Search results

Can we broaden the boundaries of the history of economic thought to include positionalities articulated by grassroots movements? Following Keynes’s famous remark from General Theory that ‘practical men […] are usually the slaves of some defunct economist,’ we might be wont to dismiss such a push from below. While it is sometimes true that grassroots movements channel preexisting economic thought, I wish to argue that grassroots economic thought can also precede developments subsequently elaborated by economists. This paper considers such a case: by women at the intersection of the women’s liberation movement and the claimants’ unions movement in 1970s Britain. Oral historical and archival work on these working-class women and on achievements such as their succeeding to establish unconditional basic income as an official demand of the British Women’s Liberation Movement forms the springboard for my reconstruction of the grassroots feminist economic thought underpinning the women’s basic income demand. I hope to demonstrate, firstly, how this was a prefiguration of ideas later developed by feminist economists and philosophers; secondly, how unique it was for its time and a consequence of the intersectionality of class, gender, race, and dis/ability. Thirdly, I should like to suggest that bringing into the fold this particular grassroots feminist economic thought on basic income would widen the mainstream understanding and historiography of the idea of basic income. Lastly, I hope to make the point that, within the history of economic thought, grassroots economic thought ought to be heeded far more than it currently is.

Examining how ideas about violence and agency relate to gender, this chapter considers women's participation in armed struggle during the 1960s–1980s. Drawing on a small selection of case studies, it specifically explores women's involvement with left-wing urban guerrilla groups in Italy, West Germany and the United States. I examine different examples of political violence connected to ‘women's issues’, discuss the experiences and reflections of women involved and look at how such activities were received by the broader women's liberation movement. With a foundation thus established, the chapter interrogates the implications of the examples covered in relation to the social organisation of gender, touches on their significance to feminism and concludes with a consideration of the subversive and potentially liberatory possibilities associated with women's political violence.

Prior to the passage of the 20th amendment to the US Constitution in 1920, several states had extended the suffrage to women. Helen Laura Sumner (later Woodbury), a student of John R. Commons at Wisconsin, undertook a statistical study of the political, economic, and social impacts of the granting of voting rights to women in the state of Colorado, and subsequently defended the results against numerous attacks. In this paper, we present a brief account of the struggle for women’s equality in the extension of the suffrage and examine Sumner’s critical analysis of the evidence as to its effects, as well as the counterarguments to which she responded.

In this chapter, I reflect on the place of hope in activist criminology. Offering reflections from my own activist scholarship, this chapter draws out the ways in which hope structures and sustains our work across temporal frames and distinct modes of academic practice. This chapter develops a hopeful analysis of lineage, memory and resistance, reflecting on my participatory research with the Tamil community in London, and reflects on the revival of utopian thought in criminological scholarship. Hopeful imaginaries of an abolitionist future inform my scholar-activism with Reclaim Holloway – an abolitionist collective formed to influence the redevelopment of the Holloway prison site. I describe this future-oriented work before considering hope as a practice in the present, focusing on ‘pedagogies of hope’ as activist criminology in the classroom.

The focus of this chapter is drawn from the author’s lived experience and background as a third generation stateless Palestinian refugee who lived in one of the Palestinian camps in Lebanon and inherited the refugeeship from her parents and grandparents. Even though the author agrees with Hannah Arendt (1943) that ‘We don’t like to be called refugees’ (p. 264), the process of this research and thoughts behind it are attributed to the author’s personal experiences, as Arendt (1964) confirms in her statement that the process of thought can seldom be possible without being attributed to a personal experience.

The rise of “strong man” politics in the Philippines brings attention to manhood narratives. Machismo remains a strong presence in the upper echelons of society, despite gender equality initiatives and a strong feminist movement. With Rodrigo Duterte portraying the “father-figure” of the nation, one questions what this type of manhood means for the Filipino family.

This study traces the construction of Filipino manhood in relation to the country’s strongest unit of the family. Utilizing a systematic review of seminal outputs on masculinity, this piece explores the definition of Filipino manhood using texts from various Filipino gender and development scholars. Sikolohiyang Pilipino or Indigenous Filipino Psychology frames the identified themes that surround the image of a Tunay na Lalaki or True Man. The labas (outer world) and loob (inner self) are then framed in relation to Filipino men’s roles. Intersections between one’s peer group, socio-economic class, and the situation in the global migration context inform the formation of one’s labas (outer self/identity). The findings indicate that Filipino manhood traits, as seen in one’s loob (inner self) contextualize one’s understanding of manhood’s construction as familial. By unearthing the nuances of manhood in the archipelago, this chapter showcases masculinities from the subaltern and purports possible ways of decolonizing “from below.”

The popular uprising, the Aragalaya, was a response to a debt crisis as well as a catharsis of accumulated public discontent, which overlapped with the pandemic. A key lesson from the pandemic was the need to strengthen state social provisioning capacities to protect the health status of citizens. In addition, enhancing local economies and sustainable livelihoods is central to avoiding the vulnerabilities of international migrant labour and tourism. The limitations of representative politics highlight the need to strengthen democratic social movement politics. Along with cross cultural alliances, building multi-class alliances is central for strengthening politics of redistribution. In a context of integration of party politics with criminal networks, demilitarisation as well as the abolition of prisons is indispensable for democratisation. In a global scale, democratising financial markets and platform economies suggests regulation and regional experiments not simply by the state but also multiple publics. In demanding participation in representative institutions, the Aragalaya combined a protest movement with a sense of commons. In turn, it pointed towards the possibilities of a public-driven economy based on the democratisation of the state as well as markets. In framing this movement as a ‘struggle of love’, it revitalised the realm of life politics and alternative pleasures of life.

Introducing the concepts of equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI), the chapter provides an overview of frameworks and approaches used to manage workforce diversity. First, the authors introduce the notion of the old deal based on the uneven relationship between human diversity, nature, and technological innovation. The chapter then explores the new deal between humans, nature, and technology. The authors are providing cases from the EU, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Iceland to show the emergence of the new deal in managing diversity.