Counter-hegemony, anti-globalisation and culture in International Political Economy

Worth, Owen; Kuhling, Carmen

doi:10.1177/030981680408400103

Cited by 26 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Transformative mechanisms of counter-hegemony seek to transform a hegemonic order through the direct or indirect undermining of the legitimacy of the foundations that support it (see Rupert 1993;Bieler and Morton 2004;Worth and Kuhling 2004). By questioning widely accepted understandings of reality (i.e.…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Resistance and Of Counter-hegemony [Contest]mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Worth (2002) elaborates on Gramsci's understanding of the process through which one hegemonic order is actually transformed: disillusionment first leads to forces that challenge the order; struggles ensue from resistance to that challenge; compromises are made from this latter group to the new order being established, such that the new order is consolidated. Specific actions taken may be understood to occur-in Gramsci's terms-within 'wars of movement' (direct confrontation) and 'wars of position' (more subtle and strategic forms of contest designed to undermine the legitimacy of the order, awaken consciousness, and destabilise the consent upon which it is based (see also Worth and Kuhling 2004;Loftus and Lumsden 2007;Levy 2008)). Counter-hegemonic actions may be part of larger counter-hegemonic strategy oras in most, if not all, of the transboundary water arrangements considered later-more reactive and tactical.…”

Section: Distinguishing Between 'Apparent' or 'Veiled' Consent And Comentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Transboundary water interaction III: contest and compliance

Zeitoun

Cascão

Warner

et al. 2016

Int Environ Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper serves international water conflict resolution efforts by examining the ways that states contest hegemonic transboundary water arrangements. The conceptual framework of dynamic transboundary water interaction that it presents integrates theories about change and counter-hegemony to ascertain coercive, leverage, and liberating mechanisms through which contest and transformation of an arrangement occur. While the mechanisms can be active through sociopolitical processes either of compliance or of contest of the arrangement, most transboundary water interaction is found to contain elements of both. The role of power asymmetry is interpreted through classification of intervention strategies that seek to either influence or challenge the arrangements. Coexisting contest and compliance serve to explain in part the stasis on the Jordan and Ganges rivers (where the non-hegemons have in effect consented to the arrangement), as well as the changes on the Tigris and Mekong rivers, and even more rapid changes on the Amu Darya and Nile rivers (where the non-hegemons have confronted power asymmetry through influence and challenge). The framework also stresses how transboundary water events that may appear isolated are more accurately read within the many sociopolitical processes and arrangements they are shaped by. By clarifying the typically murky dynamics of interstate relations over transboundary waters, furthermore, the framework exposes a new suite of entry points for hydro-diplomatic initiatives.

show abstract

Section: Mechanisms Of Resistance and Of Counter-hegemony [Contest]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Distinguishing Between 'Apparent' or 'Veiled' Consent And Comentioning

confidence: 99%

Transboundary water interaction III: contest and compliance

Zeitoun

Cascão

Warner

et al. 2016

Int Environ Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The central activity of contemporary contentious movements in GCS is the 'un-doing' of neoliberal hegemony through counter-hegemonic struggle (Evans, 2001;Worth & Kuhling, 2004). Counter-hegemony comprises varied attempts to question naturalized values of the dominant class (Boggs, 1984;Gill, 1993), setting up a pattern of interaction between hegemonic and counter-hegemonic forces that is mutually defining (Lipschutz, 2005).…”

Section: Global Civil Society Uncivil Society and Contentious Politicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Becoming Global (Un)Civil Society: Counter-Hegemonic Struggle and the Indymedia Network

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link AbstractIn this paper we ask how 'civil society' actors and organisations can become constructed and treated as 'uncivil society'. We contest the notion that 'uncivil' necessarily equates with the dark of qualities of violence and organised criminality. Instead, we take a Gramscian perspective in suggesting that what becomes 'uncivil' is any practice and organisation that substantially contests the structuring enclosures of hegemonic order, of which civil society is a necessary part. To trace this, we consider several ways in which a global grassroots media network called Indymedia has established and maintained itself as a counter-hegemonic media-producing organisation. In this case, a conscious positioning and self-identification as counter-hegemonic has been accompanied by the framing and sometimes violent policing of nodes of this network as 'uncivil' by cooperating state authorities. This is in the absence of association of this network with organised violence or crime. We intend our reflections to contribute to a deepening theorisation of the terms 'civil' and 'uncivil' as they are becoming used in social movement and globalization studies.

show abstract

“…Contradictions over the boundaries of cultural space were perhaps best illustrated at the 2007 forum in Nairobi, where a far greater religious presence meant that Western-inspired situationism, which had long been a feature of anti-capitalist demonstrations in the industrial world, 14 clashed with orthodox church groups. 15 In addition, the sheer volume of contrasting panels and stalls that make up the Forum demonstrates a high degree of stark contradiction among its diversity that cannot merely be overlooked.…”

Section: The Wsf and Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%