![Political Science SDSU](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- 13
- 12 871
Political Science SDSU
Приєднався 29 жов 2020
The official page of the Department of Political Science at San Diego State University. Understanding politics is vital to the maintenance of free societies and indispensable for democratic citizenship.
Teach-in on Israel/ Palestine
Panelists:
Dr. Farid Abdel-Nour
Political Science, SDSU
Dr. Ted Falk
History, USD
Dr. Jonathan Graubart
Political Science and ISCOR, SDSU
Dr. Susanne hillman
History, SDSU
Moderated by: Dr. Kristen Maher
Political Science, SDSU
Wednesday
October 18
6:30 pm
PG 153
Dr. Farid Abdel-Nour
Political Science, SDSU
Dr. Ted Falk
History, USD
Dr. Jonathan Graubart
Political Science and ISCOR, SDSU
Dr. Susanne hillman
History, SDSU
Moderated by: Dr. Kristen Maher
Political Science, SDSU
Wednesday
October 18
6:30 pm
PG 153
Переглядів: 2 135
Відео
Graubart's Jewish Self-Determination beyond Zionism: Lessons from Hannah Arendt and other Pariahs
Переглядів 220Рік тому
Book Launch at San Diego State University for Jonathan Graubart's book "Jewish Self-Determination beyond Zionism: Lessons from Hannah Arendt and other Pariahs," Temple University Press. tupress.temple.edu/books/jewi... "An exciting, profound, and humane critical rethinking of Zionism as the ideological foundation of the Israeli state, Graubart’s alternative vision reinforces what Zionism might ...
Teach in: Perspectives on the Russian War on Ukraine
Переглядів 4272 роки тому
The department and ISCOR held a teach-in on Ukraine representing a diversity of perspectives and approaches. This in-person event took place on Wednesday April 20 at 1 PM in West Commons 220. Speakers are: SDSU Political Science Professors Mikhail Alexseev, Jonathan Graubart, Emanuele Saccarelli, and Latha Varadarajan; as well as Professor Volodymyr Dubovyk of Odesa Mechnykov National Universit...
Uyghurs in China: Sean Roberts SDSU Book Talk
Переглядів 4892 роки тому
San Diego State University Webinar: "The War on the Uyghurs: China's Internal Campaign against a Muslim Minority," March 8, 2022. A talk by Prof. Sean R. Roberts on his 2020 book, which analyzes how the Chinese government's settler colonialism has tried to eradicate 11 million Uyghurs' culture and identity. Q&A moderated by Prof. Ahmet T. Kuru. Organized by Porteous Chair (co-sponsored by Cente...
Islam & Democracy in Indonesia: Robert Hefner & Zainal Bagir
Переглядів 1,2 тис.2 роки тому
San Diego State University Webinar: "Unfinished Indonesia: Film Screening and Discussion on Islam & Democracy with Profs. Robert Hefner & Zainal Bagir," January 26, 2022. Q&A moderated by Prof. Ahmet Kuru. This video includes only 2 min of a 46 min film "Unfinished Indonesia" co-produced by Hefner & Bagir; for the full film & the series of six films, see indonesianpluralities.org A discussion o...
Applying to Law School
Переглядів 4632 роки тому
A panel for SDSU's pre-law students with Southwestern Law School, University of San Diego School of Law and Chapman University Fowler School of Law.
Reflecting on the Legacies of 9 11
Переглядів 1852 роки тому
A discussion on the historical significance and contemporary ramifications of 9/11. Moderated by Dr. Latha Varadarajan and Dr. Greggory Daddis. Featured panelists Judge Najla Ayoubi, Chief of Coalition & Global Programs, Every Woman Treaty; Maj (Ret) Danny Sjursen, Director, Eisenhower Media Network and Bill Van Auken, Editorial Board, World Socialist Web Site.
SDSU ISCOR Graduation Celebration 2020 & 2021
Переглядів 1393 роки тому
Join San Diego State University's ISCOR program and it's graduates of 2020 and 2021 as we virtually commemorate this milestone. Please note, the video begins with a silent slideshow to avoid copyright issues. The ceremony starts at minute 2:25.
