Call for Papers: Solidarity Economics

Call for Papers

Solidarity Economics

(working title)

(Journal for the Critique of Science, Imagination, and New Anthropology – JCSINA,

Časopis za kritiko znanosti, domišljijo in novo antropologijo, February 2018)

editor: Marta Gregorčič

co-editors: Karolina Babič and Nina Kozinc

Submission deadline: 20 November 2017

Since the 1980s there has been a rising tide of theoretical works which have tried to re-invent social emancipation, otro mundo, alternative democracy, sociology of emergences, etc., and a multitude of heterogeneous, authentic, autonomous and alternative practices such as community-run social-centres, consumer and producer co-operatives, solidarity entrepreneurship, alternative currencies, community-run exchange platforms, do-it-yourself initiatives, community initiatives (resource libraries, credit unions, land trust, gardens), open-source free software initiatives, community supported agriculture programmes, collective spaces (housing, kitchens, kindergartens, retirement homes), etc. Usually this kind of solidarity and these economic practices are labelled under the name ‘économie sociale et solidaire’, ‘economía social y solidaria’, ‘social economy’, ‘solidarity economy’, ‘social entrepreneurship’, etc. Although most of them had developed in last two centuries and have re-appeared in the last decades as bottom-up movements, co-operatives, or non-governmental organisations, some see them merely as the remains of the popular economy, failed socialism, co-operativism, different liberation struggles, or the failed welfare state of The Spirit of 45 and others see them as the labour economy (Coraggio, 2000), distributive economy (Laville, 2010), socialist economy (Singer, 2000), alternative economy (Santos & Rodríguez Garavito, 2006; Santos, 2014), and more. Although many inspirational examples were not able to bring about a more profound social change or desired paradigm-shift, they are all part of the history of practicing communitarianism, autonomy, horizontality, egalitarianism, mutuality, and solidarity.

Although it is very common for solidarity economics to be integrated within the social economy, they are in fact two different approaches, and the implications of equating them are rather profound. Some authors explicitly expressed the differences (Nardi, 2016; Laville, 2010; Gaiger, 1996; Gaiger, Ferrarini and Veronese, 2015) and some implicitly (Santos and Rodríguez Garavito, 2006; Razeto, 1993). Therefore, the special edition of the JCSINA will highlight certain aspects of solidarity economics vs. the social economy. This question seems to be important since both solidarity economics and social economies have been undergoing a renaissance and a profound transformation in the last few decades and since reconsiderations of the potentialities and the limitations of social transformation are finally coming to the fore in scientific writings after permanent financial, economic, and environmental crises; structural adjustment programmes; and austerity policies in last decades.

As already distinguished by Nardi (2016: 3, 4), the solidarity economy seeks to ‘change the whole social/economic system and puts forth a different paradigm of development that upholds solidarity economy principles’ while the primary concern of the social economy is ‘not to maximize profits, but to achieve social goals’, to be the ‘the third leg of capitalism, along with the public and the private sector’, or, more radically, ‘a stepping stone towards a more fundamental transformation of the economic system’ (ibid.).  He sees it in an explicitly systemic, transformative, and post-capitalist agenda. For Laville (2010: 36, 37) the concept of social economy has mostly centred on economic success and has put aside political mediations, while the solidary economy ‘has brought to public attention notions of social utility and collective interest, and raised the question of the aim of activities, something that had been sidestepped in the social economy’. Emphasizing its citizen-oriented and entrepreneurial dual dimension, for Laville (2010: 36) the solidarity economy goes further than the social economy

This distinction between two overlapping concepts seems to be recognized also by the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC, 2012), which knowingly shifted its policy away from solidarity economics in favour of the social economy. Recognizing emerging initiatives which are both political and economic in nature (Laville, 2010) as a ‘force for social change’, the EESC opted for the hegemonic discourse of the social economy, which is perceived as ‘… social economy has not only asserted its ability to make an effective contribution to solving new social problems, it has also strengthened its position as a necessary institution for stable and sustainable economic growth, fairer income and wealth distribution, matching services to needs, increasing the value of economic activity serving social needs, correcting labour market imbalances and, in short, deepening and strengthening economic democracy’ (EESC, 2012: 13). The social economy therefore strives to enrich current economic democracy, while the solidarity economy struggles for otro mundo, for another democracy and another economy. Besides these distinctions, many other concerns should be taken into account for an understanding of new solidarity economics. The main intention of this special edition of JCSINA is to strengthen the discourse and scientific (alternative qualitative and quantitative) observation of emerging solidarity economics.

