Search

It has been 89 years since M. Weber died. Many of the studies achieved on Weber-s Theory that part of sociology, law, politics, history and even economy. So, Weber was known as the last general genius in sociological part. But Weber-s influence on other academic areas caused many disputes which connected to Weber-s theory. Especially, Weber-s methodology has aroused a controversy for a long time. Even though, Weber-s methodology influenced positively many of the study fields. The matter is beyond dispute. Weber-s methodology view was so complicated and difficult. If understand of Weber-s point of view, should premise the apprehension of German history school and national economy-s view. And We should understand what difference between marxism and german historical philosophy. But, In the paper, I will show to minimum-s access to Weber-s methodology. Instead of, in this paper, with M. Weber-s methodology view, I willing to understand historical events. So, this paper attempts to show that understanding weber-s methodology, accessing to historical events(as weber-s methodology), and providing specific example(South korea-s candlelight vigil) ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Traditional approaches to the interpretation of the theories of Marx and Weber have departed from an assumption of the inherent incompatibility of their approaches. Instead, contemporary critical theorists have begun articulating a theory of "Weberian Marxism," yet have failed to justify their complementary nature with any systematic argument that draws upon the tenets of Marx and Weber's own theories. To fill this gap, I first provide a brief overview of past expressions of Weberian Marxism in Lukács and the Frankfurt School, portraying its defining characteristics in relation to both Marx and Weber. After a brief synopsis of the competing narratives of the progression of modern society within classical Marxism and Weberian theory, I provide an argument for the philosophical roots of Weberian Marxism, showing a convergence that can be located within the original works of Weber and Marx themselves. Therefore, this paper moves beyond mere inferences to and applications of the convergence of Marx and Weber within the writings of Lukács and the Frankfurt School to offer instead a systematic argument that demonstrates how each theorist incidentally borrows intellectual capital from the other. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The main objective of this paper is to claim that the origins and formation of the welfare state are reconsidered as an institutional process embedded in patterned relations between given historical contingencies and institutional adaptations in response to welfare demands. Such relational processes can be categorised by the three isomorphic convergences of institutional adaptations to the welfare demands: national emergencies, economic challenges and political transitions. Existing accounts for the emergence of the welfare state - universalism, selectivity, and Marxism - are bracketed under a single heading of social control theory for two reasons: first, those three explanations commonly err in believing that an ideological intent is given as predetermined before actual analyses of social policy-making, thereby neglecting the process of institutional reforms; and second, the underlying implication of all three accounts ends in a common target of social policy - how to control welfare demands, and safeguard social stability. By comparison of institutional adaptations with social control theory, the paper aims to explain and emphasize the methodological utilities and practical applicability of the institutional process approach in the studies of welfare development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper addresses a problem posed by the idea of culture for marxian theory, namely how an essentially non-theoretical term, and the topics it organizes, bears on what is theoritical in Marx’s critique of "capital." In that critique, Marx expands upon two problems and, in a sense, solves them. The first has to do with the reproduction of capital, and the second with the production of society, specifically the conditions under which it is possible to conceive of society as an ensemble of practices or "relations." In each case, the problem is developed in regard to the production of means of subsistence as cmmodities. While this procedure exposes, at the margin of capitalist production, a number of conditions that are suggestive for politics (Marx refers to the "bearers" of labor power, domestic life, ideology, and the "society of the producers",) there seems to be no room for what we now call "culture" - meaning self-reflective conditions of action (having to do with forms, values, and the like). It is clear that such a concept goes beyond the idea of critique, and so it remains topical in regard to Marxian theory and not theoretical as such. I review some of the issues involved in trying to reconcile the theory and the concept, and the significance of the latter to the bearing the former has on politics. In the end, I conclude that culture poses a problem for theorizing but not for theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Even though the issue of crime is increasingly politicized throughout the world there are very few Marxist analyses dealing directly with this issue and practically nothing recent. The following paper provides a Marxist analysis of crime focusing on (1) recent crime rates, (2) trends in criminal justice and the development of repressive state apparatus, (3) public awareness and opinion on 1 and 2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dominated people are stereotyped by dominators as overly aggressive, sex-ridden, lacking in conscience, and weak in the talents and skills it takes to be effective in the world. Thus colonizers to colonized, racists to their victims, anti-Semites to Jews, men to women, and so on. These convictions do more than rationalize domination. They speak to subjective realities and dynamics ordinarily ignored by dominators, dominated, and most theorists of domination as well.Both Marxist and non-Marxist sociologists address structures of race, class, and gender, but not the structure of generations. It is my claim that race, class, and gender structures unknowingly to the dominators and dominated, as well as to scholars of domination, reproduce the structure and dynamics of the relations of generations, and that the dominated group is implicitly confused with and fused with the objective and subjective realities of children in their early years of development and domination by adults. In a very hard-nosed masculine way, Marx dismissed subjectivity in his efforts to understand domination. By examining subjective issues in adults' relations to children, we can uncover the crucial hidden dimension of domination otherwise lacking in sociologists' treatment of it. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper draws on in-depth interviews with immigrant domestic workers and employers of domestic workers in Washington D.C. and Istanbul to explore to interrelated issues: emergence of an international class of domestic workers who are replaceable and disposable due to high volume of immigrant women in informal paid domestic service, and labor process of paid domestic work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of digital technology has a great impact on newspaper production as on every aspect of our life. This technological innovation has rationalized the production process, eliminating a great number of jobs. Marxist and political economic theories explain that technology (mechanization) turns the workplace into a bleak place for workers because of the dehumanization of work. In Marx's words, workers are alienated from their work, products, and themselves under this desolate work situation. This paper explores firsthand experiences of newspaper workers about technological changes in workplace, based on interviews with reporters, editors, and photographers of a Japanese local newspaper that is pushing forth rationalization. This study found that newspaper workers have contradictory experiences and perspectives involving technology including computers, cell phones, and the Internet. Newspaper workers do not necessarily look at technological changes negatively, as theories at the macro level argue while they are experiencing trends and phenomena that those theories discuss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

See Attached Form. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A right-wing populist critique of "bad bankers" is a central trope used by the Tea Party movement and others on the contemporary Political Right. Using a sociological Marxist and social movement theory approach, I explain how the "bad bankers" trope is a version of the "Socialism of Fools" in which the "bad bankers" can be portrayed as Jews, the Rockefellers, or the Bilderbergers, etc. In none of these cases is there a structural analysis of power in which systems and institutions of capitalist political economy are actually scrutinized much less criticized. It artificially divides Capitalism into a model where "bad" "parasitic" "non-productive" finance capital is struggling against "good" "independent" "productive" industrial capital. There is a dynamic and fluid relationship between finance capital and industrial (and service) capital, but the "bad bankers" (or "banksters") trope personalizes individuals and specific institutions in a way that is not only superficial and oversimplified, but blames scapegoats rather addressing the need for substantive changes to the political and economic system. This explains why major individuals and entities highly invested in protecting corporate capital and its prerogatives would support what is ostensibly a significant populist mass movement. This is the way in which right-wing populist mass movements construct political economy in the United States so that they shoot themselves in the wallet. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]