David Norman Smith

Dance of the DialecticDance of the Dialectic: Steps in Marx's Method, by OllmanBertell. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003. 232 pp.

world seems unable to overcome the impasse of contemporary societies caught between the systemic forces of transnational globalization and the struggle for local autonomy. A final substantive chapter considers the confrontation between critical theory and postmodernism (Baudrillard and Lyotard). It is an excellent example of critical theory’s approach to competing theoretical viewpoints, but also of the limits of both critical theory and postmodernism as they peer into the abyss of absolute relativism. Alan How renders critical theory through a review of the debates among the major protagonists. He writes in refreshingly personal terms: His first-person account of how he encountered critical theory is instructive and would seem to make this type of “theory” accessible to a college-age audience. His favorite critical theorist is Marcuse, but he advances an inclusive view of critical theory’s development during the last 80 years and provides informed, sensitive, and critical evaluations of the major works. How repeatedly talks about a “rational future” for society and a “rational solution” to the impasse of critical theory, but the referent of “rational” is not always clear: It is hardly the scientific and instrumental rationality of positivism, but is it Popper’s critical rationalism, or Weber’s value rationality, or the communicative rationality of Habermas’ discourse theory, or simply the opposite of a nonrational and irrational past? There are also some irritating editorial lapses, especially toward the end of the book, or when Horkheimer and Adorno’s Dialectic of Enlightenment is cited with Adorno as the senior author. All told, however, the book offers a handy and engaging account of one of sociology’s black sheep.

39.95 cloth. ISBN: 0-252-02832-5.

Fifty years after the Holocaust, anti-Jewish myths and sentiments are gaining momentum in Europe, the Islamic world, the Americas, and even in Japan. Why ? Does hate spring eternal ? Seeking an answer to this question, the author develops a seven-part argument. His aim is to advance what can reasonably be called a social constructionist perspective on the kind of antisemitic demonology that is now gaining worldwide currency. His method is to seek clarity by evaluating varying kinds of constructionist claims. Both the strengths and weaknesses of these claims are illuminating for my purposes, as he tries to show in connection with writers including Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe, Elisabeth Young-Bruehl, Daniel Goldhagen, and Pierre-Andre Taguieff. His conclusion is that we can best understand antisemitism as an instance of what historian Gavin Langmuir calls chimeria. Interpreted in the spirit of certain classic texts (by Sartre, Adorno, and Samuel), this notion offers a powerful starting point for further inquiry. To illustrate the promise of this approach, he closes with an interpretation of the current, global antisemitic revival as an expression of anti-Jewish chimeria

18.95 paper. ISBN: 0-252-07118-2.: Steps in Marx's Method

Spontaneous coronary arterial intramural hematoma is a rarely diagnosed cause of acute myocardial infarction. The underlying pathophysiology is poorly understood. A historical series of intramedial dissecting hematomas, published in 1965 ([1][1]), postulated that rupture of the vasa vasorum or

The social construction of enemies: Jews and the representation of evil

No interpreter of Marxs Capital has been as highly esteemed by Marx or as little noticed as Nikolai Ivanovich Sieber. Yet Siebers contribution has been overlooked by almost all of the participants in the innumerable debates sparked by Capital. This is not only a failure of exegesis, but significant as well, since Siebers work, in fact, is a valuable coda to Capital. Several aspects of Marxs theory which remain obscure to many critics can be better grasped in the light of Siebers exposition.

Spontaneous multivessel coronary intramural hematoma: an insight with OCT.

It is seldom noticed that the concept of the authoritarian personality sprang from research - above all by Max Weber and Erich Fromm - on the ambivalence of the German working class. Unlike earlier social critics and theorists, Weber and Fromm did not simply assume that workers are naturally anti-authoritarian: nor, unlike many later theorists, did they assume the reverse. The working class, they found, is complex divided - indeed, contradictory. Some workers are anti-authoritarian, others worship authority, and many others have deeply mixed feelings. Hence the inadequacy of what Weber called a priori class theories, which, without evidence, deduce consciousness from status, thus finding whatever they presuppose. The alternative, a la Fromms Critical Theory, is to probe not only the antipodes on the continuum from authoritarianism to anti-authoritarianism, but also the contradictory cases in between. Only in this way can the genuinely contradictory character of class feeling and thinking be understood