Although debates concerning the meaning and relevance of solidarity economics have been with us for at least two centuries, from early attempts to create alternative communitarian responses to the capitalist economy, it should be recognised and validated that some thinkers and historic periods dominated over others. Great examples of the rise of alternative production in times of hardship, recession, crisis, and even times of war during the first part of the 20^th century, were either very rarely discussed under the concept or not discussed at all. The same blindness exists today with respect to the Kurds. Amid their autonomous libertarian struggle they are developing democratic confederalism and a stateless democracy with a solidarity economy, community run schools, academies, hospitals, strong grass-roots movements, initiatives, etc. Because solidarity economics often expanded during economic crises and wars, it was often implemented as a strategy to appease people in an uprising (Fals Borda, 1976). Special concern should therefore be placed on the questions of:

• Who is running the agenda of solidarity economics (vs. social economy) and why?
• What are the missing points in the discussions on solidarity economics and another economy: what has been silenced, ignored, misinterpreted and subverted and why?
• What are the main objectives of solidarity economics and how can they be critically analysed through different case studies and historical (ex-Yugoslavia, Latin America, etc.) and contemporary local/state/global contexts (examples from Middle East, Latin America, Greece, Spain, other parts of Europe and the world are encouraged)?
• What are the main mechanisms (principles, methods) on which modern cooperatives run their production (regarding ownership, property and management; as well as role players, obligations, duties, responsibilities, etc. of workers or participants)?
• Are cooperatives able to envision new democracy, to democratize democracy or otro mundo? Are the heterogeneous types of appearing cooperatives the bridge to another economy or another production or they remain as the third leg of capitalism?
• Can solidarity economy still be considered under the common sense of all-encompassing democracy or the division between solidarity economy and social economy should be strengthened? Why? How?
• How to identify, analyse, validate, recognize and define rich and heterogeneous historical examples of another economy?

Although such discussions are rather difficult to come across in social studies and humanist documents, the past three decades have nevertheless offered some critical reflections on these issues particularly in Nuestra America (Latin America). For all these considerations and open questions, the discussion on solidarity economics should be deepened, since these issues were often not avoided, but rather intentionally excluded from the discussion. Such practices and examples should be recalled, recognized, and validated in order to understand the heterogeneity and complexity in which solidarity economics emerged and developed both its emancipatory goals and the means to achieve them.

For this thematic issue two types of articles are welcome:

• Theoretical, conceptual and review articles problematizing solidarity economics and democratization of democracy, social transformation, another economy; alternative economy and otro mundo.
• Empirical studies which analyse solidarity economics praxis and experiences, and provide reflections of its democratic, autonomous, self-determing, political, cultural, social, economic or educational aspects.

Summaries

Please send the summaries of proposed papers of up to 300 words, as well as a brief biographic notice, to editor This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. by 30 May 2017 at the latest.

Deadline for texts: 20 November 2017 at the latest.

Structure of the thematic issue and instructions to authors

Besides scientific articles, we accept proposals for essays, translations, interviews, book reviews, documents, photographs etc.

Papers should be submitted, formatted according to author guidelines available at: http://www.ckz.si/instructions-for-authors

(Illustration: P2P Foundation)

References:

CORAGGIO, JOSÉ LUIS (2000): Da economia dos setores populares à economia do trabalho. In Economia dos setores populares: entre a realidade e a utopia, G. Kraychete, F. Lara and B. Costa (eds.), 91–142. Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE (EESC) (2012): The social economy in the European Union. Brussels: Visits and Publication Unit.

FALS BORDA, ORLANDO (1976): El reformismo por dentro en América Latina. Mexico: Siglo Veintiuno Editores.

GAIGER, LUIZ INÁCIO, ADRIANE FERRARINI AND MARÍLIA VERONESE (2015): Social enterprise in Brazil: An overview of solidarity economy enterprises. Available at:  http://www.socioeco.org/bdf_fiche-document-3512_en.html (13 February 2017).

LAVILLE, JEAN-LOUIS (2010): The solidarity economy: An international movement. RCCS Annual Review 2: 3–41.

LOACH, KEN (2013): The Spirit of ’45. Documentary film, 98 min. Great Britain.

NARDI, JASON (2016): Solidarity economy in Europe: An emerging movement with a common vision. Available at: http://www.socioeco.org/bdf_fiche-document-5115_en.html (15 February 2017).

RAZETO MIGLIARO, LUIS (1993): Los caminos de la economía de solidaridad. Santiago de Chile: Ediciones Vivarium.

SANTOS, BOAVENTURA DE SOUSA, AND RODRÍGUEZ-GARAVITO, CÉSAR A. (2006): Introduction. Expending the economic canon and searching for alternatives to neoliberal globalization. In Another production is possible. Beyond the Capitalist Canon, B. de S. Santos (eds.), XVII–LXII. London/NY: Verso.

SANTOS, BOAVENTURA DE SOUSA (2014): Epistemologies of the South. Epistemologies of the South: Justice Against Epistemicide. London & NY: Routledge.

