Archives par mot-clé : Révolution

AAC section « Concepts in Conflict », ECPR General Conference, Oslo, 6-9 septembre 2017

HiSoPo vous informe de la publication de l’appel à communication pour le prochain congrès de l’ECPR, qui se tiendra à Oslo du 6 au 9 septembre 2017. Le groupe « Political Concepts » organise une section intitulée « Concepts in Conflict ». Pour proposer une intervention, vous pouvez contacter les organisateurs/trices de la section ( ; ;, ou bien, encore mieux, directement les organisateurs/trices du panel qui vous intéresse.  Il est possible que le programme final change en fonction du nombre de réponses aux panels, ou que certains panels ne soient finalement pas retenus, mais dans ce cas les organisateurs essaieront de proposer des panels de remplacement.

ECPR General Conference
Oslo University
6-9 September 2017
Section proposal

Title: Concepts in Conflict

The aim of the section is to focus on political conflicts in their various forms, and the ways in which they are linked to different usages, contestations and discussions of concepts.

Worldwide, political conflicts pose challenges or threats in various degrees, not just on life and humanity, but also on political order and democratic institutions. They can come in different shapes and forms and last for longer or shorter periods of time. What they all share, however, is some kind of conceptual disagreement on principles, values or arguments. Sometimes conflicts can be reconciled, but there are also instances of crises following after another. Ethnic conflicts, for example, can be continuous, whereas European integration forms a very different sort of chain of crises that can also be detrimental for a whole continent. At the same time, political conflict is a basic feature of representative democracies. In parliaments, political disagreement and debate are constitutive of the political process and come about in orderly manner following established rules and procedure.

Controversies and struggles over concepts provide important nodal points for the study of politics and political conflicts. Paying attention to what is contested, not just in political life but in other types of debates as well, is not just the starting point for political research but can also constitute breaks or shifts in current debates, historical perception or established grand narratives. What has been previously considered as incontestable or without a doubt, can suddenly seem more problematic and worthy of further research. For example, human rights, nation states and the European integration can seem incontestable and matters of fact if the conceptual struggles over their political aspects are ignored.


Dr Taru Haapala is a research fellow at the Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, University of Jyväskylä. She has held the position of visiting fellow at the Queen Mary Centre of History of Political Thought, University of London, and at the Department of History and Civilization of the European University Institute in Florence. She has co-chaired panels on deliberation in three previous ECPR General Conferences.



Dr Anna Kronlund is a Senior Research Fellow specializing in US politics at The Finnish Institute of International Affairs. Together with Dr Haapala, she has co-chaired panels on politics of deliberation in two previous ECPR General Conferences.


MA Gabriele Ciampini is a PhD student at Università degli Studi di Firenze. Previously he has acted as a Vice-Chair for Section on EU Politics at the ECPR Graduate Student Conference held in Tartu 2016 and a Chair of the panel ‘Liberalism and Economics’ at the ECPR General Conference in Montréal.


This section endorsed by the ECPR Standing Group Political Concepts will be formed of the following 11 panels addressing issues ranging from ethnic and religious conflicts to the European past and revolutions, with both modern and historical as well as theoretical and empirical emphases:

1) Concepts in revolutions

Chairs: Douglas Moggach (, University of Ottawa and Samuel Hayat (, CNRS (CERAPS)

The aim of the panel is to assess the effects of revolutions on key concepts in political vocabulary. The focus will be set on the concepts of freedom, universality, and the state.

2) The politics of negation: public resentment in democratic theory

Chair: Anthoula Malkopoulou (, Uppsala University

This panel will take issue with why citizens are becoming increasingly resentful of ‘democracy’ as we know it and how this bears on our understanding of democracy and related concepts, such as representation, participation and legitimacy.

3) Neoliberalism as a Social Order. Conflicting visions in the Neoliberal Intellectual Community

Chair: Gabriele Ciampini (, Università degli Studi di Firenze

The panel aims to analyse the intellectual conflicts within the neoliberal community. The panel focuses on the critiques of democracy and on the complex relationship between economic and political sphere.

