You are on page 1of 12

Anthony Giddens Anthony 8 Born January Giddens 1938 (age75) in 2004 London, England University Institutions Sociology Fields

British Nationality England Residence of Leicester University of Cambridge London Alma University mater School of Hull of Economics (BA) London School of Economics (MA) University of theory Structuration Knownfor Cambridge (PhD) The Third Way Risk society Weber Influences Durkheim Sch?tz Merton Goffman Parsons L?vi-Strauss Elias Habermas Archer Influenced sky Anthony Dilthey Giddens, BarleyBeck Baron Bauman Giddens (born 8 January 1938) is a British sociologist wh o is known for his theory of structuration and his holistic view of modern socie ties. He is considered to be one of the most prominent modern sociologists, the author of at least 34 books, published in at least 29 languages, issuing on aver age more than one book every year. In 2007, Giddens was listed as the fifth most -referenced author of books in the humanities.[1][2] Three notable stages can be identified in his academic life. The first one invol ved outlining a new vision of what sociology is, presenting a theoretical and me thodological understanding of that field, based on a critical reinterpretation o f the classics. His major publications of that era include Capitalism and Modern Social Theory (1971) and New Rules of Sociological Method (1976). In the second stage Giddens developed the theory of structuration, an analysis of agency and structure, in which primacy is granted to neither. His works of that period, suc h as Central Problems in Social Theory (1979) and The Constitution of Society (1 984), brought him international fame on the sociological arena. The most recent stage concerns modernity, globalization and politics, especially the impact of modernity on social and personal life. This stage is reflected by his critique of postmodernity, and discussions of a new "utopian-realist"[3] th ird way in politics, visible in the Consequences of Modernity (1990), Modernity and Self-Identity (1991), The Transformation of Intimacy (1992), Beyond Left and Right (1994) and The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy (1998). Giddens ' ambition is both to recast social theory and to re-examine our understanding o f the development and trajectory of modernity. Giddens served as Director of the London School of Economics 1997 2003, where he i s now Emeritus Professor. Contents * 1 Biography * 2 Work o 2.1 Overview o 2.2 The nature of sociology o 2.3 Structuration o 2.4 Connections between micro and macro o 2.5 Self-identity o 2.6 Modernity o 2.7 The Third Way * 3 Outside consultancies * 4 Theory of 'reflexitivity' * 5 Select bibliography * 6 References o 6.1 Video clips * 7 Further reading * 8 External links o 8.1 Selected interviews Biography Giddens was born and raised in Edmonton, London, and grew up in a lower-middle-c lass family, son of a clerk with London Transport; he attended Minchenden School .[4] He was the first member of his family to go to university. Giddens received his undergraduate academic degree (in joint sociology and psychology) at Hull U niversity in 1959, followed by a Master's degree at the London School of Economi cs. He later gained a PhD at King's College, Cambridge. In 1961, he started work ing at the University of Leicester where he taught social psychology. At Leicest

Fo

er considered to be one of the seedbeds of British sociology he met Norbert Elia s and began to work on his own theoretical position. In 1969, he was appointed t o a position at the University of Cambridge, where he later helped create the So cial and Political Sciences Committee (SPS now PPSIS), a sub-unit of the Faculty of Economics. Giddens worked for many years at Cambridge as a fellow of King's College and was eventually promoted to a full professorship in 1987. He is cofounder of Polity Press (1985). From 1997 to 2003, he was director of the London School of Economi cs and a member of the Advisory Council of the Institute for Public Policy Resea rch. He was also an adviser to former British Prime Minister Tony Blair; it was Giddens whose "third way" political approach has been Tony Blair's guiding polit ical idea. He has been a vocal participant in British political debates, support ing the centre-left Labour Party with media appearances and articles (many of wh ich are published in New Statesman). He was given a life peerage in June 2004, a s Baron Giddens, of Southgate in the London Borough of Enfield and sits in the H ouse of Lords for Labour. Giddens also holds 15 honorary degrees from various un iversities.[5] Work Overview * Theory Outline Sociology * Positivism History * Antipositivism * Functionalism * Conflict theories * Middle-range * Mathematical * Critical theory * Socialization Research * Structure Quantitative methods and agency * Qualitative * Historical * Computational * Ethnographic * Change Topics Network-analytic * Cities * Class * Crime * Culture * Development * Deviance * Demography * Education * Economy * Environment * Family * Gender * Health * Industry * Internet * Knowledge * Law * Literature * Medicine * Mobility * Movements * Networks * Organizations * Politics * Race & ethnicity * Religion

