Bringing the State Back In?

Cammack, Paul

doi:10.1017/s0007123400005469

Cited by 62 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In his words, the Representative disguises the potential hazards of shale drilling and minimizes the political-economic inequality by making it seem that everyone will benefit equally from hydraulic fracturing. Instead of a truly democratic process, focus and outcome we see an instance of what Cammack (1989) describes as the role of the state: aligning itself with the interests of the dominant social class, including the individuals or companies that own the subsurface mineral rights and the investment firms that have been securing the rights to shale gas (Schwartzel 2013). Others' needs fall far behind these interests.…”

Section: Journal Of Political Ecologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing fracking: private property, common resources, and regimes of governance

Hudgins

Poole

2014

Journal of Political Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this policy ethnography we examine the discourse related to unconventional natural gas development in western Pennsylvania in order to illuminate expressions of political power in attempts to manufacture consent. We focus on the overlapping spheres of influence between the state and capital to dissect techniques of governance as they operate at the level of civil society. Data collection from fieldwork and discourse analysis, particularly focused on discourse about recent legislation to regulate the booming natural gas industry in Pennsylvania, reveals the ways in which industry proponents attempt to corral public opinion to the goal of extracting and amassing capital. We analyze how industry actors try to gain and draw from the authority and approval of the state in those efforts. In turn, the state uses its socially sanctioned authority to reframe water, land, air, community, health, and self around a paradigm that interprets those as sources of profit. This case study examines how, under neoliberalism, the state organizes knowledge on the topic of fracking such that the balance of power shifts further out of democratic reach. Key Words: capital, discourse analysis, ethnography, fracking, Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvania Act 13, governance RésuméDans cette étude ethnographique nous examinons le discours relatif au développement de gaz naturel non classique dans l'ouest de la Pennsylvanie, pour éclairer les expressions du pouvoir politique ne sont utilisées pour fabriquer un consensus. Nous nous concentrons sur les sphères d'influence entre l'Etat et le capital fait chevauchement, interroger les techniques de gouvernance car elles opèrent au niveau de la société civile. La collecte des données de travail sur le terrain et l'analyse du discours, en particulier l'accent sur le discours sur la récente législation pour réglementer l'industrie du gaz naturel en plein essor en Pennsylvanie, révèle la façon dont les promoteurs de l'industrie tentent d'encercler l'opinion publique à extraire et accumuler du capital. Nous analysons comment les acteurs de l'industrie essaient de gagner et de tirer de l'autorité et de l'approbation de l'État dans ces efforts. En contrepartie, l'État utilise son autorité, socialement sanctionnée, pour recadrer l'eau, la terre, l'air, la communauté, la santé, et la personne autour d'un paradigme fait interprète les choses comme des sources de profit. Cette étude de cas examine comment, sous le néolibéralisme, l'Etat organise les connaissances sur le sujet de la fracturation hydraulique comme l'a fait la balance du pouvoir va plus loin hors de contrôle démocratique. Mots clés: Capital, analyse du discours, ethnographie, fracturation, Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvanie Loi 13, la gouvernance _________________________________________________________________________ 1 Dr. Anastasia Hudgins and Dr. Amanda Poole, Assistant Professors, Department of Anthropology, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, PA, USA. Emails: Anastasia.Hudgins "at" iup.edu, Amanda.Poole "at" iup.edu. The authors ...

show abstract

Section: Journal Of Political Ecologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing fracking: private property, common resources, and regimes of governance

Hudgins

Poole

2014

Journal of Political Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, instead of subscribing intractably to one side or another in the debate between the notions of whether "revolutions are not made, they come" or "revolutions do not come, they are made," Marx may offer a way forward when he observed long ago in the Eighteenth Brumaire: men make their own history but not under the circumstances of their own choosing. 16 See (Cammack 1989;Knight 1986;Taylor 1988;Burawoy 1989;Nichols 1986;Sewell 1985;Hunt 1984;Colburn 1994;Selbin 1993Selbin , 1997. For a recent work that combines structural analysis (socioeconomic deprivation, political opportunity structure, ineffective state) with rational choice, see Mason (2004).…”

Section: Theoretical Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Small state, big revolution: geography and the revolution in Laos

Kittikhoun

2008

Theor Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extant theoretical insights-mostly derived from studies of prominent revolutions in large countries-are less useful when applied to the unfolding of revolutions in small states. To understand why revolutions happened in the latter, a framework is needed that takes into account geography. For small states, geography is more than dotted lines on maps. It is the source of intervention and vulnerability. Deeply mired in history and memory, states' geographies shape their distinctive identities and have great impacts on national political trajectories, including revolutions. Thus, to provide understanding of revolutions in these countries, no analysis could be complete without taking into account their places, understood in physical, ideational, and historical terms, within their regions and the world. The case of Laos is used to suggest a geographical analysis of revolutions that provides overlooked insights into the origins, processes, and outcomes of revolutions in small, vulnerable states.To some extent, revolutionary theorizing is now dead. This is not a statement about the lack of new theorizing about revolutions. New attempts, however, fall largely within the confines of extant theoretical models and insights. While both structuralist and culturalist theories have certainly improved their frameworks, and thus make valuable contributions, they still very much base their theories, however sophisticated, on established social science concepts and categories. There is currently a paucity of attempt or interest to cross disciplinary lines. Partly, this is because the last decade or so has been a period in which major social revolutions 1 rarely happen.

show abstract

“…Or to put it in more sociological parlance, various writers have claimed that WHS is politically reductionist (Jessop, 1990: 283-8;Cammack, 1989;Scholte, 1993b: 96, 101-2, 112). This challenge requires a clear differentiation of the neo-Weberian approach from the realist.…”

Section: 'Non-realist' Concept Of State Autonomymentioning

confidence: 99%