SDSU Political Science Department Graduation Celebration 2020 & 2021
Переглядів 2753 роки тому
Join San Diego State University's department of political science and it's graduates of 2020 and 2021 as we virtually commemorate this milestone. Please note, the video begins with a silent slideshow to avoid copyright issues. The ceremony starts at minute 4:35
Francis Fukuyama SDSU Webinar: The Global Rise of Right-wing Populism and the Future of Liberalism
Переглядів 1,9 тис.3 роки тому
Francis Fukuyama's webinar at San Diego State University: "The Global Rise of Right-wing Populism and the Future of Liberalism," April 5, 2021. Q&A moderated by Ahmet T. Kuru Organized by Porteous Chair in Political Science: politicalscience.sdsu.edu/people/porteous.html
Daron Acemoglu SDSU Webinar: The Narrow Corridor
Переглядів 1,9 тис.3 роки тому
Daron Acemoglu's webinar at San Diego State University: "Remaking the Post-COVID World: Lessons from 'The Narrow Corridor,' " February 24, 2021. Q&A moderated by Ahmet T. Kuru Organized by Porteous Chair in Political Science: politicalscience.sdsu.edu/people/porteous.html Daron Acemoglu discusses how several economic and political faultlines of modern democracies have been exacerbated by the CO...
What Is Left of American Democracy on the Eve of the 2020 Elections? David North & Adolph Reed
Переглядів 3,5 тис.3 роки тому
Join San Diego State University's Department of Political Science for a panel discussion featuring two eminent public intellectuals, whose critical perspectives challenge us to think beyond the paradigm of mainstream American politics. As the Presidential elections approach, there are troubling signs that American democracy may be in its death throes: daily breaches of long-standing democratic ...
David North's comments have aged very well. Far more politically grounded and farsighted
yeah i really want to join=this team
What’s far worse terror than this is the way the Israeli war airplanes bomb the armless Palestinians in their stolen homes and lands
The Director for ISCOR clearly is disconnected from the actual course and degree program. What the Director has said I can completely 100% say was not my experience, maybe due to my time @ sdsu was as an Adult non traditional veteran student with disabilities that none were attended to and actually had to stay an extra semester due covid19 infection in 2019 that my instructor didn't care to use his discretion, smh. Why does the director need to lie, if not and this is truly her sentiment 🤔 then all I can assume is she is surrounded by yes men and women that never bring problems and concerns to kinda like the potus. I'm glad I never spent the money that others are paying yearly to attend, smh.
Please note, the video begins with a silent slideshow to avoid copyright issues. The ceremony starts at minute 2:25.
Please note, the video begins with a silent slideshow to avoid copyright issues. The ceremony starts at minute 4:35.
I thoroughly enjoyed this video but felt the need to comment about one observation. The argument that leftists place too much emphasis on the vote and on elections as the premise for concluding that they should then proceed to support Democratic candidates in elections falls entirely to pieces when the inherent assumptions of said premise are applied inversely.
North's opening remarks seem rather prophetic a week after the fascist assault the US capitol...
Comment section is disappointing. They don't understand Reed's position 100%. To say that Reed is trying to funnel you into the democratic party is hilarious. He's saying the exact opposite. The problem is many of you place too much importance on electoralism that you think any advocacy of voting for the Democrat means you're for electoralism. To believe you should vote or should have voted for Biden over Trump in this past election simply means Biden is marginally better than Trump. That's all. How some on the left can't grasp this simple idea is hilarious. Another thing is, many of you don't understand what organizing means. You believe it's mobilization which is what many of the left have been doing the past decade. Knocking on doors when it comes to voting (3rd party, or specific policies) and organizing protests is not what Reed means by organizing. It means getting into unions and convincing workers to fight back against their bosses. Building solidarity with right wingers, liberals, and leftists within the corporate world. This means they (workers) now have a foundation of how the system works, so then you can translate that solidarity into political fights. You also have a naive understanding of how to win. This is why you believe 3rd party is what's needed. It's a gross misunderstanding of how to build your base. You simply believe getting your idea out there like how things are done right now, but with a 3rd party message is going to win things. That's wrong and pointless. What's clearly missing is the numbers, which is your base. There is no leftist base right now. If you have numbers, it doesn't matter whether you're a 3rd party or a Democrat. Because numbers based on a working class coalition would by definition mean you use your numbers to vote for working class policy positions. At that point you would have essentially taken control of a certain portion of the Democrats or if you wanted, started up a 3rd party. Either way, there would be an equivalent amount of ppl voting for working class policies. In other words, the party itself is a pointless discussion.