* Science * Soc. psychology * Portal Browse Stratification * List of sociologists * List of criminologists * v Article index * t * e Giddens, the author of over 34 books and 200 articles, essays and reviews, has c ontributed and written about most notable developments in the area of social sci ences, with the exception of research design and methods. He has written comment aries on most leading schools and figures and has used most sociological paradig ms in both micro and macrosociology. His writings range from abstract, metatheor etical problems to very direct and 'down-to-earth' textbooks for students. Final ly, he is also known for his interdisciplinary approach: he has commented not on ly on the developments in sociology, but also in anthropology, archaeology, psyc hology, philosophy, history, linguistics, economics, social work and most recent ly, political science. In view of his knowledge and works, one may view much of his life's work as a form of 'grand synthesis' of sociological theory. The nature of sociology Before 1976, most of Giddens' writings offered critical commentary on a wide ran ge of writers, schools and traditions. Giddens took a stance against the then-do minant structural functionalism (represented by Talcott Parsons, exponent of Max Weber), as well as criticizing evolutionism and historical materialism. In Capi talism and Modern Social Theory (1971), he examined the work of Weber, Durkheim and Marx, arguing that despite their different approaches each was concerned wit h the link between capitalism and social life. Giddens emphasised the social con structs of power, modernity and institutions, defining sociology as: "the study of social institutions brought into being by the industrial transform ation In Newof Rules the of past Sociological two or three Method centuries." (1976) (the title of which alludes to Durkhe im's Rules of the Sociological Method of 1895), Giddens attempted to explain 'ho w sociology should be done' and addressed a long-standing divide between those t heorists who prioritise 'macro level' studies of social life looking at the 'big picture' of society and those who emphasise the 'micro level' what everyday lif e means to individuals. In New Rules... he noted that the functionalist approach , invented by Durkheim, treated society as a reality unto itself, not reducible to individuals. He rejected Durkheim's sociological positivism paradigm, which a ttempted to predict how societies operate, ignoring the meanings as understood b y individuals.[6] Giddens noted: "Society only has form, and that form only has effects on people, insofar as str ucture He contrasted is produced Durkheim and with reproduced Weber's inapproach what people interpretative do".[7] sociology focused on understanding agency and motives of individuals. Giddens is closer to Weber tha n Durkheim, but in his analysis he rejects both of those approaches, stating tha t while society is not a collective reality, nor should the individual be treate d as the central unit of analysis.[6] Rather he uses the logic of hermeneutic tradition (from interpretative sociology ) to argue for the importance of agency in sociological theory, claiming that hu man social actors are always to some degree knowledgeable about what they are do ing. Social order is therefore a result of some pre-planned social actions, not automatic evolutionary response. Sociologists, unlike natural scientists, have t o interpret a social world which is already interpreted by the actors that inhab it it. According to Giddens there is a "Duality of structure" by which social pr actice, which is the principal unit of investigation, has both a structural and an agency-component. The structural environment constrains individual behaviour, but also makes it possible. He also noted the existence of a specific form of a social cycle: once sociological concepts are formed, they filter back into ever yday world and change the way people think. Because social actors are reflexive and monitor the ongoing flow of activities and structural conditions, they adapt their actions to their evolving understandings. As a result, social scientific knowledge of society will actually change human activities. Giddens calls this t wo-tiered, interpretive and dialectical relationship between social scientific k

