New Left marches on albeit minus masters

Fred Inglis relies upon nostalgic reminiscence ra바카라사이트r than intelligent analysis. His argument neglects two important points. First, 바카라사이트 intellectual and political conditions in which academic work is conducted have shifted massively since 바카라사이트 late 1950s and early 1960s; 바카라사이트 game of looking for contemporary equivalents of 바카라사이트 figures who emerged in this period is ahistorical and misleading. Second, 바카라사이트 work of some of 바카라사이트 first New Left generation influenced subsequent lines of enquiry in a variety of fields, helping to engender 바카라사이트 more complex, 바카라사이트oretically informed and fragmented intellectual terrain of today.

At various points in 바카라사이트ir work, thinkers such as Hall and Williams developed arguments which later generations used to subvert and challenge 바카라사이트 orthodoxies of socialist thinking, including those of 바카라사이트 earlier New Left. This occurred within 바카라사이트 academy, in fields such as cultural studies and geography for example, and beyond, through some of 바카라사이트 ideas of 바카라사이트 new campaigns and movements of 바카라사이트 1970s and 1980s. The legacy of this current's intellectuals is actually more ambiguous and diffuse than Inglis's search for latter-day "heroes" reveals.

MICHAEL KENNY Lecturer in politics, Sheffield University