I think David North articulated his ideas amazingly he was very clear and concise and I think he put forth a vision for the working class that is achievable while Professor Reed seemed to base his analysis in my opinion off of emotions and continue the unsuccessful policy that I see that a lot of progressives have adopted of herding people back into the Democratic Party and then trying to push them left when we have seen time and time again their clear disdain for progressive policies . Great job gentlemen 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
Thanks to the speakers and to the SDSU Poli Sci dept for hosting this event. It was a highlight of political life in 2020.
The idea that Biden will give the left space or buy time to build a mass movement is a deadly mistake. In fact A biden presidency is even more likely than Trump to launch new wars in the middle east and go into direct military clashes with Russia, which could quickly avalanche into another World War. Not much breathing room when Biden drags us back into war shortly after taking office. Never mind "labor rights" which already didn't exist since Obama -- we won't have any rights because war-time martial law will be in effect and the right to free speech and press, as well as striking and activism, will be suspended, with all dissent being labeled as Russian-enemy agents. Biden wil not be breathing room he will be a Bombshell in the most ironic way possible. If you doubt that 2020 can get any more ironic then you'll simply be one of the first to witness it.
Voting is just something you do for at most a day, if you live where votes are suppressed and lines are long, or less than a half hour if you live where it's easy. Voting is instrumental, it doesn't define your politics. For the vast majority of people who are leftists, it really shouldn't be complicated: vote for the one that will do less harm and then spend the rest of your life organizing and actually being political. Once there's a powerful socialist movement we can talk about how to use it in elections, if that's even what we want to do. Until then, punch the ticket and get back to organizing.
Reed takes me back to my university years where I came out more confused than when I went in. To be quite frank , like Chomsky and Hedges, Reed's obscurantism over the building of an independent party of the working class reflects a very definite class character . It is not an accident that the mass of youth flooding out of the Universities for decades have disappeared down the rabbit hole of reformism and a dead end road . The 'so called' ''intellectual '' classes have concerned themselves more with climbing academic ladders with fancy wages attached .Warm and cosy offices and the drip drip of routinism will addle the brain in no time. Idealism of youth swapped for a steady wage and a foot in the door. Little do such people cognise and all too late, if indeed they ever do....that as the world changes, and as ''necessity'' bares down on the working class and not those in their ivory towers....''they are behind events and not in front of them''.
This debate is mentioned in the following article: Pseudo-left apologists for Biden and the bankruptcy of “lesser-evil” politics Joseph Kishore-SEP candidate for US president 31 October 2020 www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/10/31/pers-o31.html
🤣 Mr. Reed trying hard to be edgy by cursing. The fawning of everyone involved over him was sad. Comrade North's scientific analysis of capitalism's current crisis and historical perspective that he applied was, in my opinion, quite accurate and he and the SEP are the only ones offering a true socialist alternative to capitalist slavery.
I voted for Joe Kishore and Norissa Santa Cruz, and proudly so.
Thanks for posting, Political Science Department. This was a very illuminating exchange.
wsws.org
Adolph Reed is bound up in identity politics, he's just better at masking it, than say Nikole Hannah-Jones. Both support Biden, so what's the difference, really? The difference is how much education & intelligence they are wasting.
Ric Size is bound up in a keyboard bigger than his brain, knowledge and understanding combined.
what is going on in your addled brain that you felt the need to post the same drivel twice? given Reed's well known positions on identity politics, we are left to assume that you are literally basing your argument entirely on the fact that he's black.
@@janosmarothy5409 You didn't capitalize the 'B' in black, which means you're a racist according to your liberal colleagues. You & others here accuse me of slander, then attempt to slander me as a racist, all to avoid any discussion of class politics. All you know is the big lie.
Racialism is a Democratic Party construct. It's defined as being obsessed with race, and it's the liberal form of racism. Liberals don't want to discuss class issues, so they accuse anyone who does, as being a racist. That's the 'Big Lie Technique' straight from Langley. Those are the tactics of fascism, yet liberals never see it in themselves.
