continues to thrive even though it creates economic upheaval, environmental destruction, social and cultural division and increased inequality. After economic crisis, the orthodoxy presents not as the cause of it, but rather the appropriate policy response to it. The failure of the left to effectively challenge the neoliberal policy programme post-crisis is argued to be an important link in a causal chain which connects neoliberalism to the rise of the populist right.

This paper brings emphasis to the ways in which modern economics has subverted the constraints of a theoretical foundation, and ultimately has become a policy practice that exacerbates inequality and leverages crises that it has created to its advantage. It also highlights the linkages between economic crisis, the persistence of the neoliberal paradigm and the rise of right-wing populism in recent years.

The paper combines descriptive and normative accounts of the origins and evolution of neoliberalism as it has been accounted for by major economists and scholars, adding to this the understanding that in breeching from theoretical foundations, the policy programme has become vague and malleable, which curtails the possibility for the left to respond to it effectively, and contributes to the rise of the populist right in various contexts.