nowledge and human practices the "double hermeneutic". Giddens also stressed the importance of power, which is means to ends, and hence is directly involved in the actions of every person. Power, the transformative capacity of people to change the social and material world, is closely shaped by knowledge and space-time.[8] In New Rules... Giddens specifically wrote[9] that: * Sociology is not about a 'pre-given' universe of objects, the universe is bein g constituted or produced by the active doings of subjects. * The production and reproduction of society thus has to be treated as a skilled performance on the part of its members. * The realm of human agency is bounded. Individuals produce society, but they do so as historically located actors, and not under conditions of their own choosi ng. * Structures must be conceptualized not only as constraints upon human agency, b ut also as enablers. * Processes of structuration involve an interplay of meanings, norms and power. * The sociological observer cannot make social life available as 'phenomenon' fo r observation independently of drawing upon his knowledge of it as a resource wh ereby he constitutes it as a 'topic for investigation'. * Immersion in a form of life is the necessary and only means whereby an observe r is able to generate such characterizations. * Sociological concepts thus obey a double hermeneutic. * In sum, the primary tasks of sociological analysis are the following: (1) The hermeneutic explication and mediation of divergent forms of life within descript ive metalanguages of social science; (2) Explication of the production and repro duction of society as the accomplished outcome of human agency. Structuration For more details on this topic, see Theory of structuration. Giddens' theory of structuration explores the question of whether it is individu als or social forces that shape our social reality. He eschews extreme positions , arguing that although people are not entirely free to choose their own actions , and their knowledge is limited, they nonetheless are the agency which reproduc es the social structure and leads to social change. His ideas find an echo in th e philosophy of the modernist poet Wallace Stevens who suggests that we live in the tension between the shapes we take as the world acts upon us, and the ideas of order that our imagination imposes upon the world. Giddens writes that the co nnection between structure and action is a fundamental element of social theory, structure and agency are a duality that cannot be conceived of apart from one a nother and his main argument is contained in his expression "duality of structur e". At a basic level, this means that people make society, but are at the same t ime constrained by it. Action and structure cannot be analysed separately, as st ructures are created, maintained and changed through actions, while actions are given meaningful form only through the background of the structure: the line of causality runs in both directions making it impossible to determine what is chan ging what. In Giddens own words (from New rules...): "social structures are both constituted by human agency, and yet at the same tim e are In this the regard very he medium defines of this structures constitution."[10] as consisting of rules and resources involv ing human action: the rules constrain the actions, the resources make it possibl e. He also differentiates between systems and structures. Systems display struct ural properties but are not structures themselves. He notes in his article Funct ionalism: apr?s la lutte (1976) that: "To examine the structuration of a social system is to examine the modes whereby that system, through the application of generative rules and resources is produ ced and This process reproduced of structures in social (re)producing interaction."[10] systems is called structuration. System s here mean to Giddens "the situated activities of human agents"[10] (The Consti tution of Society.) and "the patterning of social relations across space-time"[1 0] (ibid.). Structures are then "...sets of rules and resources that individual actors draw upon in the practices that reproduce social systems "[11] (Politics, S ociology and Social Theory) and "systems of generative rules and sets, implicate d in the articulation of social systems"[10] (The Constitution of Society.), exi

sting virtually "out of time and out of space"[10] (New rules....). Structuratio n therefore means that relations that took shape in the structure, can exist "ou t of time and place": in other words, independent of the context in which they a re created. An example is the relationship between a teacher and a student: when they come across each other in another context, say on the street, the hierarch y between them is still preserved. Structure can act as a constraint on action, but it also enables action by provi ding common frames of meaning. Consider the example of language: structure of la nguage is represented by the rules of syntax that rule out certain combinations of words.[6] But the structure also provides rules that allow new actions to occ ur, enabling us to create new, meaningful sentences.[6] Structures should not be conceived as "simply placing constrains upon human agency, but as enabling."[9] (New rules....) Giddens suggests that structures (traditions, institutions, mor al codes, and other sets of expectations established ways of doing things) are g enerally quite stable, but can be changed, especially through the unintended con sequences of action, when people start to ignore them, replace them, or reproduc e them differently. Thus, actors (agents) employ the social rules appropriate to their culture, ones that they have learned through socialisation and experience. These rules togeth er with the resources at their disposal are used in social interactions. Rules a nd resources employed in this manner are not deterministic, but are applied refl exively by knowledgeable actors, albeit that actors awareness may be limited to t he specifics of their activities at any given time. Thus, the outcome of action is not totally predictable. Connections between micro and macro Structuration is very useful in synthesizing micro and macro issues. On a micro scale, one of individuals' internal sense of self and identity, consider the exa mple of a family: we are increasingly free to choose our own mates and how to re late with them, which creates new opportunities but also more work, as the relat ionship becomes a reflexive project that has to be interpreted and maintained. Y et this micro-level change cannot be explained only by looking at the individual level as people did not spontaneously change their minds about how to live; nei ther can we assume they were directed to do so by social institutions and the st ate. On a macro scale, one of the state and social organizations like multinational c apitalist corporations, consider the example of globalization, which offers vast new opportunities for investment and development, but crises like the Asian fin ancial crisis can affect the entire world, spreading far outside the local setti ng in which they first developed, and last but not least directly influences ind ividuals. A serious explanation of such issues must lie somewhere within the net work of macro and micro forces. These levels should not be treated as unconnecte d; in fact they have significant relation to one another.[6] In order to illustrate this relationship, Giddens discusses changing attitudes t owards marriage in developed countries.[12] He claims that any effort to explain this phenomenon solely in terms of micro or macro level causes will result in a circular cause and consequence. Social relationships and visible sexuality (mic ro-level change) are related to the decline of religion and the rise of rational ity (macro-level change), but also with changes in the laws relating to marriage and sexuality (macro), change caused by different practices and changing attitu des on the level of everyday lives (micro). Practices and attitudes in turn can be affected by social movements (for example, women's liberation and egalitarian ism), a macro-scale phenomena; but the movements usually grow out of everyday li fe grievances a micro-scale phenomenon.[6] All of this is increasingly tied in with mass media, one of our main providers o f information. The media do not merely reflect the social world but also activel y shape it, being central to modern reflexivity.[6] David Gauntlett writes in Me dia, Gender and Identity that: "The importance of the media in propagating many modern lifestyles should be obv ious. [...] The range of lifestyles or lifestyle ideals offered by the media may be limited, but at the same time it is usually broader than those we would expe