@@InfinitelinkRecords "the big lie" lmao get over yourself. I like no one here knows how to succinctly and honestly address points, all they know is deranged mendacious gish gallops
Reed's discourse is so full of generalisations that effectively mean everything and nothing. Quite frankly he is just squirming in the face of a scientifically derived argument posed by David North. This somewhat pitiful out pouring from a propagandist of the pseudo left is really a call for workers to continue to play Russian roulette as if there is all the time in the world ,with a party that is screaming loud and clear at the working class (and has done for decades) , that it defends the interests of US capitalism at ''all costs ''. When Biden nods to the ruling class in the same voice and at precisely the same time he is whispering sweet nothings in the ears of workers, that '' I beat the socialist'' , then the trajectory of the Democratic party under Biden is foretold ''nothing will in essence change''. In this respect Biden begs the ''essential point'' of enquiry on which Reeds argument stands counterposed to that of David North. What is the objective character of capitalism, and by what political logic is it transformed? Are we to assert that the observable historical processes of capitalist decline are in some sense ''when push comes to shove'' arbitrary ? If so, one would have thought with the exponential rise of obscene social inequality to new heights, and the spectre of world war 3 and irreversible climate change , the ruling classes would have shifted into ''time to save the world mode'' long ago . However the observable opposite is the irrefutable truth. Just compare the pie charts of US domestic expenditure over the last decade and the size of the slices tell you unequivocally where the ruling classes are headed and just look at the gargantuan levels of insoluble debt !! However as this process continues its motion through ever escalating intra national crises spurred on by ''competition for profit between competing nation states'', to say nothing of the historical patterns of this crisis that ended ''twice'' in 2 world wars, at this late hour, the bourgeois academic in his ivory tower pronounces the way forward is to continue playing Russian roulette !! wtf!
I voted for Joseph Kishore and Norissa Santa Cruz.
So did I! And proud to have!
Reed tries to shut North up. Reed is contemptible.
WSWS, where you hang out, keeps anyone with a coherent disagreement blacklisted from the discussion. Reed didn't censor north, did he?
He works at the U of P yada yada, so this is to be expected as is he is expected to be like by PENN if he still expects to hang with THEM!
@@none194 Not true, they'll keep fascists and trolls off tho yeah.
@@donbarzinitut "Troll" is a nice loose term that encapsulates anyone whose arguments they can't answer. I know this to be a fact.
@@none194 Well you seem to have been employing the term liberally in this comment section lol. There are many trolls in wsws comment sections who solely exist to downvote supporters of the SEP and make strawman arguments which try and frame wsws supporters as racist or sexist or both. Anyone arguing in bad faith shouldn't be able to have the privilege to preach to readers of the website.
Good question, Emmanuele!
Reed's ideas are totally bankrupt. Making excuses for Sanders! The bullshit is on Reed's part, not David's.
I left when Prof. Reed mentioned cleaning the toilet. I was sickened by his attitude. I am coming back to it today in order to hear David North's response to Reed's drivel.
Oh great! Another sectarian WSWS troll arrives. General strike! General strike!
