City Research Online

Abstract

This paper has two authors, two titles and is written in the form of a dialogue,rather than conveying a unitary voice, as one would instead expect of a coauthored paper. The reason for this is that the articulation of the authors'
disagreement, despite the identification of each of them with “the left”, is precisely the object of inquiry. After briefly introducing the problem on which the authors’ discussion takes place, namely regime collisions, and the clash of approaches that are available to (decide whether to) deal with them, a dialogue follows, in which the authors’ voices are clearly separated as they discuss the specific issue of the measurement of quality as a (managerialist) proposal to “solve” regime collisions, and contrast that to more openly politicised views of approaching regime collisions. In the end, the main features of such discussion are examined in such a way as to bring forth the peculiar self-consciousness that pluralist spaces give rise to, weakening and downsizing every point of view that appoints itself as the “higher” vantage point from which to describe the world and enumerate problems, and stimulating a constant oscillation between perspectives. This commitment to a pluralistic confrontation and the ensuing hybridization of perspectives is, we argue, at the heart of the idea of “the left” which we both identify with.

Publication Type:	Monograph (Working Paper)
Subjects:	J Political Science > JA Political science (General)
Departments:	School of Policy & Global Affairs > International Politics
Related URLs:	Author

Export

Downloads