Unraveling EU Policies: the ““Common Basic Principles”” and the ““European Integration Fund”” as a technology of government

this paper is about EU “soft policies” on immigrant integration. It analyzes the “Common Basic Principles” (CBPs) and the “European Integration Fund” (EIF), two devices that have been recently established within this framework. It adopts the theoretical perspective of the “anthropology of policy” and “governmentality studies”. It shows the context of birth of the aforementioned devices, as well as their functioning and the assessment done by the actors implied in the elaboration/implementation/evaluation of the related policies. It is based both on documentary research as well as direct observation and interviews done to the actors implied. It concludes that the PBC and the EIF should be considered as a “technology of government”, that strives to align the conduct of the actors with the governmental aims, as well as it produces specific practices and knowledge. It also underlines an intrinsic feature of many policies: their “congenital failure”, since they are (often) disputed and resignified by situated actors, who are embedded in asymmetrical power relations.

Colonialism, political unconscious and cognitive mapping in the space of the film "Captain Phillips"

The purpose of this article has been made through a Marxist analysis of the US film "Captain Phillips" (PaulGreengrass, 2013), based on a true story. I have found how the evolution of capitalism in the West continuesto consolidate the belief reified in a historical and geographical superiority of the political and socioeconomicwestern models regarding Africa and Asia lowers models. At the same time, through categories like dialecticalmaterialism, criticism of diffusionist theory and application of cognitive mapping to large geopoliticalspaces located in most poor areas of the world, I have realized a remark about currently being articulatingthe political unconscious of working class in rich countries and the poor in poor countries, establishing arelationship between the ideological representation that takes an individual from his historical reality (ona scale that moves from local to global), and how he has developed a mental ability to escape of the responsibilityto make a critical review of what's happening around him in all areas. Finally, through physicalspace captured in the film, I have realized a materialist critique of globalized business process that takesplace through the carriage of goods, outlining spatial and cognitively limits of the mentality of our time, bothamong "winners"as among the "losers", based on the spatial movement of capital.

Temor, silencio y deliberación: la inhibición de la opinión en Tucídides

Tucídides es una de nuestras mejores fuentes de información para conocer la práctica argumentativa de la deliberación democrática. En este trabajo se analiza uno de los vicios que, según el historiador, haría su aparición en la escena política ateniense a la muerte de Pericles: la instrumentalización del miedo para obtener la victoria momentánea en la asamblea. El temor prudente, que fuera una arma periclea para conducir la deliberación racional en aras del bien común, habría desaparecido siendo sustituido por el amedrentamiento del rival, la calumnia, el obstruccionismo y la parálisis de la confrontación dialéctica. Instauradas en la ciudad la desconfianza y la sospecha de ocultación, los golpistas del 411 hallaron el terreno abonado para callar las voces contrarias y, gracias al silencio, instaurar el terror.

Of Marx and Makers: an Historical Perspective on Generative Justice

In Marxist frameworks “distributive justice” depends on extracting value through a centralized state. Many new social movements—peer to peer economy, maker activism, community agriculture, queer ecology, etc.—take the opposite approach, keeping value in its unalienated form and allowing it to freely circulate from the bottom up. Unlike Marxism, there is no general theory for bottom-up, unalienated value circulation. This paper examines the concept of “generative justice” through an historical contrast between Marx’s writings and the indigenous cultures that he drew upon. Marx erroneously concluded that while indigenous cultures had unalienated forms of production, only centralized value extraction could allow the productivity needed for a high quality of life. To the contrary, indigenous cultures now provide a robust model for the “gift economy” that underpins open source technological production, agroecology, and restorative approaches to civil rights. Expanding Marx’s concept of unalienated labor value to include unalienated ecological (nonhuman) value, as well as the domain of freedom in speech, sexual orientation, spirituality and other forms of “expressive” value, we arrive at an historically informed perspective for generative justice.