Search results

There is a noticeable dearth of literature offering Marxist perspectives and analyses on the Bangsamoro struggles for self-determination, ethnic and religious identities and social justice. A reason for this may lie in the general derision of bourgeois academics and conventional commentators on the supposed paucity of Marxist theories on nationalism, ethnicity and religion. This may have influenced, ironically, Filipino Marxist thinkers into being indifferent to this research topic. Far from the truth, however, that Marxism is essentially an economic determinist social conflict theory, its historical materialism offers a rich treasury of analyses and perspectives on nationalism, self-determination, religion and ethnic identity within the context of class struggles as the acme of the theory of scientific socialism. The paper, therefore, offers a scientific analysis of the Bangsamoro Question from a Marxist standpoint beyond the perspectives of psychologism, naturalism and ethno-racialism, which are usually deployed by traditional and uninformed commentators in analyzing ethnicity questions and quests for separatism.

The paper employs the historical and class analysis of the dynamics, relationships and struggles of classes in the history of the Bangsamoro struggles against colonialism and the subsequent postcolonial regimes up to the present time.

As a scientific paradigm, historical materialism presents itself as a general scientific social conflict theory. Using this framework through historical and class analyses, the paper proves the improbability of the Moros’ quest for separatism or genuine autonomy at this historical point. It, therefore, asserts the linking of the Moro struggles to the more immense struggles of the Filipinos for national and social liberation from imperialism.

The paper is limited to the historical and class analyses of classes’ dynamics and struggles. It is, therefore, far from an exhaustive analysis of the Moro struggles using different non-Marxist social conflict theories.

The research can be considered a practical guide in analyzing and predicting the trajectories of the Moro struggles in Mindanao and Sulu.

The work addresses the question from radical and Marxist premises.

This is a highly original and valuable work from the point of view of Marxist social conflict theory.

The paper provides a detailed historical account of Douglass C. North's early intellectual contributions and analytical developments in pursuing a Grand Theory for why some countries are rich and others poor.

The author approaches the discussion using a theoretical and historical reconstruction based on published and unpublished materials.

The systematic, continuous and profound attempt to answer the Smithian social coordination problem shaped North's journey from being a young serious Marxist to becoming one of the founders of New Institutional Economics. In the process, he was converted in the early 1950s into a rigid neoclassical economist, being one of the leaders in promoting New Economic History. The success of the cliometric revolution exposed the frailties of the movement itself, namely, the limitations of neoclassical economic theory to explain economic growth and social change. Incorporating transaction costs, the institutional framework in which property rights and contracts are measured, defined and enforced assumes a prominent role in explaining economic performance.

In the early 1970s, North adopted a naive theory of institutions and property rights still grounded in neoclassical assumptions. Institutional and organizational analysis is modeled as a social maximizing efficient equilibrium outcome. However, the increasing tension between the neoclassical theoretical apparatus and its failure to account for contrasting political and institutional structures, diverging economic paths and social change propelled the modification of its assumptions and progressive conceptual innovation. In the later 1970s and early 1980s, North abandoned the efficiency view and gradually became more critical of the objective rationality postulate. In this intellectual movement, North's avant-garde research program contributed significantly to the creation of New Institutional Economics.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the different design approaches architects take towards the adaptive reuse of small-scale shipyards. Thereby giving a proposition for future projects by giving insight in how others preceded and showcasing different possibilities.

The research is based on a literary review in combination with a case study, following one main question: What architectural approaches do architects employ in redesigning nineteenth- and twentieth century dockyards in Northern Europe and how do these approaches consider the history of building and context? First, this paper researches the history of adaptive reuse. Additionally, the historical and cultural context of shipyards is researched. Finally, a case study is done linking theory with practice. Selected cases are: Kromhout shipyard in Amsterdam, Verftet Ny-Hellesund in Ny-Hellesund and the Maritime Museum in Helsingør.

Four approaches to adaptive re-use were distinguished in the cases: differentiation, continuation, cultivation and optimisation. Each has its own implications for the design and the chosen approach is ultimately related to the important heritage values of each individual shipyard. Heritage professionals proved to have a great say, in the early stages of the adaptation process, in which the adaptive reuse approach was chosen.

This comparative research enables an in-depth analysis and comparison and thorough qualitative understanding. It however limits the insight in the representativeness of these cases.

This paper compares the adaptive reuse of small-scale shipyards in an international perspective. It offers insight into the patterns, principles and context of the architectural reuse of this underexposed industrial heritage.

This paper aims to investigate the ideological discourse in the EU's self-presentation, which will provide a new standpoint for scholars interested in analyzing the EU's foreign policy.

To understand how the EU perceives itself, the research investigates the Preamble of the Treaty of the European Union (Maastricht Treaty 1992) and its consolidated versions of 1997, 2002, 2006, 2008, 2010 and 2016. Investigation of the consolidated versions of the Maastricht treaty is important to understand how the Union came to develop the image of the Self throughout time and how the international context had affected EU’s self-image. The preambles are analyzed using the socio-cognitive approach to critical discourse analysis to examine the ideological discourse of self-presentation.

It can be concluded that the discourse used in the preamble reflects an ideological discourse used by the EU to present itself in positive ways. Such an ideological discourse emphasizes the differentiation between the in-group and out-group identification. Thus, it can suggest some implications that the EU holds a negative portray of the “Other” who do not hold the same characteristics, activities, goals, norms and values.

Understanding the possibility of such an ideological discourse can help researchers to adopt a new standpoint to analyze the EU’s foreign policy, which can help in providing new perspective for academic scholarly work.