SINGER, PAUL (2003): Economia solidária, um modo de produção e distribuição. In A Economia solidária no Brasil A autogestão como resposta ao desemprego, P. Singer and A. R. Souza (eds.), 11–28. São Paulo: Contexto.

285. in 286. številka ČKZ

Izšla je nova številka Časopisa za kritiko znanosti, domišljijo in novo antropologijo

Pandemija (let. XLX, št. 285; ur. Arne Zupančič)

Prva številka jubilejnega letnika ČKZ se ukvarja konceptom pandemije iz različnih vidikov, od osebnih do sistemskih. Avtorji in avtorice predstavijo krizo korona virusa kot krizo pandemije in geopolitike (kot protislovje modernih kapitalističnih družb in zato kot privilegirano točko motrenja ekonomskega, družbenega stanja po vsem svetu, kot protislovje lokalnega-globalnega in tudi razmerja moči med velesilami), kot razmerje med umetnostjo in znanostjo, v okviru manjšinskih pravic (pravice starejših, migrantov), pandemije kot zdravstvene krize, ki razkriva tudi krizo na ostalih področjih (v zakulisju zdravstvene krize se zaostruje socialna in okoljska kriza).

Issue 285 (Pandemic, ed. Arne Zupančič)

The first issue of the JKC Jubilee year explores the concept of pandemics from different perspectives, from the personal to the structural. The authors present the crisis of the Corona virus as a crisis of pandemics and geopolitics (as a contradiction of modern capitalist societies and therefore as a privileged point of reference for the economic, social situation worldwide, as a contradiction of the local-global and also of the power relations between the superpowers), the relationship between art and science, in the context of minority rights (rights of the elderly, migrants), the pandemic as a health crisis that also reveals the crisis in other areas (behind the health crisis, the social and environmental crisis).

Iz uvodnika A. Zupančiča:

»V času, ko gre revija v tisk, se zdi številka o pandemiji skorajda odvečna … [A] obdobje preteklih dveh let je kljub vsemu slabemu vseeno nakazalo dve izrazito pozitivni stvari. Prvič, neznansko solidarnost med ljudmi, ki se je pokazala takoj ob zaprtju praktično povsod po svetu, še danes, skoraj tri leta po uvedbi »lockdownov«, pa daje neverjetno upanje v človeštvo. Splet so preplavili posnetki medsebojne pomoči, ki se je kazala kot pomoč starejšim, onemoglim in revnejšim, koncerti na balkonih, spoznavanje in organiziranje s sosedi, skrb za lastno zdravje in zdravje drugih, lastna pridelava hrane ipd. Zdi se, kot da je bil primarni odziv velike večine prebivalstva sveta na (vsaj koronsko) krizo izjemno solidaren in usmerjen v čim mirnejše preživljanje tega izrednega stanja. Stvari pa so se zapletle že kmalu, praktično takoj, ko je v situacijo s prepovedovanjem, nadzorom in triažo začela posegati Država. Pogosto nesmiselni, praviloma pa nekoherentni in arbitrarni ukrepi oblasti so na globalni ravni izzvali celo paleto razlogov za upor, ki se je ponekod manifestiral kot nasprotovanje določeni politični opciji, ponekod kot zanikanje (smrtonosnosti) virusa, ponekod kot obči dvom v znanost in nekje spet kot splošen upor proti institucijam države, institucionalizirani koruptivnosti in državnemu poseganju v pravico posameznice do sprejemanja odločitev, povezanih z lastnim zdravjem, življenjem in političnim delovanjem. Če je bil rezultat družbenega odziva na pandemijo združevalen, se je državno upravljanje s krizo povsod končalo v neverjetno polarizirani družbi, v kateri so se poglobile pretekle razlike in vzpostavile nove. Drugič, če se omejimo le na domačo realnost, je mobilizacija ljudi ob delovanju vlade presenetila mnoge, saj sta glavno nasprotovanje vladnim ukrepom in bojkotiranje vrnitve v normalnost prišla s tistega pola, od koder večina tega ni pričakovala, in predvsem v obsegu, ki je popolnoma presenetil. Nasprotovanje vladnim ukrepom je v veliko skupino povezalo prej po številu zanemarljive anarhiste, nasprotnike cepljenja, nasprotnike farmakologije, antiglobaliste, antisorošide, hipije ter mnoge druge,1 ki so dejanja državnih oblasti v spregi z nadnacionalnimi korporacijami in političnimi entitetami razumeli kot arbitrarne, nepremišljene in nerazumne, celo zarotniške ...«

Izšla je nova številka Časopisa za kritiko znanosti, domišljijo in novo antropologijo

Praktična filozofija (let. XLX, št. 286; ur. Katarina Majerhold, Dali Regent)

