This article is part of a debate. Read the original argument by Michael Walzer here, and Joshua Leifer’s response here. I disagree radically with Joshua Leifer’s response and won’t be able to get to every point of disagreement in this …
We need to think not only about beating the 1 percent, but also about the kind of world we want to build, the kind of existence we want to have on this earth.
If progressive critics of neoliberalism aim to recuperate the national arena to regain policy space back from global capital, they also need to think hard about how to challenge capitalists they face at home.
Le Guin’s work is distinctive not only because it is imaginative, or because it is political, but because she thought so deeply about the work of building a future worth living.
Activists in L.A. are connecting homelessness to the issues of over-policing, gentrification, and the fight for affordable housing—and asking the city to recognize the homeless as members of the community, rather than a problem to be swept out of view.
Personhood for Happy would create a legal precedent and framework for granting fundamental rights to nonhumans in the future.
The labor historians of the 1960s were born into the culture of unity forged in the working-class movement’s classical phase, between 1890 and 1945. In one form or another, they told the story of this era, not realizing how radically it might come undone.
Bruno Latour’s flirtations with the paranoid style of climate politics are a summation of ideas long in the making—ideas that those attempting to preserve a planet shared by all will have to take into account, but will also have to reach beyond.
If the nation-state had failed to overcome the problem of colonial dependence, then the postcolonial political kingdom had to be reimagined. Nkrumah’s vision of pan-African federation was an effort to do just that.
In the Global North we often act as if our future will be a warmer version of today: liberal capitalism, plus flood insurance, minus coral reefs. That future is a fantasy.
Can West Bengal’s traditions of religious tolerance and equal rights survive the rise of Hindu nationalism?
Aufstehen’s leaders insisted that their movement was not defined by its opposition to migrants. But they consistently cast migrants as either pawns in the game of finance capital or as the phony poster children of misguided urban idealists.
“We have to talk to people in a way that combines addressing these [economic] anxieties with the issues of the environment. Unless we manage to do that, we will fail.”
Trump’s wall is a “monument to the final closing of the frontier.” He has abandoned the political language of boundless optimism for a darker tone.
Does nationalism have a place in left politics?
