Search

Most recent analyses of New Social Movements (NSMs) by British sociologists have concentrated on broad social changes or the middle classes as the key explanatory factors. This paper criticizes recent contributions to the analysis of NSMs which emphasize the development of 'post-Fordism' and 'disorganized capitalism', and recent attempts to understand NSMs as a reflection of 'middle class' interests or values. An alternative theoretical approach is outlined which places at the centre of the analysis the social relations in which NSMs are grounded, and which NSMs seek to transform. In this alternative account the middle classes play the role of 'traditional intellectuals', that is, they provide the key social resources for mobilization of NSMs and all social movements.

This paper considers recent debates around patriarchy and gender segregation in paid employment. I argue that there are significant problems concerning a lack of attention to the forms of mobilization of patriarchal forces. Most analyses using the concept of patriarchy to explain gender segregation have used those empirical examples where men are organized in trade unions or professional associations. They have no way of explaining segregation in those cases where such organizations are absent. Using a case study of the hotel and catering industry between 1951 and 1981, I show that it is necessary to distinguish functional, hierarchical and industrial forms of segregation, rather than simply horizontal and vertical forms. I also develop concepts of the different organizational resources that patriarchal mobilization may draw upon in order to explain those cases where unions and professional organizations are absent., Introduction: the debate on gender segregation According to dual systems theorists the restructuring of gender segregation can only be understood by taking into account both capitalist restructuring, and patriarchal processes [...]

The Changing Shape of Work Richard K, Brown, (ed.), Macmillan, London, 1997, 14.99 £, 226pp. As a sociological topic work and employment is somewhat out of fashion, but Richard Brown's [...]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the issue including the racism in higher education institutions, the creation of anti-racist university and the lack of progression of black and ethnic minority students in the academic workforce.

In this article, we explore and develop the utility for social movement studies of Michel Foucault’s conceptualization ofheterotopia. Informed by Foucault’s theorizing, we propose a heuristic typology of social movement heterotopias. Five heterotopia ‘types’ are considered: ‘contained’, ‘mobile’, ‘cloud’, ‘encounter’ and ‘rhizomic’. Each has particular attributes, but all challenge normal, routine politics. They do so by being, from the perspective of state and capital, either in the ‘wrong’ place, moving in the ‘wrong’ way, or involving the ‘wrong’ connections, affinities or organization. These are constructed-types, proposed for the purpose of description, comparison and prediction. These social movement heterotopias are different types of space that facilitate practices of resistance and transgression. We situate Foucault’s writing on heterotopia at a pivotal moment in his intellectual career, when he became increasingly concerned with how particular mechanisms for modulating the creative force of resistance/power are invented, the types of bodies they craft and the politics they make possible. We propose an interpretation of heterotopia that relates it to his later work on power, resistance and freedom, and the interplay of his ideas with those of Gilles Deleuze. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]