The spectral reality of value: Sieber, Marx, and commodity fetishism

Abstract Purpose The aim of this chapter is to argue that charisma is a collective representation, and that charismatic authority is a social status that derives more from the “recognition” of the followers than from the “magnetism” of the leaders. I contend further that a close reading of Max Weber shows that he, too, saw charisma in this light. Approach I develop my argument by a close reading of many of the most relevant texts on the subject. This includes not only the renowned texts on this subject by Max Weber, but also many books and articles that interpret or criticize Weber’s views. Findings I pay exceptionally close attention to key arguments and texts, several of which have been overlooked in the past. Implications Writers for whom charisma is personal magnetism tend to assume that charismatic rule is natural and that the full realization of democratic norms is unlikely. Authority, in this view, emanates from rulers unbound by popular constraint. I argue that, in fact, authority draws both its mandate and its energy from the public, and that rulers depend on the loyalty of their subjects, which is never assured. So charismatic claimants are dependent on popular choice, not vice versa. Originality I advocate a “culturalist” interpretation of Weber, which runs counter to the dominant “personalist” account. Conventional interpreters, under the sway of theology or mass psychology, misread Weber as a romantic, for whom charisma is primal and undemocratic rule is destiny. This essay offers a counter-reading.

The Ambivalent Worker: Max Weber, Critical Theory and the Antinomies of Authority

During World War II, Frankfurt School researchers studied attitudes in factories across America, finding high levels of anti-Semitism. Since the CIO’s birth in 1935, labor had grown meteorically and seemed fundamentally progressive. But the Frankfurt study of Labor anti-Semitism showed the other side of the coin — namely, that many workers held anti-Semitic views of a kind familiar from fascist propaganda, even during an anti-fascist war. In this issue of Critical Sociology, we excerpt Paul Massing’s contribution to this large unpublished study. Massing’s findings, and those of his co-authors, went almost entirely unnoticed and the corrosive bias they exposed has now largely vanished in the USA. Yet the findings of this study remain pertinent at a moment when, after many shifts of register and key, both labor and anti-Semitism remain significant global forces. The articles by present-day authors that accompany Massing’s article address related issues.

Charisma disenchanted: Max weber and his critics

Abstract Purpose Max Weber called the maxim “Time is Money” the surest, simplest expression of the spirit of capitalism. Coined in 1748 by Benjamin Franklin, this modern proverb now has a life of its own. In this paper, I examine the worldwide diffusion and sociocultural history of this paradigmatic expression. The intent is to explore the ways in which ideas of time and money appear in sedimented form in popular sayings. Methodology/approach My approach is sociological in orientation and multidisciplinary in method. Drawing upon the works of Max Weber, Antonio Gramsci, Wolfgang Mieder, and Dean Wolfe Manders, I explore the global spread of Ben Franklin’s famed adage in three ways: (1) via evidence from the field of “paremiology” – that is, the study of proverbs; (2) via online searches for the phrase “Time is Money” in 30-plus languages; and (3) via evidence from sociological and historical research. Findings The conviction that “Time is Money” has won global assent on an ever-expanding basis for more than 250 years now. In recent years, this phrase has reverberated to the far corners of the world in literally dozens of languages – above all, in the languages of Eastern Europe and East Asia. Originality/value Methodologically, this study unites several different ways of exploring the globalization of the capitalist spirit. The main substantive implication is that, as capitalism goes global, so too does the capitalist spirit. Evidence from popular sayings gives us a new foothold for insight into questions of this kind.

Solidarity in Question: Critical Theory, Labor, and Anti-Semitism

Commentators agree that the crisis that boiled to a bubble in the fall of 2008 (“the Great Recession”) is the gravest downturn since the depression of the 1930s. That makes it one of the two greatest crises in the history of capitalism. And plainly, the crisis continues, yielding severe joblessness and a growing danger of government defaults, bank failures, and stock market crashes. Hundreds of commentators have sought to explain the crisis. Yet much remains murky, even paradoxical. This essay attempts to put the crisis in perspective by mapping the universe of crisis literature. It begins by framing some of the key questions posed in this literature. Next it offers sharply etched reviews of thirteen key books. The result is a multi-faceted portrait of a crisis that is still unfolding.

Profit Maxims: Capitalism and the Common Sense of Time and Money

Recently released data from the 2016 American National Election Study allow us to offer a multifaceted profile of white voters who voted for Donald J. Trump in the 2016 presidential election. We find that Trump’s supporters voted for him mainly because they share his prejudices, not because they’re financially stressed. It’s true, as exit polls showed, that voters without four-year college degrees were likelier than average to support Trump. But millions of these voters—who are often stereotyped as “the white working class”—opposed Trump because they oppose his prejudices. These prejudices, meanwhile, have a definite structure, which we argue should be called authoritarian: negatively, they target minorities and women; and positively, they favor domineering and intolerant leaders who are uninhibited about their biases. Multivariate logistic regression shows that, once we take these biases into account, demographic factors (age, education, etc.) lose their explanatory power. The electorate, in short, is deeply divided. Nearly 75% of Trump supporters count themselves among his enthusiastic supporters, and even “mild” Trump voters are much closer in their attitudes to Trump’s enthusiasts than they are to non-Trump voters. Polarization is profound, and may be growing.