This paper is a discussion of the subject of high-technology industrial development in peripheral regions. Findings from the literature are utilized to analyze critically the prospects for promoting high-technology industrial growth in Israel's peripheral regions. Alternative strategies for development are proposed. In section 2, the specific case of Israel, where the development of high-technology industries has recently been given high priority and attracting high-technology industries has been proposed as a viable strategy for promoting growth in peripheral regions, is discussed. This is presented in the context of the history of Israel's industrial development in general and of its high-technology industrial development policy in particular. In section 3, three alternative strategies for development policy are proposed, and the suitability of each to Israel is analyzed. The alternatives—the ‘Silicon Glen’ model, the specific area focus, and local-based development—all pursue strategies that sometimes contradict one another, sometimes overlap, and sometimes reinforce one another, thus generating the possibility of a fourth, and more optimal, policy strategy. In conclusion, it is not proposed that there exists a single policy strategy that could be claimed to be optimal for every peripheral region. Thus, no attempt is made to evaluate the superiority of one strategy alternative over another. This conclusion is reached after comparing the international literature to the case of Israel. It is apparent that high-technology industries are not necessarily always the best solution to the dilemmas of economic development in every region, particularly the ‘outer-ring’ border regions. A separate plan must be made for each peripheral region in light of its specific socioeconomic and locational characteristics. In drafting a regional development policy, planners must then deliberate whether or not high-technology industry is indeed likely to succeed in promoting regional economic growth.

This article provides a sociological explanation for the global emergence of Slavoj Žižek as a public intellectual. It presents an integrative account encompassing both personal and institutional aspects. Drawing on positioning theory and performative frameworks, the article contributes to the sociology of intellectuals, as well as to the vast ‘Žižek-literature’ that focuses on his philosophical content or political activities. We analyse the distinctiveness of Žižek’s performances, arguing that Žižek acts as a ‘sacrificial intellectual’: he plays ‘the fool’ and relies on irony to undermine the traditional role of the authoritative intellectual. Within the context of the digital public sphere and declining intellectual authority, Žižek’s unique form of positioning has been particularly effective and has contributed to his celebrity status.

Why are some intellectuals more successful than others in conveying their ideas and making them public? Within this question lies another, which is the focus of this article: can the same intellectual be successful in some places and unsuccessful in others, and if so, what determines this variance? The present article answers this question by examining "one of the world's best-known public intellectuals" (Gray, 2016)-Slavoj Žižek.

No abstract

translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.