Gender Politics after Corbynism

This article examines Corbynism's gender politics, and its relationship with feminism. We note that in the early years of the Corbyn period there were starkly opposed positions on the gender dynamics and feminist-friendliness of the Corbyn project. This, in turn, reflected wider factional divisions, often mapping onto different articulations of the relationship between feminism, race/whiteness, and trans rights. We then describe how initial prospects for the cultivation of a more gender-sensitive left politics were ultimately undermined by two key developments: first, a discursive terrain in which feminism increasingly became pitted against the Corbynite left; and second, a defensiveness within the Corbyn project that made it resistant to immanent critique. We conclude by arguing that the failure of pro-Corbyn feminists to gain much traction must be contextualised within the dynamics of personalisation, instrumentalisation and polarisation that increasingly shape our political culture

Theorising power and resistance under contemporary capitalism: An interview with Nancy Fraser

This is the final version. Available on open access from SAGE publications via the DOI in this recordIn this interview, Fraser reflects on the meaning of the so-called ‘culture wars’ for theorising power and domination, the nature of contemporary struggles for liberation, the role the concept of labour could play in bringing those movements together in political action, and the wider theoretical and political work needed to achieve it. She also offers her assessment of some of the theoretical literature that has addressed those issues. In doing so, she both situates her own work within the wider tradition of Frankfurt School critical theory and clarifies her views on intersectionality theory

Rethinking globalised resistance : feminist activism and critical theorising in international relations

This article argues that a feminist approach to the 'politics of resistance' offers a number of important empirical insights which, in turn, open up lines of theoretical inquiry which critical theorists in IR would do well to explore. Concretely, we draw on our ongoing research into feminist 'anti-globalisation' activism to rethink the nature of the subject of the politics of resistance, the conditions under which resistance emerges and how resistance is enacted and expressed. We begin by discussing the relationship of feminism to critical IR theory as a way of situating and explaining the focus and approach of our research project. We then summarise our key empirical arguments regarding the emergence, structure, beliefs, identities and practices of feminist 'anti-globalisation' activism before exploring the implications of these for a renewed critical theoretical agenda in IR

Reclaiming feminist futures : co-opted and progressive politics in a neoliberal age

This article engages with the influential narrative about the co-optation of feminism in conditions of neoliberalism put forward by prominent feminist thinkers Nancy Fraser, Hester Eisenstein and Angela McRobbie. After drawing out the twin visions of 'progressive' feminist politics that undergird this narrative — cached out in terms of either the retrieval of past socialist feminist glories or personal reinvention — we subject to critical scrutiny both the substantive claims made and the conceptual scaffolding invoked. We argue that the proleptic imaginings of all three authors, in different ways, are highly circumscribed in terms of the recommended agent, agenda and practices of progressive politics, and clouded by conceptual muddle over the meanings of 'left', 'radical' and 'progressive'. Taken together, these problems render the conclusions of Fraser, Eisenstein and McRobbie at best unconvincing and at worst dismissive of contemporary feminist efforts to challenge neoliberalism. We end the paper by disentangling and redefining left, radical and progressive and by sketching a contrasting substantive vision of progressive feminist politics enabled by this reconceptualisation

El laberinto de la autonomía indígena en el Ecuador: las circunscripciones territoriales indígenas en la Amazonía Central, 2010-2012

¿Cuáles son los avatares y desencuentros presentes en el proceso de constitución de las Circunscripciones Territoriales Indígenas (CTIs) en relación a la vigencia del derecho a la autodeterminación y autogestión territorial de las nacionalidades indígenas en el Ecuador? Para responder a dicha interrogante, el artículo considera el reconocimiento al derecho a la autonomía y autodeterminación de las nacionalidades y pueblos indígenas en Ecuador. Posteriormente, analiza el alcance de los procedimientos establecidos tanto en la Constitución Política como en el Código Orgánico de Ordenamiento Territorial y Descentralización (COOTAD), y su alcance potencial en generar un nuevo tipo de institucionalidad y una nueva organización territorial en el marco de la definición del Estado plurinacional Ecuatoriano. Esta contribución analiza además el proceso derivado de una hoja de ruta acordada entre el Estado y las nacionalidades amazónicas en el periodo comprendido entre 2010 y 2012, y analiza las diferentes acciones desplegadas desde entonces, enfatizando en los avances y contradicciones, tanto a lo interno del movimiento indígena como en su relación con otras instancias estatales centrales y locales. Se examinan los desencuentros y tensiones a lo interno del aparato Estatal y los sectores mestizos, que no se plantean ningún reparo al momento de obstaculizar los avances del proceso. El artículo analiza el desafío de crear las CTIs en el territorio de los Kichwa de las provincias de Napo y Orellana y en los territorios Kichwa y Achuar en la provincia de Pastaza, en la Amazonía central. Finalmente, el texto puntualiza críticamente algunas de las perspectivas y dilemas que dicho proceso plantea al futuro de la relación Estado-nacionalidades indígenas y al proceso de construcción del Estado plurinacional e intercultural en Ecuador

