CFP Anthropology and Anarchism

Journal des anthropologues, 2018

Social Anthropology, 2006

... ISBN: 0 9728196 4 9. FIROUZ GAINI a1 a1 University of the Faroe Islands (Faroe Islands), ... ISBN: 0 9728196 4 9. FIROUZ GAINI (2006) Social Anthropology, Volume 14, Issue 01, February 2006 pp 139-140 http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0964028205271987. ...

Zilsel, 2022

Archaeologists have documented that the vast majority of our time as a species, Homo sapiens – extending back about 300,000 years – peoples have lived in communities without the centralization or institutionalization of leadership. That is, we have mostly lived wit- hin anarchies. For this reason alone, anarchism should be useful for understanding the anarchies of the past. While the vast majo- rity of us now live within state societies, this only encompasses the last 6,000 years (≈2% of our history) – and, even then, that only applies to those living in such societies, as even after the first civi- lizations began, the majority of the world continued in non-state formations. For such reasons, anarchism is important to include in an archaeological approach to the past...

International Studies Review, 2020

There is a fundamental link between political anthropology and Hedley Bull's classical study of international order, which has been persistently neglected by contemporary students of international society. While traditional assessments of Bull's work normally focus on the influences of political philosophy, international law, and history, a discussion of Bull's reliance on anthropological studies of anarchical societies is also essential for a more comprehensive understanding of his conceptualization of order and the sources, number, and functions of the “fundamental institutions” of international society. After showing how exactly political anthropology has underpinned Bull's work, the article explores its relevance for contemporary English school theorization. In particular, it offers a critique of the new institutionalists’ claims on the issue of sources, numbers, and functions of Bull's fundamental institutions. An updating of Bull's original “anthropological investigations” suggests a reconsideration of “Trade” as a sixth fundamental institution, a closer attention to “binding” and “dividing” forces in international society, as well as a reframing of the domestic analogy in IR.

2018

Paper for Anarchist Studies Network (ASN) 5th International Conference: “Decolonise!”, University of Loughborough (UK), 12-14 September 2018, Session “Anarchist Critiques”, 13th September 2018

Although the focus and underpinnings have adjusted through time, Americanist archaeology is founded on the notion that anthropology plays an important role in archaeology. Even now the nature of anthropological archaeology is transforming to incorporate modern developments and lessons from our predecessors. Anthropological archaeology remains vibrant, maintaining sensitivity to current trends and methodological, theoretical, and conceptual advances by updating and honing its direction, and gradually transforming itself through the ebbs and flows of current trends and renewed angles on long-established venerable issues. The discipline has passed through several phases that emphasized first an essentially historical focus, then staunch positivistic processualism, and then a refined socially relevant archaeology that incorporates process while contextualizing. Home-grown archaeological theory is among these more current approaches, which emphasizes method and theory developed by archaeologists to solve archaeological and anthropological problems. But fundamental to the approach, through all these adjustments, is the premise that archaeology is anthropological, taking its lead from anthropological understandings and theories of process, while at the same time incorporating what is relevant from history, geomorphology, psychology, and sociology. It is a compilation of approaches where generalizations have a role but are understood within the boundary conditions set by contextualized cases.

This paper draws attention to the categories and norms of human belonging that are produced in global institutions. To a great extent, the discipline of anthropology has been superseded as the primary source of popular knowledge of human life. The conceptualization of humanity and its communities is accomplished in more publicly persuasive ways by global agencies, in part through their use of new media. The anthropology of global governance is instrumental and strategic, involving identification and categorization of beneficiary peoples, groups, and communities, including conceptions about the nature of their oppression and their distinct human qualities that make them proper subjects of the rights and benefits of global governance initiatives.

Anarchic Solidarity: Autonomy, Equality and Familiarity in Island Southeast Asia. , 2011