In Resisting the State, Scott Neigh critiques the idea that dominant accounts

In Resisting the State, Scott Neigh critiques the idea that dominant accounts of where we are, how we got here, and where we might be going are somehow value-free or objective representations of singular, timeless “truths.” He argues instead that conventional history makes certain assumptions about how society works and what history should be, and the exclusion of people and stories and ideas flows from those assumptions. Approaching history with a different framework can result in a much different and much more useful picture of how the present was produced by the past, and how the future can be produced by the present. (2012,
8)
In this course we have taken a similar approach to exploring both “globalization” and
“global transformations.” Drawing specifically on our course texts (Resisting the State,
Solidarity, and Everyday Revolutions), the movies we screened in class (The Fourth World War, If a Tree Falls, Eyes on the Prize, and The Revolution Will Not Be Televised), and lectures, discuss how people’s struggles for social justice can drive socially, and even globally, transformative processes. What is the difference between viewing social order and social change “from above” (the position of powerful and privileged actors) versus “from below” (the position of “ordinary” people). How is ournderstanding of the interests invested in social order and the forces driving social change affected when we take people’s struggles for social justice seriously analytically as well as politically?
ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!

You can place an order similar to this with us. You are assured of an authentic custom paper delivered within the given deadline besides our 24/7 customer support all through.