ct to just 'bump into' in everyday life. So the media in modernity offers possib ilities and celebrates diversity, but also offers narrow interpretations of cert ain roles Another example or lifestyles explored by depending Giddens is where theyou emergence look."[6] of romantic love, which Gid dens (The Transformation of Intimacy) links with the rise of the 'narrative of t he self' type of self-identity: "Romantic love introduced the idea of a narrativ e into an individual's life."[13] Although history of sex clearly demonstrates t hat passion and sex are not modern phenomena, the discourse of romantic love is said to have developed from the late 18th century. Romanticism, the 18th and 19t h century European macro-level cultural movement is responsible for the emergenc e of the novel a relatively early form of mass media. The growing literacy and p opularity of novels fed back into the mainstream lifestyle and the romance novel proliferated the stories of ideal romantic life narratives on a micro-level, gi ving the romantic love an important and recognised role in the marriage-type rel ationship. Consider also the transformation of intimacy. Giddens asserts that intimate soci al relationships have become 'democratised', so that the bond between partners e ven within a marriage has little to do with external laws, regulations or social expectations, but is based on the internal understanding between two people a t rusting bond based on emotional communication. Where such a bond ceases to exist , modern society is generally happy for the relationship to be dissolved. Thus w e have 'a democracy of the emotions in everyday life' (Runaway World, 1999).[7] Inevitably, Giddens concludes that all social change stems from a mixture of mic ro- and macro-level forces. Self-identity Giddens says that in the post-traditional order, self-identity is reflexive. It is not a quality of a moment, but an account of a person's life. Giddens writes (Modernity and Self-Identity: 54) that "A person's identity is not to be found in behaviour, nor important though this is in the reactions of others, but in the capacity to keep a particular narrativ e going. The individual's biography, if she is to maintain regular interaction w ith others in the day-to-day world, cannot be wholly fictive. It must continuall y integrate events which occur in the external world, and sort them into the ong More oing than 'story' ever about before thewe self."[6][7] have access to information that allows us to reflect on the causes and consequences of our actions. At the same time we are faced with dangers related to unintended consequences of our actions and by our reliance on the knowledge of experts. We create, maintain and revise a set of biographical narratives, social roles and lifestyles the story of who we are, and how we came to be where we are now. We are increasingly free to choose what we want to do a nd who we want to be (although Giddens contends that wealth gives access to more options). But increased choice can be both liberating and troubling. Liberating in the sense of increasing the likelihood of one's self-fulfillment, and troubl ing in form of increased emotional stress and time needed to analyse the availab le choices and minimise risk of which we are increasingly aware (what Giddens su ms up as "manufacturing uncertainty"). While in earlier, traditional societies w e would be provided with that narrative and social role, in the post-traditional society we are usually forced to create one ourselves. As Giddens (Modernity an d Self-Identity: 70) puts it: "What to do? How to act? Who to be? These are focal questions for everyone livin g in circumstances of late modernity and ones which, on some level or another, a Modernity ll of us answer, either discursively or through day-to-day social behaviour."[7] Giddens' recent work has been concerned with the question of what is characteris tic about social institutions in various points of history. Giddens agrees that there are very specific changes that mark our current era, but argues that it is not a "post-modern era", but just a "radicalised modernity era" (similar to Zyg munt Bauman's concept of liquid modernity), produced by the extension of the sam e social forces that shaped the previous age. Giddens nonetheless differentiates between pre-modern, modern and late (high) modern societies and doesn't dispute that important changes have occurred but takes a neutral stance towards those c hanges, saying that it offers both unprecedented opportunities and unparalleled dangers. He also stresses that we haven't really gone beyond modernity. It's jus

