News & announcements from ASA Marxist Section members

Section Awards for 2016

Join with us in congratulating the winners of our section awards!   ASA MARXIST SOCIOLOGY SECTION AWARDS 2016   Marxist Sociology Lifetime Achievement Award (Co-winners):   David Fasenfest   Scott McNall   Howard Waitzkin   Paul Sweezy Marxist Sociology Book Award:   Wendy Matsumura, The Limits of Okinawa   Outstanding [...]

By |2018-06-08T11:29:07-04:00Aug 7, 2016|

Enough!

Enough! Somewhere, somewhere perhaps in the desert of Iraq, or perhaps in Palestine or the Afghan hills, amidst the cacophony of shells, the reek of boiled-off flesh, somewhere, a voice awakens ...

By |2018-10-08T07:20:05-04:00Aug 7, 2016|

We

Seemingly helpless in a democracy beyond repair, on a world brewing the floods, droughts and endless wanderings of a vengeful planet, I live as a godless Jew in an age when the leaders of Judaism spit the fires of Uzis and smart bombs like the bowels of Ba’al in eras past ...

By |2018-10-08T07:21:51-04:00Aug 6, 2016|

Never Again

Red stains the walls of the mosque of proud Hebron, red on the floor and red on the ceiling, as rage blossoms red in the hearts of the people, but no anger remains in the eyes on the floor.

By |2018-10-08T07:23:19-04:00Jul 29, 2016|

Publication: González Review of Film Criticism, The Cold War, and the Blacklist by Jeff Smith

As one of the most widely discussed and researched subjects within the field of film studies, the Hollywood blacklist makes for a difficult task to explore. Previous research in film studies generally examines how members within the Hollywood community came to become blacklisted, either on behalf of the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC) directly or by their fellow artists. Furthermore, previous literature has simply expressed hypotheses as to the intent of anti-communist films: as propaganda or allegory. In Film Criticism, the Cold War, and the Blacklist, Jeff Smith provides a new perspective on the phenomenon by elucidating why anti-communist films functioned as they did, regardless of propagandistic or allegorical intent.

By |2018-07-16T13:10:38-04:00Jul 27, 2016|

Publication: Jonna on Braverman, Baran, and Sweezy as a Dialectical Whole

Harry Braverman’s Labor and Monopoly Capital, although the single most influential work in labor sociology in the post–Second World War period, is often viewed narrowly as a theory of the labor process and labor degradation. However, the central focus of Braverman’s analysis was the structure and dynamics of the working class as it evolved in the period of monopoly capitalism. While the labor process was key to unlocking class dynamics, including changing class composition and increasing precariousness within the working class, Braverman never failed to emphasize how the labor process was intimately intertwined with contradictions and tendencies buried deep within contemporary monopoly capitalism. Indeed, Marx’s theory of the reserve army of labor, which Braverman used as a basis for explaining the degradation of labor and the generalization of precariousness, formed a crucial link between Braverman’s analysis and that of monopoly capital theory. In this essay, we reengage with these neglected dimensions of Braverman’s analysis making it possible to address contemporary problems such as increasing worker precariousness and the internationalization of production, in a broader and more comprehensive context. In the course of the analysis, we develop fresh perspectives on the continuing significance of Braverman’s work.

By |2018-07-16T13:11:02-04:00Dec 19, 2015|