4) Conceptual politics of European integration

Chairs: Taru Haapala (, University of Jyväskylä/Queen Mary University of London & Teemu Häkkinen (, University of Jyväskylä

This panel addresses the conceptual controversies related to European integration which can redefine and change the way in which key issues on European unity and its political institutions are seen and valued.

5) Strategic narratives and conceptual change

Chairs: Alister Miskimmon (, Royal Holloway University of London & Michelle Bentley (, Royal Holloway University of London

This panel examines the ways in which the strategic construction of rhetoric contributes to and facilitates shifts in conceptual understanding. It seeks to explore where actors deliberately construct narratives for their own gain and use redefinitions of concepts in order to realize the ambitions behind them.

6) Conflicting concepts in making representations of the past

Chairs: Katja Mäkinen (, University of Jyväskylä & Sanna Valkonen (, University of Lapland

Competing interpretations about the past are made through the uses and meanings of concepts depending on perspectives, contexts and actors involved. The panel will welcome papers discussing conceptual conflicts in politics of representation.

7) Ethnicity and the State: struggles over representation during political crises

Chairs: Mehdi Labzaé, CESSP, Paris 1 – Panthéon Sorbonne & Marianne Saddier (, CESSP, Paris 1 – Panthéon Sorbonne

This panel seeks to address from a comparative perspective mobilizations of ethnicity in the context of political crises, with a focus on their political usages and varying relationships with the State.

8) The Political Rhetoric of European Memory

Chair: Rieke Trimcev (, Greifswald University

The panel focuses on the political rhetoric of “European” Memory that serves to negotiate competing concepts of Europe and sustains manifold strategies to mobilize the past for present political aims.

9) Catholic Encounters with Nationalism and Political Modernity

Chair: Ettore Bucci (, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa – Centre d’Histoire de Sciences Po, Paris

This panel aims at discussing case studies of the longstanding confrontation between the Roman Church and the liberal Nation-State after French Revolution. Through presentations of different historical and political contexts, it will focus on recognizing the continuities and discontinuities, from rejection to problematic cooperation.

10) Concept of crisis in international politics

Chair: Anna Kronlund (, The Finnish Institute of International Affairs, Helsinki

This panel investigates how the concept of crisis is used in the vocabulary of international politics. It discusses what kinds of events are constituted as crisis and how these are to be analyzed and conceptualized.

11) Linguistic justice and its conceptual underpinnings

Chair: Josep Soler (, Stockholm University

This panel will contribute to the debate on ‘linguistic justice’ and the challenges posed to our understanding of the concept of language in the context of increased citizen mobility and diversity.

CfP: 53rd ITH Conference « Worlds of Labour Turned Upside Down – Revolutions and Labour Relations in Global Historical Perspective », Linz/Upper Austria, 21-23 September 2017

HiSoPo vous informe de la publication de l’appel à communications pour la 53ème International Conference of Labour and Social History (ITH) qui porte sur le thème  » Worlds of Labour Turned Upside Down – Revolutions and Labour Relations in Global Historical Perspective ». La conférence aura lieu du 21 au 23 septembre 2017 à Linz (Autriche).

Call for Papers for the 53rd ITH Conference

« Worlds of Labour Turned Upside Down –

Revolutions and Labour Relations

in Global Historical Perspective« 

21-23 September 2017,
Linz/Upper Austria



After a long quarantine, “revolution” is back as a topic of historiographical debate. The upcoming anniversary of 1917 – arguably one of, if not the most momentous event of the 20 th century – has further fuelled this renewed interest. The reasons for the trend might be sought, on the one hand, in broader contemporary social experiences of crisis – including economic crises, recent upheavals in the Arab world, or movements and governments in Latin America aiming at transformation or even explicitly revolution. On the other hand, internal shifts within the domains of historical studies have made revolutions an attractive object of study again: Under the influence of dynamic debates around “global history” and “transnational perspectives” revolutions have emerged as an obvious object of study for those interested in the circulation of ideas, persons, commodities, practices, etc., as well as the connection between locations.