I've always appreciated Professor Reed's principled Marxist opposition to identity politics, and his defence of viewing class as the fundamental defining line in society. But it was unpleasantly clear in this discussion that his pragmatic perspective of building an "institutional left" forces him to at times cast aside Marxism entirely. The claim that the main feature of history is its "specificity", i.e. that any attempt to draw lessons from history is futile, is a complete rejection of historical materialism, and Professor Reed would ridicule this claim had it come out of anyone else's mouth, except that he knows that the historical record can't possibly justify his support for a bourgeois party as providing "breathing room" from fascism. His response to a worker who complained about the Democrats' promotion of identity politics shows that the opportunism behind Professor Reed's call to elect Biden is even incompatible with his usual principled opposition to identity politics. The basic feature of the US's two-party system is that both parties attack the conditions of the working class, but the Democrats couple their right-wing agenda with more progressive social policies -- the worker who has identified that both the Democrats and Republicans are opposed to the interests of his class has taken a major step towards breaking with the two-party system. But the position that Professor Reed implicitly put forward -- that the only thing stopping this worker from voting for the Democrats is a prejudiced opposition to their social policy, and that it would be a step forward to convince this worker to vote for Biden -- requires promoting illusions in a thoroughly anti-working class party, and while still rejecting the theory of identity politics of the material interests of "white supremacy" etc., concedes to its conclusion that a bigoted "white working class" is responsible for Trump. A principled and honest response would be "These 'moral issues' are an important part of the fight for complete human equality. But the Democrats promote them so heavily to disguise the fact that they stand for enormous social inequality, and to divide the only force which can bring about true equality: the working class. Both parties offer social devastation to the working class, and will worsen inequality. Their methods are different: Trump is planning to enforce his attacks by building a fascist base and destroying workers' abilities to fight back, and Biden would prefer to use the politics of race, gender, etc. to divide and demobilise all opposition, and to enforce the requirements of Wall Street through the existing state apparatus." One could find everything in that response in Professor Reed's writings, but why could he not respond in that way to the worker he mentions? If advocating a Biden vote as a lesser evil doesn't require promoting Biden's politics, then why not explain precisely what the Democratic Party is? In this case, honesty about the Democrats leads inevitably to the conclusion that an "irresponsible" rejection of both parties is necessary, and for the working class to defeat fascism itself - and the agreement between Professor Reed and David North on the nature of the Democratic Party breaks down when it comes to a political programme because only one of the two is unafraid to draw the revolutionary conclusion: the urgent task facing socialists is to establish the independence of the working class from all the agents of capitalism.
Yes, one should contrast Reed's perspective in this discussion from his much stronger and harmonious critique of the 1619 Project in his interview with the World Socialist Web Site, which may be found here: www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/20/reed-d20.html
I completely agree.
I hate to be impolite but David North makes this guy, showing off all his books in the background, sound like an idiot. When one cuts through all his BS, his basic position is the same as every other bourgeois socialist. "Everyone wants universal health care and etc but it's just not available so lets get on board with the friendlier right-wing capitalist and organize for the future." I think they said that 40 years ago when workers real wages were about 3 times higher.
Adolph Reed stumbles to reach workers and maintain coherency because he is bungled-up in identity politics. David North makes sense because he is a Marxist & historical materialist
It's not identity politics at all. Its a pragmatic approach to politics and to current conditions. Modern identity politics comes out of the pragmatic trends that followed the defeats of the Civil Right movement. Marxism fights pragmatism. An explanation of current conditions is discovered by working through historical events, yeah. And the pragmatist formalizes a new strategy at every change of conditions.
Plenty to critique Reed on but astonishingly ignorant to think that "bungled-up in identity politics" is one of those things
There’s not a man less caught up in identity politics than Adolph Reed. What a bullshit slanderous comment.
"Adolph Reed stumbles to reach workers and maintain coherency because he is bungled-up in identity politics. David North makes sense because he is a Marxist & historical materialist" You can be sure, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the author of this mindless group think comment understands neither Marxism, its synonym, historical materialism, or identity politics. And this is from someone who fundamentally agrees with North's perspective, if not the SEP's adventurist/sloganeering calls for a general strike which, significantly, are not mentioned in this discussion.
It is you bourgeois apologists who are confused & wrong. Adolph Reed has no plan to unite the workers, because he supports Biden. "We have to elect Biden," he said during the broadcast. All these negative replies are false & hypocritical.
I thought Reed won this debate. Contrary to North's claims, a second Trump term won't lead to the collapse of the Democratic Party, a la the Whigs in 1852-1854, or build the constituency for a socialist revolutionary party. It will only make the left even more marginal, the labor movement even weaker, and the political space for a challenge to the Democrats even narrower than it is after one term of Trump. Biden is less charismatic, has a longer history of corporate collusion, and less credibility with African Americans than Obama. It will be easier for the left to expose him and present an alternative to the corporate Democrats while they are in power and displaying all their contradictions than when they are out of power and the far right dominates the conversation. After all, if the Republicans really are the neo-fascist party that North says they are, then his position is equivalent to Ernst Thälmann in 1931 moralizing about the "social fascist" SPD and claiming, "After Hitler, our turn!" As awful as the SPD was, the German CP should have tactically allied with them as far as necessary to stop the Nazis while expanding its base and presenting a viable alternative for the German working class. And since the US left is in a far weaker position than the CP was in 1931, the same lesson only applies with more force today.