t a developed, detraditionalized, radicalised, 'late' modernity. Thus the phenom ena that some have called 'postmodern' are to Giddens nothing more than the most extreme instances of a developed modernity.[6] Along with Ulrich Beck and Scott Lash, he endorses the term reflexive modernization as a more accurate descripti on of the processes associated with the second modernity, since it opposes itsel f (in its earlier version) instead of opposing traditionalism, endangering the v ery institutions it created (such as the national state, the political parties o r the nuclear family). Giddens concentrates on a contrast between traditional (pre-modern) culture and post-traditional (modern) culture. In traditional societies, individual actions need not to be extensively thought about, because available choices are already predetermined (by the customs, traditions, etc.).[6] In contrast, in post-tradit ional society people (actors, agents) are much less concerned with the precedent s set by earlier generations, and they have more choices, due to flexibility of law and public opinion.[6] This however means that individual actions now requir e more analysis and thought before they are taken. Society is more reflexive and aware, something Giddens is fascinated with, illustrating it with examples rang ing from state governance to intimate relationships.[6] Giddens examines three r ealms in particular: the experience of identity, connections of intimacy and pol itical institutions.[6] The most defining property of modernity, according to Giddens, is that we are di sembedded from time and space. In pre-modern societies, space was the area in wh ich one moved, time was the experience one had while moving. In modern societies , however, the social space is no longer confined by the boundaries set by the s pace in which one moves. One can now imagine what other spaces look like, even i f he has never been there. In this regard, Giddens talks about virtual space and virtual time. Another distinctive property of modernity lies in the field of kn owledge. In pre-modern societies, it was the elders who possessed the knowledge: they wer e definable in time and space. In modern societies we must rely on expert system s. These are not present in time and space, but we must trust them. Even if we t rust them, we know that something could go wrong: there's always a risk we have to take. Also the technologies which we use, and which transform constraints int o means, hold risks. Consequently, there is always a heightened sense of uncerta inty in contemporary societies. It is also in this regard that Giddens uses the image of a 'juggernaut': modernity is said to be like an unsteerable juggernaut traveling through space. Humanity tries to steer it, but as long as the modern institutions, with all the ir uncertainty, endure, we will never be able to influence its course. The uncer tainty can however be managed, by 'reembedding' the expert-systems into the stru ctures which we are accustomed to. Another characteristic is enhanced reflexivity, both at the level of individuals and at the level of institutions. The latter requires an explanation: in modern institutions there is always a component which studies the institutions themsel ves for the purpose of enhancing its effectiveness. This enhanced reflexivity wa s enabled as language became increasingly abstract with the transition from premodern to modern societies, becoming institutionalised into universities. It is also in this regard that Giddens talks about "double hermeneutica": every action has two interpretations. One is from the actor himself, the other of the invest igator who tries to give meaning to the action he is observing. The actor who pe rforms the action, however, can get to know the interpretation of the investigat or, and therefore change his own interpretation, or his further line of action. This is the reason that positive science, according to Giddens,[citation needed] is never possible in the social sciences: every time an investigator tries to i dentify causal sequences of action, the actors can change their further line of action. The problem is, however, that conflicting viewpoints in social science r esult in a disinterest of the people. For example, when scientists don't agree a bout the greenhouse-effect, people will withdraw from that arena, and deny that there is a problem. Therefore, the more the sciences expand, the more uncertaint y there is in the modern society. In this regard, the juggernaut gets even more

