Author Archives: Stephen Gill

“Three Moments of Alienation: with reference to the organic crisis of the state, social reproduction, and the planet” (2017).

Bakker & Gill (2017) Three moments of alienation and the crisis of social reproduction” (2017).

Paper and presentation. By Isabella Bakker and Stephen Gill. Presented at the the Symposium “Alienation and Appropriation Today”, University of Liverpool, UK 13 July 2017. This is a brief paper with a sketch of some of our possible ideas concerning the concept of alienation.

“Access and Inclusion/Exclusion in Global Governance” 2018

“Access and Inclusion/Exclusion in Global Governance” (2018).” (2018).

This is a historically grounded paper that looks at the long historical sweep of global governance associated with the emergence of merchant, industrial and 20th-century forms of capitalism. It is connected to and builds from my edited work “Critical Perspectives on the Crisis of Global Governance: Reimagining the Future” (Palgrave 2015). The paper was to open the conference of the same name, in Barcelona, (11 & 12 January 2018, Organized by ESADEgeo (ESADE Business School Centre for Global Economy and Geopolitics) and IBEI (Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals).

“The Constitution of Global Capitalism” (2000)

Gill 2000 Constitution of Global Capitalism” (2000)

I have many requests for this paper which was originally presented at the International Studies Association Annual Convention in Los Angeles in 2000, and subsequently posted on a website called Global Site. Unfortunately appears to have disappeared and as a result I am posting here on my website, and for reasons that escape me, I never tried to have it published.

“A Dialectic of Utopia/Dystopia in the Public Imagination of the 21st Century” April 20, 2017

From global-e UC Santa Barbara:

An avenue for characterizing one aspect of the public imagination of today’s world—apparently configured by a rising populism across both the left and particularly the right—is with reference to a recent upsurge of interest in utopian/dystopian thinking. Since Donald Trump was elected President of the United States, Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and George Orwell’s 1984 have resumed prominence in the concerned public imagination and are again top of the bestseller lists. Both works discuss how repressive autocratic/totalitarian elements place subject populations under regimes of total surveillance and propagate “Orwellian” versions of the truth,1 while citizens are palliated by the happy drugs of a somatic culture.2 These dystopian perspectives are contrasted in the conclusion to this piece with my political hypothesis of the “post-modern Prince” with its “feasible utopias” reflected in the imaginaries and collective action of diverse progressive forces.

Utopias have tended to emerge in response to wars, crises, and significant periods of dislocation: in the context of the Peloponnesian Wars, Plato’s The Republic (ca. 380 BC) was premised on creating a good society led by wise elite Guardians. Utopian thought has typically been concerned with concepts of justice, order, the good society, and radical change, often based on common ownership of land/property. Indeed, utopias—and their dialectical other, dystopias—are “ways to interpret the present with an eye to an (imaginary yet positive) future.” A dystopia may be taken as a utopia “that malfunctions” or “only functions for a particular segment of society.” Dystopias “resemble actual societies historically encountered—planned but not planned well enough to be just.”3

These insights seem to capture very well aspects of current imaginaries in US, European, and in some respects world politics.

Continue reading here…