3:1 — Post-Crisis — 0 of 3 (Introduction)


Are we, as a global community, living in a post-crisis world? We seem to be in a semi-permanent state of crisis, either in crisis or on the brink of it perpetually, and, in that context, does a concept like crisis really mean anything anymore? By invoking “post-crisis” we are not talking about post-crisis as in “after a crisis” (for example, in stories like this one about “post-crisis economic planning“); for comic-buffs, we are also not talking about the crazy-cool “post-crisis” events in DC Comics’ publishing history following the 1985-86 Crisis on Infinite Earths (discussed here); this is also not the revamped homo ecnonomicus discussion of the “post-crisis consumer.” The bottom-line: as the global community gets more and more intertwined, non-local crises have local implications and impacts, and if there is always a crisis or a looming crisis somewhere, does “crisis” really capture anything out of the ordinary? (given that crisis means an intensification of difficulty or trouble, and, hence, a perpetual state crisis ceases to be a moment of crisis)

It should be recognized that much of this “crisis talk” is sourced by media outlets that thrive on hyperbole, so, possibly, we are making too much of this; however, the roots of a post-crisis society are possibly deeper than just journalistic portrayals in the media (though they are surprisingly powerful in framing global events). These issues, among others, are what we will discuss this week on our 3:1 on Post-Crisis.


Our guest this week is Peter Bratsis. I know Peter’s work from his outstanding book Everyday Life and the State (for theory buffs, there is a section in this book where Peter claims that Kantorowicz is possibly the greatest state theorist [who wasn’t a state theorist] of all time — a thought which also figures into his new work on corruption). You might also know his other book, with Stanley Aronowitz, Paradigm Lost: State Theory Reconsidered. You can read much of his work here, and perhaps you’ve recently seen him speaking about the rise of the Syriza Party in Greece, for example, on Uprising or on European Ideas.

We welcome him to the blog! 

5 thoughts on “3:1 — Post-Crisis — 0 of 3 (Introduction)

  1. Jeg er helt vild med billede 1, og 3, og 4 …. Alle sammen!! Alene det mÃ¥ være en gyldig grund til at anskaffe sig et par?Ida / Fanaioslhb recently posted..


  2. Pingback: 3:1 — Post-Crisis (and back again) — 3 of 3 | Installing (Social) Order

  3. ““Every day on the news there’s another toxic spill. Cancerous solvents from storage, arsenic from smokestacks, radioactive water from power plants. How serious can it be if it happens all the time? Isn’t the definition of a serious event based on the fact that it’s not an everyday occurrence?”
    Delilo Whitenoise


  4. That is perhaps a point I will develop later this week: the post-crisis move (i.e., being in a semi-perpetual state of crisis) is dual pronged — it is an invitation to keep crisis officially on the “always on alert” and then also an invitation to the public to stop talking about crisis as anything special or out of the ordinary. NOTE: and this I will develop this Friday, there are appreciable parallels to what Charles “Chick” Perrow was trying to unpack with “normal accidents” …


  5. sounds good, my guess is that people (especially as workers and voters) are as resistant to crisis talk/events as they are to other external imperatives/calls-to-change. Was just watching people in Kentucky bemoaning how they are getting flooded out yet again and what it would take to start refurbishing the same houses that they were standing in up to their knees in water…


Comments are closed.