Druga številka jubilejnega letnika ČKZ je posvečena temi praktične filozofije, v kateri se avtorji posvečajo praktičnim vidikom (terapije duše) sicer teoretsko naravnane filozofije: pri tem najdejo avtorji izvore za praktičnost že pri Sokratovi opredelitvi filozofije kot samo-spraševanja in preizpraševanja osnovnih vrednot in prepričanj, ki jih ima vsak posameznik. Prek sprememb slednjih lahko posameznik spremeni svoje mišljenje, čustvovanje in delovanje v vsakodnevnem življenju. To je eden od osebnih vidikov praktične filozofije, drugi vidik se nanaša na spremembo filozofskih konceptov človeka in družbe na splošno in s tem načina vladanja in družbenega sistema (družbeni vidik), tretji vidik se nanaša na izobraževanje in poučevanje filozofije na različnih področjih (ne le v okviru Filozofske fakultete), ampak tudi poudarjanje njenih praktičnih vidikov za področje kot so terapija, znanstvene in tehniške vede, pa tudi predstavljanje teoretskih konceptov filozofije prek sodobnih digitalnih platform, kot so YouTube.

Issue 286 (Practical Philosophy, eds. Katarina Majerhold, Dali Regent)

The second issue of the JKC Jubilee year is dedicated to the theme of practical philosophy, in which the authors focus on the practical aspects (the therapy of the soul) of an otherwise theoretical philosophy: here the authors find the origins of practicality in Socrates' definition of philosophy as a self-questioning why we think the way we do and questioning of the basic values and beliefs of each individual. By changing these, individuals can change the way they think, feel and act in their daily lives. This is one of the personal aspects of practical philosophy; the second aspect relates to changing philosophical concepts of man and society in general, and thus the way of governing and the social system (the social aspect); the third aspect relates to the education and teaching of philosophy in different fields (not only within the Faculty of Arts), but also to highlighting its practical aspects for fields such as therapy, sciences and engineering, as well as presenting the theoretical concepts of philosophy through modern digital platforms such as YouTube.

Iz uvodnika K. Majerhold, D. Regent

»Pogosto se srečujemo z vprašanji, če oziroma kako je filozofija (lahko) praktična. Pričujoči tematski sklop ponuja več odgovorov na ta vprašanja. Urednici, ki imata izkušnje s praktično filozofijo, sta se za tak tematski sklop odločili zaradi vsesplošnih koristi filozofskih praks, ki jih končna zbirka člankov opisuje in analizira.

Majerhold ima dolgoletne izkušnje na področju praktične filozofije, natančneje s področja filozofskega svetovanja. Leta 2006 se je začela ukvarjati z vprašanjem, kako bi lahko v današnjem času uporabila filozofijo v praktične namene, kajti razen nekaj možnosti za zaposlitev na fakulteti in kakšnem inštitutu ter učiteljevanja na srednjih šolah možnosti za zaposlitev s filozofsko izobrazbo ni bilo. Med iskanjem drugih možnosti je naletela na različne vire danes priznanih filozofskih svetovalcev. Dali Regent je leta 2019 ustanovila prvo slovensko društvo za praktično filozofijo Hiša filozofije. Pred tem je kot prostovoljka za Društvo informacijski center Legebitra vodila krožek praktične filozofije – pilotno prizadevanje, ki se je izkazalo za enega najbolj priljubljenih in najbolje obiskanih rednih krožkov Legebitrinega mladinskega centra ...«

ČKZ Symposium 20.4.2023

On the occasion of its 50th anniversary the Journal for the Critique of Science is organising a JCS Symposium in the Blue Room of Faculty of Arts in cooperation with the Department of Philosophy. Founded by a group of radical students and younger intellectuals during the student demonstrations of the early 1970s, the Journal today is committed to the critical examination of approaches and theories of social movements and alternative political practices, socio-ecological issues, cultural and gender studies, scientific and technological change, media and communication theories, risky technologies, socio-pedagogical issues, marginality, disability, etc., addressed by national and international authors from different disciplines.

The symposium will include 3 panels on the themes presented by the editors of the 2022 issues.

10.00-11.00 (Panel 1, Practical Philosophy, co-moderated by Katarina Majerhold, Dali Regent, Dr. Marjan Šimenc, Neža Ambrožič)
11.00-11.15 Break
11.15-12.15 (Panel 2, Pandemic, moderated by Arne Zupančič; Dr. Uršula Berlot Pompe, MSc.Tim Prezelj, MSc. Barbara Purkart)
12.15-12.40 Break
12.40-13.40 (Panel 3, Zapatistas, moderated by Žiga Brdnik; participants: Arne Zupančič, dr. Andrej Kurnik, Aigul Hakimova)

There will also be a stand at the symposium where the latest and less recent issues will be presented. 

You are cordially invited!