FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W170461623> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W170461623 startingPage "78" @default.
• W170461623 abstract "ON A RAINY EVENING IN OCTOBER 2011 WE ARE SITTING IN THE GENERAL Assembly of Occupy London Stock Exchange in the courtyard of St Paul's Cathedral. It is day four of the occupation, which is congregating here under the slogan are the 99 percent. This is in solidarity with occupations and protests across the globe. Working groups have formed to deal with all the aspects of the occupation's infrastructure and livelihood--kitchen, legal team, tech team, welfare working group, Tent City University, process group, direct action group, and media team. They are reporting back from their meetings. The media team's delegate ends her daily roundup with the request for stories of acts of kindness to tell the press: Occupy is a positive movement that may be determined and confrontational, but is nonetheless ethical and caring. The political battle over the right of the occupation to stay at St Paul's has prompted occupiers to ask the church, would Jesus do? This question has been painted in big letters on a banner that faces outward to the main road. In doing so, the movement puts the Church of England on the spot, holding it to account over its own purported ethical values of kindness, charity, and social justice. Many banners decry greed, violence, and injustice, instead advocating love, care, and empathy. Occupy makes an emotive plea for a different kind of world, unlike the present one founded on pillage, corruption, exploitation, and theft. Massive mobilizations by university and college students also took place in the autumn of 2010, with current and potential future students protesting that nobody cares about their access to education; in 2011, summer riots across England in many ways expressed anger by a generation (and a class) of forgotten youth. In this article, we argue that these movements, which have been interpreted as anti-austerity or anti-cuts movements, can be better understood as a response to a crisis of care. This crisis of care is precipitated by the economic crisis and the cuts being forced through by the government in the United Kingdom (UK). This crisis of care is also one of political representation: increasing numbers of people are waking up to the fact that the state-capital nexus does not care about them in the sense that it does not promote, protect, or even consider their needs or interests. We offer a political reading of the crisis of care through the lens of social conflict and its political economy. In our view, the present political-economic crisis emerged from the financial crisis and is most aptly understood as a crisis of social reproduction--a crisis in the ability of individuals and communities to reproduce their livelihoods. Not generally discussed in these terms, it is either designated as a crisis of economic growth or viewed as a moral crisis in which greedy bankers and feral youth are conjured up in equal measure. Even within protest movements that contest the injustices of austerity, there is a tendency to focus on the supposed deficiencies of human behavior and to demand regulation of various excesses so as to make the financial system less corrupt and more democratically accountable. This approach misses what is at stake. An analysis of the crisis in terms of social reproduction, we argue, allows for a political reading of the social conflicts that have erupted in the UK in the wake of the recent crisis affecting it. Our argument unfolds in four sections. In the first, we determine who is being cared for and who is not. That provides an overview of the most significant protests, movements, and social conflicts that have happened in the UK in the last two years. Next, we look at the ways in which the crisis and its conflicts are given a moral or ethical inflection, which we propose must be extended to encompass a political reading of care. In the third section, we make the case for the analytical lens of social reproduction and its political economy. …" @default.
• W170461623 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W170461623 creator A5004526088 @default.
• W170461623 creator A5027330532 @default.
• W170461623 creator A5055136871 @default.
• W170461623 creator A5090512758 @default.
• W170461623 date "2012-03-22" @default.
• W170461623 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W170461623 title "Careless Talk: Social Reproduction and Fault Lines of the Crisis in the United Kingdom" @default.
• W170461623 cites W1530656339 @default.
• W170461623 cites W1543826429 @default.
• W170461623 cites W2149113149 @default.
• W170461623 cites W2294964883 @default.
• W170461623 cites W2315433885 @default.
• W170461623 cites W2491014650 @default.
• W170461623 cites W579653423 @default.
• W170461623 cites W643464358 @default.
• W170461623 cites W2181325187 @default.
• W170461623 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W170461623 type Work @default.
• W170461623 sameAs 170461623 @default.
• W170461623 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W170461623 countsByYear W1704616232016 @default.
• W170461623 countsByYear W1704616232019 @default.
• W170461623 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W170461623 hasAuthorship W170461623A5004526088 @default.
• W170461623 hasAuthorship W170461623A5027330532 @default.
• W170461623 hasAuthorship W170461623A5055136871 @default.
• W170461623 hasAuthorship W170461623A5090512758 @default.
• W170461623 hasConcept C107993555 @default.
• W170461623 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W170461623 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W170461623 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W170461623 hasConcept C2777266375 @default.
• W170461623 hasConcept C2779768198 @default.
• W170461623 hasConcept C2780641677 @default.
• W170461623 hasConcept C29595303 @default.
• W170461623 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W170461623 hasConceptScore W170461623C107993555 @default.
• W170461623 hasConceptScore W170461623C144024400 @default.
• W170461623 hasConceptScore W170461623C17744445 @default.
• W170461623 hasConceptScore W170461623C199539241 @default.
• W170461623 hasConceptScore W170461623C2777266375 @default.
• W170461623 hasConceptScore W170461623C2779768198 @default.
• W170461623 hasConceptScore W170461623C2780641677 @default.
• W170461623 hasConceptScore W170461623C29595303 @default.
• W170461623 hasConceptScore W170461623C94625758 @default.
• W170461623 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W170461623 hasLocation W1704616231 @default.
• W170461623 hasOpenAccess W170461623 @default.
• W170461623 hasPrimaryLocation W1704616231 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W1169664132 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W156081517 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W1562374607 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W1590061294 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W1868587347 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W2132401326 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W2144232355 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W2232617135 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W2344723216 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W2483676977 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W2561815378 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W2594777119 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W2606880451 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W2892712630 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W2976837711 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W3174381501 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W323143338 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W330755825 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W334722249 @default.
• W170461623 hasRelatedWork W46663098 @default.
• W170461623 hasVolume "39" @default.
• W170461623 isParatext "false" @default.
• W170461623 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W170461623 magId "170461623" @default.
• W170461623 workType "article" @default.