This is historically and intellectually dishonest. Thälmann's crime was the demobilization of the their mass base -- of a party which still had a mass base in the working class and was born a working class party. It was a crime so serious that Trotsky said that if continued such that Hitler took power, it would require the founding of a new International -- as indeed it did. Who's demobilizing the working class here? The ICFI, through the WSWS and its numerous interventions, is the only outfit warning workers of this danger. The Democrats are the ones who are appealing to the generals, for calm, insisting that one needn't worry. Meanwhile, for someone who you claim "won" the debate, he described the Molotov-Ribbentrop treaty, one of the nastiest betrayals of international working class solidarity, and which was a knife in the back to workers across Europe, as a positive, benign act, to create "breathing room", a la a vote for Biden. It was the last and most obvious of a decade full of Stalinist betrayals of the working class, just as orienting workers to the Democrats now has long since passed the level of tragedy and descended into farce. And what "labor movement"? Reed orients to the unions at a time when workers are rightfully fleeing, because they have not led a real struggle in 30+ years and are fleecing their members. Trotsky outlined a test as to what constituted a workers organization: an organization that suppressed strikes and wages and defended the income of the bourgeoisie -- all of which the AFL-CIO unions do, is an organization of scabs, not a workers organization. After the working class organs with a mass base had utterly prostrated and discredited themselves in the early 1930s, a legacy of the degeneration of the social democracy of the Second International and that of Stalinism in the Third, the necessity was to build anew organs of struggle, as Trotsky called for with Committees of Action in France. The ICFI is leading workers in several industries to begin the construction of rank-and-file committees. It is in embryo, but the changes likely in the coming months have a way of accelerating all such initiatives and the receptiveness to them. Your orientation is clearly toward the reformist organizations and the left flank of the Democratic Party -- the same elements that Reed was practically salivating at what he regards as his missed rightful chance to sit at the table and give friendly advice. North's (and for that matter mine) is to the working class. We probably disagree on where the true strength lies, but I think readers of this exchange can make their own assessments on that point.
Your argument relies on a distortion of the class character of the organizations you cite. When Trotsky called for the united front of social democratic and communist workers against fascism he was calling for an alliance of *working class* organizations, which would serve the dual purpose of creating a bulwark against the fascist threat while also exposing the treachery of the social democratic leadership and winning workers to revolutionary politics. In contrast, your call to support Biden and the Democrats is in the tradition of the popular front politics used by the Stalinists to subordinate workers to the organizations of the bourgeoisie. As Trotsky understood, and as North correctly stated, such politics have only led to disaster wherever they've been applied. The argument that a Democratic administration would create "space" for the "left" is not a new one. Variations of this argument have been put forward to justify support for every Democratic Party candidate for generations. It was a central argument used by the pseudo-left to justify support for Obama. Instead, his administration only created "space" for the development of Trump and the far right. Now, facing the threat of fascism and dictatorship, demoralized opportunists can only call for, not the urgent building of independent working class organizations, but for the working class to throw their support behind a "less charismatic" figure with a "history of corporate collusion" who has "less credibility with African Americans"-all of which are presented as reasons *in favor* of supporting him. The thin gruel of lesser-evilism has gotten very thin indeed.
Are you his family member? David North made the guy sound like a clueless moron.
You are making the assumption, against every comparable historical precedent, everything we know about Biden and his party, the extreme right packed supreme court and the fascist terrorists who will become a permanent feature of the political landscape, and at root, everything we know about the economic contradictions driving both wings of the ruling elite, that a second Trump term will be worse than a Biden presidency. Sorry, this is an illusion based most likely upon wishful thinking and the lack of belief that anything else is possible. There is no way that a socialist party can tell workers to vote for what it knows will be a catastrophe, in all likelihood, a war against Russia as well as the extinguishing of the remains of democracy in the US. There are no short cuts. Political independence of the working class is the prerequisite to fighting back, let alone victory. Adolf Reed is right about finding a path to engage with the working class- not stupid slogans like "general strike across North America", North is right about political independence.
You equate 1930's German SPD (headed not so long ago by Rosa Luxumborg, the SPD advanced a definite socialist program and had a huge radical working class base) with the 2020 US Democratic party (the party of the US military-intelegence establishment and the Wall Street). You must be out of your mind!
Starts at 4:45
American democracy is dead...Trump and the GOP have killed it.