‘Lovely people but utterly deluded’? British political science’s trouble with Corbynism

This paper argues that political scientists in Britain have, for the most part, failed to adequately understand Corbynism (i.e. the movement surrounding the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn) as a distinctive iteration of left politics. To substantiate this claim, we begin by mapping a consensus in British political science scholarship about the central features of Corbynism, namely that it is a misguided politics characterised by poor leadership, a ‘hard left’ ideological orientation, and a populist flavour. In the second part of the paper, we suggest that this unfavourable characterisation of Corbynism relies on problematic analytic assumptions about leadership, the left, and populism. Furthermore, we argue that such narratives do not withstand empirical scrutiny, largely because they fail to do justice to the heterogeneous strands that constitute the politics of Corbynism. In the final part of the paper, we offer an explanation for political scientists’ trouble with Corbyn, highlighting the continued dominance of the Westminster Model, widespread confusion surrounding the descriptive/normative relation, and considerable convergence between academic and media depictions of Corbynism. Overall, we suggest that political scientists’ failure to take seriously the full complexity of the Corbyn movement requires rectification

Corbynism, Populism and the Re-shaping of Left Politics in Contemporary Britain

This chapter analyses the relevance of ‘populism’ for understanding the movement surrounding UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn. Following a general mapping of the contours of Corbynism, we ask whether, from the point of view of a Laclau-inspired discursive approach, Corbynism can meaningfully be described as populist. We suggest that Corbynism can only accurately be described as populist if one were to stretch the meaning of populism so far as to render it virtually meaningless. Consequently, in the final part of the chapter, we offer a theoretical critique of the general trend towards ‘conceptual overstretching’ that one finds in the populism scholarship

Corbyn’s Labour and the populism question

It’s now common to hear Corbynism described as ‘populist’. But if we examine the core characteristics of populism, we find Corbynism bears only a very superficial resemblance to populist movements. This framing often functions as an attempt to delegitimise any political view lying outside the centre-ground of politics, and should be resisted

Making Feminist Sense of the Global Justice Movement

In recent years, the global justice movement has grabbed headlines and reshaped political imaginations worldwide. Surprisingly, however, feminism is largely absent from accounts of the movement—despite the fact that feminists are extensively involved on the ground. Addressing this significant gap in the literature, Eschle and Maiguashca shine a powerful light on what they term "feminist antiglobalization activism." Drawing on their fieldwork at the World Social Forum and European Social Forum, 2003–2005, they begin by outlining the vital role of feminist antiglobalization activism in Forum processes and events while also emphasizing its diversity. The authors then trace the origins of this activism, the critiques and aspirations of those involved, their political practices beyond the Forum, and their efforts to forge a sense of solidarity among themselves and with others. Taking feminism seriously, Eschle and Maiguashca conclude, points us toward a richer and more theoretically nuanced understanding of the global justice movement and its struggle to create other possible worlds. Their book thus offers vital insights not only for feminists, but also for all those interested in contemporary social movements and in global governance and resistance

Did somebody say populism? Towards a renewal and reorientation of populism studies

Responding to the recent explosion in scholarly analysis of populism, this paper offers a conceptual mapping and critique of the dominant schools of thought within the burgeoning field of populism studies. In the first half of the paper we suggest that two broad conceptions of populism – one associated with Cas Mudde, the other with Ernesto Laclau – have come to dominate the field. Yet neither of these approaches, we argue, are able to satisfactorily capture the specificity of contemporary forms of radical politics. Thus, the second part of the paper examines possible responses to this conceptual impasse. On the one hand, we recommend a move towards more theoretically and sociologically enriched accounts of populism, by drawing on the insights and concepts of political sociology, political theory and cultural studies. On the other, drawing on recent work by Benjamin De Cleen, Jason Glynos and Aurelien Mondon, we suggest a partial reorientation of populism towards thinking about populism as a signifier (rather than as a concept). In so doing, we conclude with a call for greater sensitivity to, and awareness of, the role that discourses about populism (including scholarly discourses) play in sustaining existing relations of power and ideology