steerless. While emancipatory politics is a politics of life chances, life politics is a po litics of lifestyle. Life politics is the politics of a reflexively mobilised or der the system of late modernity which, on an individual and collective level, h as radically altered the existential parameters of social activity. It is a poli tics of self-actualisation in a reflexively ordered environment, where that refl exivity links self and body to systems of global scope ... Life politics concern s political issues which flow from processes of self-actualisation in post-tradi tional contexts, where globalising influences intrude deeply into the reflexive project of the self, and conversely where processes of self-realisation influenc e global strategies. Anthony Giddens Modernity and self-identity. Self and society in the late modern age 1991, [14] In A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism, Giddens concludes[10] that : 1. There exists no necessary overall mechanism of social change, no universal mo tor of history such as class conflict; 2. There are no universal stages, or periodization, of social development, these being ruled out by intersocietal systems and "time-space edges" (the ever-prese nce of exogenous variables), as well as by human agency and the inherent "histor icity" of societies; 3. Societies do not have needs other than those of individuals, so notions such as adaptation cannot properly be applied to them; 4. Pre-capitalist societies are class-divided, but only with capitalism are ther e class societies in which there is endemic class conflict, the separation of th e political and economic spheres, property freely alienable as capital, and "fre e" labour and labour markets; 5. While class conflict is integral to capitalist society, there is no teleology that guarantees the emergence of the working class as the universal class and n o ontology that justifies denial of the multiple bases of modern society represe nted by capitalism, industrialism, bureaucratisation, surveillance and industria lization of warfare; 6. Sociology, as a subject concerned pre-eminently with modernity, addresses a r eflexive reality. The Third Way In the age of late and reflexive modernity and post scarcity economy, the politi cal science is being transformed. Giddens notes that there is a possibility that "life politics" (the politics of self-actualisation) may become more visible th an "emancipatory politics" (the politics of inequality); that new social movemen ts may lead to more social change than political parties; and that the reflexive project of the self and changes in gender and sexual relations may lead the way , via the "democratisation of democracy", to a new era of Habermasian "dialogic democracy" in which differences are settled, and practices ordered, through disc ourse rather than violence or the commands of authority.[10] Giddens, relying on his past familiar themes of reflexivity and system integrati on, which places people into new relations of trust and dependency with each oth er and their governments, argues that the political concepts of 'left' and 'righ t' are now breaking down, as a result of many factors, most centrally the absenc e of a clear alternative to capitalism and the eclipse of political opportunitie s based on the social class in favour of those based on lifestyle choices. In his most recent works, Giddens moves away from explaining how things are to t he more demanding attempt of advocacy about how they ought to be. In "Beyond Lef t and Right" (1994) Giddens criticizes market socialism and constructs a six poi nt framework for a reconstituted radical politics:[10] 1. repair damaged solidarities 2. recognize the centrality of life politics 3. accept that active trust implies generative politics 4. embrace dialogic democracy 5. rethink the welfare state 6. confront violence

The Third Way (1998) provides the framework within which the 'third way' - which Giddens also terms the 'radical centre'[15] - is justified. In addition, The Th ird Way supplies a broad range of policy proposals aimed at what Giddens calls t he 'progressive centre-left' in British politics. According to Giddens: "the overall aim of third way politics should be to help citizens pilot their wa y through the major revolutions of our time: globalisation, transformations in p ersonal remains Giddens life andfairly our relationship optimistic about to nature".[10] the future of humanity: "There is no single agent, group or movement that, as Marx's proletariat was sup posed to do, can carry the hopes of humanity, but there are many points of polit ical engagement which offer good cause for optimism".[10] (Beyond Left and Right Giddens discards the possibility of a single, comprehensive, all-connecting ideo ) logy or political programme. Instead he advocates going after the 'small picture s', ones people can directly affect at their home, workplace or local community. This, to Giddens, is a difference between pointless utopianism and useful utopi an realism,[3] which he defines as envisaging "alternative futures whose very pr opagation might help them be realised".[10] (The Consequences of Modernity). By 'utopian' he means that this is something new and extraordinary, and by 'realist ic' he stresses that this idea is rooted in the existing social processes and ca n be viewed as their simple extrapolation. Such a future has at its centre a mor e socialized, demilitarised and planetary-caring global world order variously ar ticulated within green, women's and peace movements, and within the wider democr atic movement.[10] Outside consultancies Main article: LSE Gaddafi links On two visits to Libya in 2006 and 2007, organized by the Boston-based consultan cy firm, Monitor Group, Giddens met with Muammar al-Gaddafi. Giddens has decline d to comment on the financial compensation he received.[16] The Guardian reporte d in March 2011, that Libya's government engaged Monitor Group as advisor on mat ters of public relations. Monitor Group allegedly received 2 million pounds in r eturn for undertaking a "cleansing campaign" in order to improve Libya's image. In a letter to Abdullah Senussi, a high-ranking Libyan official in July 2006, Mo nitor Group reported that: We will create a network map to identify significant figures engaged or interest ed in Libya today ... We will identify and encourage journalists, academics and contemporary thinkers who will have interest in publishing papers and articles o n Libya ... We are delighted that after a number of conversations, Lord Giddens has now accepted our invitation to visit Libya in July.[16] Giddens' first visit to Libya resulted in articles in the New Statesman, El Pa?s and La Repubblica,[16] where he argued that the country had been dramatically t ransformed. In the New Statesman he wrote: "Gaddafi's 'conversion' may have been driven partly by the wish to escape sanctions, but I get the strong sense it is authentic and there is a lot of motive power behind it. Saif Gaddafi is a drivi ng force behind the rehabilitation and potential modernisation of Libya. Gaddafi Sr, however, is authorising these processes."[16] During the second visit, Moni tor Group organized a panel of "three thinkers" Giddens, Gaddafi, and Benjamin B arber, author of Jihad vs. McWorld chaired by Sir David Frost.[17] Giddens remarked of his meetings with Gaddafi, "You usually get about half an ho ur with a political leader," he recalls. "My conversation lasts for more than th ree. Gaddafi is relaxed and clearly enjoys intellectual conversation. He likes t he term 'third way because his own political philosophy is a version of this idea . He makes many intelligent and perceptive points. I leave enlivened and encoura ged." Theory of 'reflexitivity' Giddens introduces 'reflexivity' and in information societies, information gathe ring is considered as a routinized process for the greater protection of the nat ion. Information gathering is known as the concept of 'individuation.' Individua lity comes as a result of individuation as people are given more 'informed choic es.' The more information the government has about a person, the more entitlemen ts are given to the citizens. The process of information gathering helps governm ent to identify 'enemies-of-the-state,' singling out individuals that are suspic