Taking this fresh attention given to revolutions as a starting point, the ITH Conference 2017 proposes to realign the focus and to discuss the specific interrelation between revolutions and labour relations. This interrelation is, of course, most conspicuous in all those movements and political projects, especially after 1917, in which a shift in ownership and labour relations was explicitly seen as a prime mover of revolutions. Labour relations were, however, not only on the mind of actors who were following Marxist ideas about what constitutes the social. Furthermore, also without an elaborated ideology and programme on labour-related issues, revolutionary processes have always been greatly shaped by the crises and conflicts emerging from the worlds of labour and by the aspirations and agency of labourers. For instance, the revolution of the slaves of Saint-Domingue in 1804 has to be seen as such directly labour-related upheaval (figuring as the iconic example of so many revolts and attempted revolutions by those bound by modern Atlantic chattel slavery). Yet, the importance of all matters of labour can also be seen in more recent events: for example, in a number of labour conflicts during the 2000s that preceded the movements of the Arab spring.

Approaching change within the “worlds of labour”, the conference aims at bringing the renewed interest in revolutions together with the vibrant debates in the field of Global Labour History. The latter has evolved over the last two decades focusing on the analysis of labour relations – emphasizing their diversity and the interrelated co-existence of various forms in the development of modern capitalism. Broadening both the geographical scope of labour history and the notion of “worker” it has set out to include the history of slaves and other unfree labourers, as well as of self-employed, informal,precarious, or unpaid (subsistence) workers. How were revolutions grounded and shaped by this diversity of labour relations? How did different groups of labourers act in and influence revolutionary processes? And, how did these revolutionary transformations determine shifts in the composition of the labour force as well as the shape of labour relations?

Starting from these basic questions about the interrelations of revolutions and labour, the following themes, topics, and lines of enquiry are possible:

Before-&-After-analysis: One line of enquiry can be a systematic analysis of labour relations before, during, and after revolutions. Contributions might analyse both the transformation of labour relations “on the ground” and the changes in the institutional and legal frameworks of labour (such as the introduction of novel labour laws, or, as in some countries after 1918, comprehensive “labour constitutions”). Such papers might focus both on the groups of labourers directly involved in revolutionary struggles or on those not, on groups faring better during or after revolutionary transformations or on those faring worse, on intended changes and unintended consequences.

Labour, Revolution and War: A further dimension which merits attention is the frequent interrelation between war and revolutionary events. As epitomized in the experience of WWI, wars often brought about sharp and enforced changes for labourers, turning workers into soldiers or dictating the militarization of labour. This had multiple repercussions for the whole of society, with the intensified recruitment of women for industrial non-household work being among the most important. As wars and home front policies caused multiple and contradictory shifts along the spectrum of “free” und “unfree” labour, the composition of the industrial workforce as well as the worlds of everyday reproduction, these upheavals both fuelled revolutionary unrest in the wake of wars and, in many cases, cast long shadows on the way labour was organised during revolutionary periods and post- revolutionary societies. It is this interlinkage between “labour under war” and “labour under revolution” which will be at the heart of this line of enquiry.

Microanalysis: A sizeable literature has built up over the last decades allowing unique glimpses at the “big” processes of revolutions by focusing on rather small units either of production (factories, workshops, plantations, households) or community (villages, neighbourhoods). In that, one of the topical issues for researchers about revolutions in the 20 th century is the self-organisation of workers, peasants, and other groups in councils, soviets, or committees. Which insights do these approaches allow on the ways labour relations have been transformed and re-arranged during revolutionary periods? How did local issues and labour grievances connect to more overarching revolutionary themes? Which interrelations between female reproductive and subsistence labour on the one hand, and out-of-household labour on the other hand, can be observed during revolutionary periods? In which ways did the gendered division of labour interact with revolutionary processes?

Tele-connections: Papers in this line of enquiry might, for one, analyse translocal connections between actors in different localities, e.g. the (seasonal) migration of labourers during revolutionary periods and its repercussions, or the active solidarities between actors considering themselves to be revolutionaries. At the same time, they might also focus on transhistorical connections between revolutions by analysing how actors in revolutions referred to previous examples, e.g. how actors during 1917 referred to 1789 in its vision of social transformation of labour.

Revolution as labour: Revolutions have generated a specific type of social actor – those living for and from revolutionary activity. From intellectual instigator to political orator, soldier to activist, or emissary to spy, this line of enquiry will analyse the conditions, forms, and changing characteristics of those making a living while or through being dedicated or enlisted to revolutionary activity.

