The coming of post-reflexive society : a critique of the political economy of digital capitalism

Language is a unique aspect of human communication because it can be used to discuss itself in its own terms. For this reason, human societies potentially have superior capacities of co-ordination, reflexive self-correction, and innovation than other animal, physical or cybernetic systems. However, this analysis also reveals that language is interconnected with the economically and technologically mediated social sphere and hence is vulnerable to abstraction, objectification, reification, and therefore ideology – all of which are antithetical to its reflexive function, whilst paradoxically being a fundamental part of it. In particular, in capitalism, language is increasingly commodified within the social domains created and affected by ubiquitous communication technologies. The advent of the so-called ‘knowledge economy’ implicates exchangeable forms of thought (language) as the fundamental commodities of this emerging system. The historical point at which a ‘knowledge economy’ emerges, then, is the critical point at which thought itself becomes a commodified ‘thing’, and language becomes its “objective” means of exchange. However, the processes by which such commodification and objectification occurs obscures the unique social relations within which these language commodities are produced. The latest economic phase of capitalism – the knowledge economy – and the obfuscating trajectory which accompanies it, we argue, is destroying the reflexive capacity of language particularly through the process of commodification. This can be seen in that the language practices that have emerged in conjunction with digital technologies are increasingly non-reflexive and therefore less capable of self-critical, conscious change.

Researching Theories of Modernity & the Subject-Critique of contemporary architecture under ideological capitalism-and Fascism & Modern Architecture

In this symposium I will discuss my work on three parallel projects I have been working on since 2010: Theories of Modernity & the Subject-Critique of contemporary architecture under ideological capitalism-and Fascism & Modern Architecture

Knowledge as Power, Knowledge as Capital: A Political Economy Critique of Modern 'Academic Capitalism'

We are constantly reminded that we live in a 'knowledge society, and indeed that with a 'knowledge economy' a nation's international competiveness is directly linked to its ability to innovate, out-compete and successfully commercialise knowledge. INcreasingly, research within universities is being directed, incetivized and ultimately disciplined towards clear 'economic' priorities. This article offers a critical analysis - employing a broad political economy approach - of the ways in which research within universities and other places of higher learning has become increasingly orientated towards a narrow set of economic goals.

Comment on the article by Raúl Prebisch "A critique of peripheral capitalism"

Includes bibliography

Varieties of capitalism and investments in human capital

This paper explores the relationship between national institutional archetypes and investments in training and development. A recent trend within the literature on comparative capitalism has been to explore the nature and extent of heterogeneity within the coordinated market economies (CMEs) of Europe. Based on a review of the existing comparative literature on training and development, and comparative firm-level survey evidence of differences in training and development practices, we both support and critique existing country clusters and argue for a more nuanced and flexible categorization.

Re-assessing streetkids : a critique of subculture theory

Focusing on the notion of street kids, the paper suggests that youth be viewed in an alternative way to the subculture theory associated with the Center for Contemporary Cultural Studies in Birmingham (CCCS). It is argued that not only is subculture theory an unsuitable mechanism for understanding homeless youth but also, and more importantly, is itself fundamentally problematic. It is suggested that the work of Michel Foucault necessitates a reevaluation of the domain assumptions underlying subculture theory and offers in its place a model that relocates street kids, and youth itself, as artifacts of a network of governmental strategies.