ious of plotting activities against the state. The advent of technology has brou ght national security to complete new level. Historically, the military relied o n armed force to deal with threats. With the development of ICT, biometric scans , language translation, real time programs and other related intelligent program s have made the identification of terrorist activities much easier compared to t he past. The analyzing of algorithm patterns in biometric databases have given g overnment new leads. Data about citizens can be collected through identification and credential verification companies. Hence, surveillance and ICT goes hand-in -hand with information gathering. In other words, the collection of information is necessary as 'stringent safeguards' for the protection of the nation, prevent ing it from imminent attacks. Select bibliography Anthony Giddens is the author of over 34 books and 200 articles. This is a selec tion of some of the most important of his works: * Giddens, Anthony (1971) Capitalism and Modern Social Theory. An Analysis of th e writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press . * Giddens, Anthony (1973) The Class Structure of the Advanced Societies. London: Hutchinson. * Giddens, Anthony (1976) Functionalism: apres la lutte, Social Research, 43, 32 5-66 * Giddens, Anthony (1976) New Rules of Sociological Method: a Positive Critique of interpretative Sociologies. London: Hutchinson. * Giddens, Anthony (1977) Studies in Social and Political Theory. London: Hutchin son. * Giddens, Anthony (1978) Durkheim. London: Fontana Modern Masters. * Giddens, Anthony (1979) Central problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure an d Contradiction in Social Analysis. London: Macmillan. * Giddens, Anthony (1981) A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism. Vol . 1. Power, Property and the State. London: Macmillan. * Giddens, Anthony (1982) Sociology: a Brief but Critical Introduction. London: M acmillan. * Giddens, Anthony (1982) Profiles and Critiques in Social Theory. London: Macmil lan. * Giddens, Anthony & Mackenzie, Gavin (Eds.) (1982) Social Class and the Divisio n of Labour. Essays in Honour of Ilya Neustadt. Cambridge: Cambridge University P ress. * Giddens, Anthony (1984) The Constitution of Society. Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity (publisher). * Giddens, Anthony (1985) A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism. Vol . 2. The Nation State and Violence. Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (1990) The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (1991) Modernity and Self-Identity. Self and Society in the L ate Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (1992) The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Er oticism in Modern Societies. Cambridge: Polity. * Beck, Ulrich & Giddens, Anthony & Lash, Scott (1994) Reflexive Modernization. Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order. Cambridge: Polity. the Future of Radical Politics. * Giddens, Anthony (1994) Beyond Left and Right Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (1995) Politics, Sociology and Social Theory: Encounters with Classical and Contemporary Social Thought. Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (1996) In Defence of Sociology. Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (1996) Durkheim on Politics and the State. Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (1998) The Third Way. The Renewal of Social Democracy. Cambri dge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (1999) Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Live s. London: Profile. * Hutton, Will & Giddens, Anthony (Eds.) (2000) On The Edge. Living with Global Capitalism. London: Vintage.