Thinking revolution and labour relations: The interrelation of revolutions and labour relations is also shaped by the ways actors (both of the time and subsequently) have reflected upon and intervened regarding this relation. What were the aspirations revolutionary actors had about labour relations? How did after-the-event interpretations – by activists, intellectuals, or, more specifically, historians – conceive this interrelation? Did they highlight specific factors, such as technological change or the role of ideology?

While this list is not exhaustive and the organizers are open to all proposals connecting to the general topic of the conference, this conference particularly seeks to encourage papers which use comparative approaches (both synchronic and diachronic) or point to
connections between places and actors apart. The conference encourages papers covering all world-regions and going beyond the well-known array of “classical” revolutions. The organizers also encourage a long global-historical perspective and the conference is open to papers on different periods. This includes the more remote
processes and events in early modern period or the transformations around 1989 and beyond, as long as they stick to the focus on the interrelation of revolutions and labour relations in an original way. The conference will also explicitly use the notion of larger transnational “cycles of revolution” presupposing the existence of interconnected clusters of revolutions affecting different regions at the same time.

This conference will be organized in a spirit that expressly acknowledges the fundamentally contested nature of all revolutions (both among actors of the time and subsequent historians). It adheres to a rather broad notion of “revolution” – including failed or attempted revolutions, revolutionary situations, as well as those imposed from above or through war. It nevertheless insists that the debate is on condensed (and relatively short) processes of crises, conflict, and change. The conference’s focus thus remains on cases where there was both an element of (political) transition and one of (social) transformation. While this encourages papers on, for instance, the interrelations between decolonization and labour relations, other instances in which the notion of “revolution” is common to denote processes of deep transformation (such as “industrial revolution”, “Fordist revolution”, “neoliberal revolution”, etc.) will not be at the centre of interest.


Proposed papers should include:

  • abstract (max. 300 words)
  • biographical note (max. 200 words)
  • full address und e-mail address

Proposals to be sent to Lukas Neissl:


Submission of proposals: by 29 January 2017
Notification of acceptance: 1 March 2017
Full papers or presentation versions: by 20 August 2017


Tamás Krausz, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest
Ragnheiður Kristjánsdóttir, University of Iceland, Reykjavík
Marcel van der Linden, International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam
David Mayer, ITH, Vienna
Stefan Müller, Friedrich Ebert Foundation, Bonn
Goran Musić, Centre for Southeast European Studies, University of Graz
Lukas Neissl, ITH, Vienna
Felix Wemheuer, University of Cologne

Vous pouvez également télécharger l’appel à communications en format PDF en langue anglaise (ith_cfp_2017_en-1) ou allemande (ith_cfp_2017_de-1).

Colloque « Les révolutions comme discontinuités. Subjectivités, changements politiques et émancipations », Institut d’études avancées de Paris, 4 mai 2016


HiSoPo vous informe de l’organisation du colloque « Les révolutions comme discontinuités. Subjectivités, changements politiques et émancipations ». Ce colloque international organisé par Federico Tarragoni (Université Paris Diderot), avec le soutien de l’IEA de Paris, de l’Université Sorbonne Paris Cité et de l’Institut des Humanités de Paris, aura lieu le 4 mai 2016 à l’Institut d’études avancées de Paris, Hôtel de Lauzun, 17 quai d’Anjou, 75004 Paris.


Les révolutions sont des phénomènes historiques tout à fait singuliers. Loin de pouvoir être abordées comme le simple produit d’un ensemble de causalités linéaires, elles mettent en jeu des possibilités, qui s’apparentent à autant de bifurcations, de discontinuités, de « possibles latéraux » dans le développement des sociétés. Or, hormis quelques exceptions notables, les sciences sociales ont peu relevé les défis radicaux que suppose la prise en compte de ce « régime de discontinuité ».

Le premier défi relève, à proprement parler, de l’historicité, c’est à dire des représentations du temps que les sciences sociales prennent, souvent de manière implicite, à leur compte dans l’explication des phénomènes sociaux. Il s’agit, ni plus ni moins, de se doter d’une réflexivité sur les représentation du temps qui président à l’explication, face à des phénomènes qui défient toute linéarité et, surtout, toute possibilité d’imputation du présent au passé, de l’état révolutionnaire à un ensemble objectivable d’état préalables.

