Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 00:06:42 +0100 (BST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Ismail=20Lagardien?= <ilagardien-AT-yahoo.com>
Subject: BHA: Absolute Beginner


--0-436033563-1020380802=:93687


Richard, Mervyn

I tend to couple emancipation with transformation. I have some difficulty conceiving of a society - in the case of my research, an international society - without structured, formalised, social relations. This is not to say that I believe in high-formalising society - i just can't conceive of anarcho-formalism (whatever that may mean - just made it up)

These are some of my thoughts:

Relations and exchange take place within social, political and economic contexts that are ontologically anterior to agency - that is my understanding anyway - and it is at this level where transformation ought to take place. For example, if an actor, say a mining company (X) in country A, wants to purchase new equipment from a company (Y) in country B, the exchange takes place within a legal, customary and financial/economic/commercial framework (the rules of the game) that is basically agree to by A & B. This framework (essentially a system of rules, regulations and conventions) exists before X and Y enter into the "deal" or regardless whether they enter into the "deal". But (this is where some of my main concerns lie) what role did X & Y play.

More closely related to my research, which is basically on Global Inequality and Structural Poverty in International Society, it is the patterns of production, distribution and consumption (all within a financial/commercia/economic/social and political framework) that continue to marginalise and oppress the weak and the poor. These (systems) exist before/regardless of whether, the poor engage in them. My envisaged research (empirical) is the extent to which the poor (in this case the 47 Countries of sub-Saharan African countries) contributed to the framework - in this case the "liberal international economic" order that was created by the USA and Britain after the Second World War (Gilpin 1982 based on Modelski 1978). I believe Critical Realism can provide me with the instruments needed for this investigation/research.

One question, then: Is emancipation prior to transformation?

Ismail (absolute beginner) Lagardien

 



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalised at My Yahoo!.
--0-436033563-1020380802=:93687

HTML VERSION:

Richard, Mervyn

I tend to couple emancipation with transformation. I have some difficulty conceiving of a society - in the case of my research, an international society - without structured, formalised, social relations. This is not to say that I believe in high-formalising society - i just can't conceive of anarcho-formalism (whatever that may mean - just made it up)

These are some of my thoughts:

Relations and exchange take place within social, political and economic contexts that are ontologically anterior to agency - that is my understanding anyway - and it is at this level where transformation ought to take place. For example, if an actor, say a mining company (X) in country A, wants to purchase new equipment from a company (Y) in country B, the exchange takes place within a legal, customary and financial/economic/commercial framework (the rules of the game) that is basically agree to by A & B. This framework (essentially a system of rules, regulations and conventions) exists before X and Y enter into the "deal" or regardless whether they enter into the "deal". But (this is where some of my main concerns lie) what role did X & Y play.

More closely related to my research, which is basically on Global Inequality and Structural Poverty in International Society, it is the patterns of production, distribution and consumption (all within a financial/commercia/economic/social and political framework) that continue to marginalise and oppress the weak and the poor. These (systems) exist before/regardless of whether, the poor engage in them. My envisaged research (empirical) is the extent to which the poor (in this case the 47 Countries of sub-Saharan African countries) contributed to the framework - in this case the "liberal international economic" order that was created by the USA and Britain after the Second World War (Gilpin 1982 based on Modelski 1978). I believe Critical Realism can provide me with the instruments needed for this investigation/research.

One question, then: Is emancipation prior to transformation?

Ismail (absolute beginner) Lagardien