Crime, accidents and (dis)organization: Rhizomic communications on/of a foodscare

``Organization', as in organized crime, or organizationalor corporate crime, has, in criminological discourse, often something fixed about it. ``Crime' then is often being read as the more or less logical outcome of intentional organization.And the same would go for the ``control', or regulation of organized/organizational crime. An undercurrent of fixedassumptions like these about the fixity of organized/organizationalcrime and its regulation often structures criminological theoryand research. In an age of events (cf. Deleuze), and of eventsas accidents (cf. Massumi), this criminological discursiveundercurrent is in need of some supplements. If, as one mightbe able to assume, ``organizations' (of ``crime', and of ``control') can now be read appropriately as clusters of events/accidents, then it pays to look towards and focus onall and everything Outside the lines which we once consideredto be ``organizational' boundaries. This Outside – a spaceof multiplicity, and thus of ambivalence, undecidability, and(im)possibility – can be read as the cradle of contemporary``organizations' (of ``crime' and ``control'). In this paper,we illustrate this with the example of a recent case, in Belgium,of food contamination, and a foodscare which emerged in its wake.Inspired by recent discussions in organization theory (see partI of this essay), we develop the case study in part II of thispaper. With this paper, we hope to rethink ``organization', and thus ``organizational crime' and ``organized crime' aswell. But we also hope to contribute, through our reading ofcontemporary rhizomics, to the study of foodscares, and perhapsto the study of ``panics' more generally. Reading ``crimes',``controls' and ``criminologies', in a Deleuzean way, aslabyrinthine hybridities will, we think, also help to rethinkcriminology in an era of meshy, (dis)organized capitalism (cf.Lash and Urry).     

``Greenwich, 1 January 2000': De-inventing the Law of Britain in a Tent

This is an essay on what happened during January 2000 on Greenwich peninsula, London. The Millennium Dome in Greenwich, London, is read here as a site of the nomadic law of the labyrinth. At the Dome, a law of hyper-nomadics is emerging. In the Dome – a nomadic home, a temporary home quickly pitched of/for/by nomads – Britishness, I argue, is being seriously played as perpetual de-invention in a labyrinthine space, somewhere in-between the Law of Lures and the Law of Commands, in-between the Law of the Desert, the Law of the Game and the Law of Orderings. The Dome is being read here as an image/space through which New Britishness forces/forges itself to the fore, as well as an image/space that forces/forges New Britishness to force/forge itself to the fore. In this essay, ``Law', as well as ``Semiotics', are being used in a very broad sense. The ``Law of Britain', i.e. that which keeps ``Britain' apart/together, or, in other words, ``Britishness', so I will argue, not only elusively occupies a labyrinthine space in-between said Laws (of Lures, of Commands, as well as those of the Desert, of the Game, and of Orderings), which it articulates while it nevertheless also weakens them, dissolves them. ``It', the Law of Britain, Britishness, I will argue, also roams nomadically in-between ``spaces of belonging' and ``spaces of becoming'. In and through the Dome, an interstitial, meridional space, ``it' surfaced – it shaped surfaces – forming a labyrinth that articulates various nomadics, while not allowing any of these to fully emerge. This is ``its' newness, this could be read as the Law of ``New Britain' or ``New Britishness': an ever-elusive labyrinthine mes(s)(h) of surfaces in-between belonging and becoming. This essay is part of an attempt at ``reading the figural', to use Rodowick's words here. Rodowick reads Deleuze who reads Foucault – theorist of spatialization – who reads figures, such as Magritte('s). Figures are clusters of ``visibles' and ``expressibles'. Their light and sound – ``light, sounds and shapes', says the Millennium Dome leaflet – form imaginary spaces – ``spatial images' – that allow for specific ``statements' to be produced and to be read in them; which, in turn, allows for the (re)production of specific ``visibles' and ``expressibles'. The specificity of the Dome, the spatial image of New Britain, of New Britishness, is that the Law of Britain whirls in there, in labyrinthine windings, on surfaces, somewhere in-between belonging and becoming, roaming elusively in-between statements, allowing and (re)producing myriads of specific statements, though none specifically.     

The politics of the agrarian question in turkey: Review of a debate

This article is a review of the major contributions to a debate between left‐wing Turkish intellectuals and political activists during 1969–71 over the character of Turkish agriculture and rural class structure and over the appropriate political strategy for the left. The crux of the disagreement, as in similar debates taking place at the same period in Latin America and India, was the extent to which feudal’ or ‘capitalist’ relations predominated in the countryside, and the implications for the class struggle ‐ in particular for the strategy of class alliances. On the one hand were those who supported a strategy for a ‘national democratic revolution ‘involving cooperation between peasants and workers and the progressive elements of the bourgeoisie to eliminate feudal relations and structures; on the other were those who argued that the Turkish countryside could in no sense be characterized as predominantly feudal, that the mass of rural producers were subject to essentially capitalist forms of exploitation and that any political strategy for socialists must recognize the predominance of capitalism in contemporary Turkey.     

从安文思与汤若望之间的恩怨论说明宫廷耶稣会士

安文思与汤若望两位耶稣会士历经明清鼎革,但是因为二人经历不同,在清朝所受待遇迥异.二人也因此结怨,并延及耶稣会内部,引发争论.随着相关文献的公开,更多二人之间恩怨细节被披露.耶稣会士在中国的政治变局中多方押宝,而耶稣会为了传教事业,在明清动荡的政局中传教策略也常常自相矛盾,从而引发耶稣会内部冲突.     

Ambivalent Sovereigns and Restorative Justice: Exploring Conditions of Possibility and Impossibility for Restorative Justice in a Post-communicative Age

This contribution hopes to be able to contribute to answering the question: whither restorative justice? The restorative justice (RJ) movement has arrived at an existential crossroads. In this contribution an attempt is made to analyse how some of the origins of the RJ movement could be located in the emergence and crystallization of a new form of life (“control society”) in the wake of the Second World War. At the heart of this form of life one might be able to discern, on the one hand, a desire for and will to radical sovereignty, and, on the other, a resulting awareness of ambivalence. Whilst these aspects of post-war life have formed the backdrop of developments in RJ, and have therefore formed part of its conditions of possibility, one might now wonder if, in a post-communicative age such as ours, those very aspects have now become part of its conditions of impossibility. The argument explored in this contribution however holds that elements in the aforementioned form of life also hold potential for the re-thinking of restorative justice theory and practice.