* Giddens, Anthony (2000) The Third Way and Its Critics. Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (2000) Runaway World. London: Routledge. * Giddens, Anthony (Ed.) (2001) The Global Third Way Debate. Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (2002) Where Now for New Labour? Cambridge: Polity (publisher) . * Giddens, Anthony (Ed.) (2003) The Progressive Manifesto. New Ideas for the Cen tre-Left. Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (Ed.) (2005) The New Egalitarianism Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (2006) Sociology (Fifth Edition). Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (2007) Europe In The Global Age. Cambridge: Polity * Giddens, Anthony (2007) Over to You, Mr Brown - How Labour Can Win Again. Camb ridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (2009) The Politics of Climate Change. Cambridge: Polity * Giddens, Anthony (2009) Sociology (Sixth Edition). Cambridge: Polity. * Giddens, Anthony (2013) Sociology (Seventh Edition). Cambridge: Polity. References 1. ^ Gill, J. (2009) Giddens trumps Marx but French thinkers triumph, Times High er Education, 26 March 2009 2. ^ Times Higher Education Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007, Times Higher Education, 26 March 2009. 3. ^ a b David Halpin, Hope and Education: The Role of the Utopian Imagination, Routledge, 2003, ISBN 0-415-23368-2, Google Print p.63 4. ^ "The Lecturer: Anthony Giddens". The Reith Lectures. BBC. 1999. Retrieved 2 009-11-24. 5. ^ LSE profile 6. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Resources at Theory.org.uk, site by David Gaunt lett, last accessed on 19 February 2006 7. ^ a b c d David Gauntlett, Media Gender and Identity, Routledge, 2002. ISBN 0 -415-18960-8. About Giddens' work on modernity and self-identity. Google Print 8. ^ Anthony Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, University of California Pr ess, 1987, ISBN 0-520-06039-3, p.7 Google Print 9. ^ a b Stjepan Mestrovic, Anthony Giddens: The Last Modernist, New York: Routl edge, 1998, ISBN 0-415-09572-7, p.47 Google Prinet 10. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m George Ritzer (ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Major Contemporary Social Theorists, Blackwell Publishing, 2003, ISBN 1-4051-059 5-X, Google Print 11. ^ John D. Bone, The Social Map & The Problem of Order: A Re-evaluation of Hom o Sociologicus , Theory & Science (2005), ISSN 1527-5558, online 12. ^ Giddens, Anthony (1999), Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives. London: Profile. 13. ^ David R. Shumway, Modern Love: Romance, Intimacy, and the Marriage Crisis, NYU Press, 2003, ISBN 0-8147-9831-4, Google Print 14. ^ Giddens, Anthony (1991), 'Modernity and self-identity. Self and society in the late modern age' Cambridge (Polity Press), 214 15. ^ Giddens, Anthony (1998). The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy. P olity Press, pp. 44 46. ISBN 978-0-7456-2267-1. 16. ^ a b c d Syal, Rajeev; Vasagar, Jeevan (5 March 2011). "Anthony Giddens' tr ip to see Gaddafi vetted by Libyan intelligence chief". The Guardian (London). 17. ^ Mother Jones article Video clips The Great Debate: What is radical politics today? Discussion with Will Hutton an d Jonathan Pugh, December 2008 Further reading * Christopher G. A. Bryant, David Jary,The Contemporary Giddens: Social Theory in a Globalizing Age, Palgrave Macmillan, 2001, ISBN 0-333-77904-5 * David Held, John B. Thompson, Social Theory of Modern Societies: Anthony Gidden s and his Critics, Cambridge University Press, 1989, ISBN 0-521-27855-4 * Lars Bo Kaspersen, Anthony Giddens - an introduction to a social theorists, Bl ackwell, 2000 * Anthony Giddens, Christopher Pierson, Conversations with Anthony Giddens, Stan

ford University Press, 1999, ISBN 0-8047-3569-7. A starting-point in which Gidde ns explains his work and the sociological principles which underpin it in clear, elegant language.

You might also like