Commentators on Craig Calhoun's Tanner Lecture. The Tanner Lectures are a collection of educational and scientific discussions relating to human values. Conducted by leaders in their fields, the lectures are presented at prestigious educational facilities around the world.

At least Herf put his hands on a good problem. He begins with a critique of what remains the most common approach to the explanation of Nazism, namely, an anti-modern revolt against reason, progress, and the political values of the French Revolution, a pathological consequence of Germany's peculiar social and political development in the 19th century. In one typical statement, Nazism was the ideological expression of a “crisis of modernization,” a “utopian anti-modernism,” whose essence was “an extreme revolt against the (...) modern world and an attempt to capture a distant mythic past.” This view was popularized in the 1960s by historian like George Mosse and Fritz Stern, although it also had plenty of license in the earlier traditions of Marxist and non-Marxist social commentary going back before the war. (shrink)

Partly in response to fundamental changes which have occurred in the social relations of actually existing capitalism, and to the concomitant political upheavals, partly as a result of the related debates and transformations in social and cultural theory, several social historians of the 1970s and 1980s began to rethink their ideas about class. Having previously made a powerful contribution to the history of working-class formation, the historians in question began to advocate the necessity of a decisive break with Marxist and (...) other materialist sociologies, by way of a turn to various forms of cultural and linguistic analysis (“the discursive approach to history”). By the end of the 1990s, forms of consensus had coalesced around this so-called cultural turn, stressing the complex and contingent relationship between a society’s forms of collective agency and identification (such as “class”) and its structural circumstances and characteristics (such as the organization of work and the distribution of inequality). During the first two-thirds of the 20th century, distinctive political traditions of the Left had developed around the given processes of capital development and their associated social histories, acquiring strong and long-lasting shape after 1945. Since the 1970s however, as capitalist restructuring under neoliberal auspices inexorably remade the social worlds of class, those earlier patterns of politics also ceased to work. In the light of the fundamentally different patterns of working-class formation, the terms of Left political practice consequently need to be radically rethought. (shrink)