Lessons from exits foreclosed: An exilic interpretation of the Mexican and Russian Revolutions, 1910–1924

Smolski, Andrew; Castro, Javier Sethness; Ross, Alexander Reid

doi:10.1177/0309816818759229

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, the revolutionary nationalist revolution in Mexico and its subsequent consolidation led to redistribution policies that expropriated, decommodified and communalized land. Smolski, Castro, and Ross (2018) argue that during revolutionary periods, such as occurred in Mexico from 1910 to 1917 or Russia from 1917 to 1924, exile had a role in subsequent state (de)formation, levels of commodification, and the egalitarianism of subsequent political institutions.…”

Section: Delinking and Exile: Complements And Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interrogating Structural Conditions for Agricultural Production

Smolski

2022

JWSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An important, contemporary focus of scholarship is on the necessary structural conditions to promote a sustainable transition in agriculture. This study examines the possible role of anti-systemic structures, delinked and exilic, in conditioning transitions to agroecological production. I conduct a comparative-historical analysis of two periods, 1959–1991 and 1992–2016, within a single case, Cuba. The results provide evidence that the prevalence of delinking with incorporation maintains an industrial model of agricultural production, even while bringing the law of value under sovereign control. In this way, the existence of delinking as one type of anti-systemic structure is not a sufficient condition for increasing agroecological production; although data suggests that delinking can provide important tools to support sustainable transitions in future periods. In the second period characterized by increasing prevalence of an exilic structure in conjunction with delinking, results demonstrate that anti-systemic structures operate complementary to one another and can maintain partial incorporation while increasing the application of agroecological production. As such, this study provides a rationale for future research and action on anti-systemic structural mixture conditioning sustainable transitions.

show abstract

Section: Delinking and Exile: Complements And Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interrogating Structural Conditions for Agricultural Production

Smolski

2022

JWSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While classical world-systems analysis considers anarchist movements, non-state spaces, and antiauthoritarian tendencies of the left to be historically-specific and thus unimportant in certain historical periods and places in the world-system, there is a growing body of scholarship that focuses on anti-state movements and non-state spaces that problematizes this assumption (see Scott 2009;Zibechi 2012;Grubačić and O'Hearn 2016;Plys 2016;Williams 2017;Smolski, Castro, and Reid Ross 2018;Potiker 2019Potiker , 2021. While impressive in its historical and geographic scope, this literature is incomplete, as no studies have attempted to systematically model the general tendencies of non-state movements and spaces over the longue durée of the capitalist world-system.…”

Section: Non-state Spacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Rojava however, the non-state space was able to succeed despite repression from a variety of actors because the United States was not directly involved in imperial repression of their commune. 7 All of these studies (Plys 2016;Smolski et al 2018;Potiker 2021) provide insight into the causes of non-state spaces' success and failure. However, since they all focus upon the meso and conjunctural scale of analysis-in a particular space or time-they lack what a macro and structural analysis could offer.…”

Section: Non-state Spacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anarchist and Anarchistic Anti-Systemic Movements in World-Systems Perspective

Potiker

Williams²,

Alimahomed-Wilson³

2022

JWSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While world-systems anti-systemic movement scholarship has briefly acknowledged the existence of anti-state “cultural” movements—namely, autonomous indigenous movements in the periphery and anarchist worker movements in the core and semi-periphery—it relegates them to secondary importance to statist “political” movements. In this paper, we provide an intervention in the world-systems anti-systemic movements literature by centering anti-state movements in our analysis. In order to investigate the mechanisms essential for anti-state, anti-systemic movements over the longue durée of the world-system, we operationalize a qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) using nine cases of non-state spaces from different geographies and historical time periods throughout the world-system. We use a Boolean crisp set, or binary approach, denoting the presence, or absence of factors to determine the pathways that lead to the variation between explicitly anarchist and implicitly anarchistic movements as well as short-term or long-term non-state spaces established by anti-state movements. We find that the core and semi-periphery classification of anarchist movements is false. We also find that non-state spaces succeed when they are not repressed by statist anti-systemic movements or core imperial nation-states. In effect, the anti-systemic political actor replicates the logic of the core nation-state it claims to be opposed to when it comes to its repression of non-state spaces and movements. Prior to the “liberal geoculture” (1848–1968), even core states had difficulty repressing non-state spaces, and after the liberal geoculture semi-periphery and periphery states have had difficulty repressing non-state spaces.

show abstract

“…Beyond the fathers of the world-systems perspective-all of whom this issue is greatly indebted to for their insights on the structural constraints placed on state centered anti-systemic movements in the world-system-there has been a growing subfield of research on non-state movements and spaces from a global political economy, world-historical, and world-systemic vantage point (Scott 2009;Zibechi 2012;Grubačić and O'Hearn 2016;Williams 2017;Smolski, Castro, and Reid Ross 2018;Gibson 2019;Potiker 2019Potiker , 2021. Although this scholarship has picked up in recent years it is anything but new.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%