Bungacast

On radical conservatism and global order. Professor Michael C. Williams talks to George and Alex about his co-authored World of the Right and how the radical right has gone global. We discuss: Does academia takes the Right as seriously as it should? What's the difference between the radical right and the far right, the new right, national conservatives, or fascists? How is the right 'global' – not just through international conferences but by being "co-constituted by its relation to the global"? Why is the radical right focused on the global liberal managerial elite? What does it get right and what does it get wrong about this stratum? How did the radical right come to take Gramsci seriously? Is the radical right just parasitic on the breakdown of liberal universalism? What does this analysis of the radical right say about the Left – is it the force that protects the status quo of the liberal international order? Links: World of the Right: Radical Conservatism and Global Order, Michael C. Williams et al., Cambridge UP /351/ Eating the Left’s Lunch? ft. Cecilia Lero & Tamás Gerőcs /129/ The Right Is Weak ft. Corey Robin

On Conclave. In our final episode of the year, we debate Edgar Berger's new film about a Papal election, featuring Ralph Fiennes and Stanley Tucci as Cardinals and Isabella Rossellini as a nun. Is the film about an alien, abstruse process – the conclave – or is it about something familiar and earthly? Is the film about the sacred or the profane? About temporal or holy power? What does it say about process and neutrality, in times of lawfare and contested elections? ⁠Why is there so much film and TV about the Pope? What is it that appeals today about Papal authority? The film features a good liberal, a corrupt moderate, a nasty reactionary, a tainted idpol candiate (a homophobic African) – do these politics matter? Why so crude? ⁠Is it mere Oscar bait?

On Non-Places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity [For access, subscribe at patreon.com/bungacast/membership] We continue working through the 2024/25 syllabus with the first theme, The Future of Place, asking, is politics possible without a sense of place. We discuss Marc Augé's much-referenced 1992 work on 'non-places': airports, shopping malls, corporate hotels, motorways... We discuss: Are non-places proliferating, and what would this mean for society and politics? Are non-places the spatial accompaniment to post-politics, to the foreclosure of political contestation? Is the distinction between non-places and places/spaces useful? Is there anything to the notion of a hyper- or super-modernity? Is Augé too deterministic? Does he miss how non-places can be places for culture or politics? Links: 2024/25 Bungacast Syllabus (with links to readings)

On immediacy, representation, and anti-politics. Anna Kornbluh, professor of English and author of Immediacy, or The Style of Too Late Capitalism talks to Alex about the cultural, political, and economic changes she refers to as 'immediacy'. We discuss: Is 'immediacy' just a vibe, or is vibe itself non-mediated? How does anti-representation in film, TV and books relate to anti-representation in politics? And can we relate culture immediacy to the 'material base'? How do Fleabag, Uncut Gems, and the turn to memoirs and autofiction exemplify immediacy? Why does self-disclosure fit so well with the data economy? In what way is contemporary anti-theory nihilistic and apologetic? How does the style of immediacy relate to Frederic Jameson's understanding of postmodernism? Is the desire to put everything private on show a response to alienation? And is the professionalisation of 'theory' a problem or solution? Links: Immediacy, or The Style of Too Late Capitalism, Anna Kornbluh, Verso Has culture become pure vibe?, Anna Kornbluh, Spike Art Magazine The Theory of Immediacy or the Immediacy of Theory?, Jensen Suther, Nonsite Embracing Alienation: Why We Shouldn't Try to Find Ourselves, Todd McGowan, Repeater