Le deuxième défi relève de l’articulation entre l’échelle structurale et l’échelle subjective. Trop souvent les analyses en sciences sociales et politiques ont fait des révolutions du passé et du présent des « bouleversements des structures socio-politiques », d’où sont étrangement absentes les transformations subjectives des acteurs. Or, considérer les révolutions comme des « discontinuités » suppose de repenser l’articulation entre structures et subjectivités, entre évolutions macro et micro, dans un contexte où les repères de la réalité ne vont plus de soi pour les acteurs. Le troisième enjeu, le plus délicat, tient à la prise en compte des significations politiques qui constituent le soubassement et la trame de toute révolution.

Repenser l’articulation entre « structures » et « subjectivités » suppose de prendre en compte, en introduisant de nouveaux outils conceptuels, les changements de sens que les révolutions produisent dans leurs contextes socio-historiques d’apparition.



9h15 Mots de présentation du porte-parole de l’IEA

9h30 INTRODUCTION: Federico Tarragoni (Maître de conférences en sociologie, Université Paris Diderot)

10h SESSION: « Les révolutions du passé : l’histoire déplacée »

Modérateur: Ch. Walton (Directeur du Centre d’Études sur le XVIIIe siècle à l’Université de Warwick, résident de l’IEA de Paris)

K. M. Baker (Professeur d’histoire moderne de l’Europe, Stanford University, résident de l’IEA de Paris) : « Revolutionizing Revolution »

H. Burstin (Professeur d’histoire moderne, Università degli studi di Milano-Bicocca) : « Réflexions autour du cas de la Révolution Française »

J. Guilhaumou (Directeur de recherche émérite en Sciences du langage, TRIANGLE-CNRS) : « L’historicité des langages de la Révolution française : réflexivité, subjectivité et discontinuité »

P. Serna (Professeur d’histoire de la Révolution française, IHRF/IHMC-Université Paris 1) : « « L’hommanimal » des lumières à la catastrophe racialiste : continuités et ruptures »



14h30 SESSION: « Les révolutions entre passé et présent : perspectives interdisciplinaires »

Modérateur: B. Gobille (Maître de conférences en sciences politiques, ENS-LSH de Lyon)

É. Tassin (Professeur de philosophie politique, LCSP-Université Paris Diderot) : « Comment continuer une interruption ? La triple aporie de la révolution »

S. Wahnich (Directrice de recherche en histoire, TRAM/IIAC-CNRS) : « Les transformations de l’intuition sensible comme expériences de la discontinuité révolutionnaire, 1789-1794, France »

M. Dobry (Professeur de science politique, Université Paris 1) : « Penser les phénomènes révolutionnaires : pourquoi l’hypothèse de continuité ? »

F. Benslama (Professeur d’Études psychanalytiques, CRPMS-Université Paris Diderot) : « Transformations subjectives de la révolution tunisienne »




Pour plus d’informations et si vous souhaitez vous inscrire à l’événement, rendez-vous sur la page dédiée au colloque sur le site de l’IEA.

Séance 6 : Saisir l’événement et le contexte. L’histoire sociale des idées politiques et ses méthodes (02 mai 2016)

La sixième séance du séminaire HiSoPo, intitulée « Saisir l’événement et le contexte. L’histoire sociale des idées politiques et ses méthodes », a eu lieu le lundi 2 mai 2016. Cette séance a été l’occasion d’écouter deux interventions:

  • Samuel Hayat (Chargé de recherche CNRS, CERAPS, Lille), « Étudier les idées en révolution : questions de méthode »
  • Arnault Skornicki (MCF en science politique, Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense/ISP) : « Le Weber de Skinner. Contextualisme et sociologie »

Ces communications ont été suivies d’une discussion collective sur les méthodes en histoire sociale des idées politiques.

La séance a eu lieu le 2 mai 2016, entre 14 et 17h, Salle 24, 27 rue Saint-Guillaume, 75007, Paris.

Vous pouvez écouter l’enregistrement audio de cette séance ici: