Published Articles by Christopher M J Boyd
New Law Journal, Mar 11, 2016
The effect of current technology on directors’ legal duties.
This article seeks to highlight an old question which has a renewed importance in light of the co... more This article seeks to highlight an old question which has a renewed importance in light of the contemporary domination of emancipatory politics by the human rights discourse. In it I examine the nature of the concept which we call 'human rights' and the objections to its validity which Marxists commonly raise. It pays particular attention to the ambiguity in the Marxist treatment of the human rights discourse, the difference between the general concept and the current liberal conception which dominates, and the role of law where human rights are theorised as legally protected political claims. I argue that the question is more complex than it first appears and that seeking too simple an answer may run the risk of inadvertently replacing Marxist critique with a distinctly a-critical dogmatism
Christopher Boyd examines the protests against Israel that recently took place in Scottish univer... more Christopher Boyd examines the protests against Israel that recently took place in Scottish universities and examines how this activism fits with left politics.
The legitimacy of the state has traditionally been a core element in how we understand the relati... more The legitimacy of the state has traditionally been a core element in how we understand the relationship between individuals and institutions in modernity. Its demise is therefore an important subject of analysis. The concept of globalisation has provided an important theoretical framework which explains many of the profound challenges to the legitimacy, and even existence, of the state. However, this framework risks perpetuating modernity’s tendency towards oversimplification by focusing too much on the state in particular and geopolitics in general, over other sites and processes of governance. The complexities of the problems must be reflected in theories proposing to answer them.
Blog Posts by Christopher M J Boyd
Legal Form: A Forum for Marxist Analysis of Law
Conference Posters by Christopher M J Boyd
With a cornucopia of potential crises to examine, my project focuses on those of labour (typified... more With a cornucopia of potential crises to examine, my project focuses on those of labour (typified by rising global un(der)employment and the precaritisation of work, particularly for migrant workers) and migration. These crises are often framed as failures of international law, and so lead to calls for more, or better, law whether in the form of treaties, monitoring institutions or enforcement mechanisms. My aim, however, is to disrupt this narrative and uncover the role of law in creating and maintaining these crises of labour and migration (in ways which work to the advantage of certain national and class interests) as a method of global governance. What appears to link these two sets of crises, and permit them to be used in the service of these interests, is how they generate, and are in turn sustained by, insecurity and what we may call ‘human superfluity'.
Conference Papers by Christopher M J Boyd
This paper, and my current research, is centred on an investigation into the structure of the glo... more This paper, and my current research, is centred on an investigation into the structure of the global legal order, which it critiques from a Marxian class-analytical perspective. It seeks to contribute to a systematic, coherent and radical theory of the contemporary world order, to address the relationships amongst law, state and economy and to account for the form, content, function and structure of that order. It draws on a number of different traditions of legal, political and economic thought including French Structuralism, World Polity Theory, Third World Approaches to International Law and Pashukanite and Gramscian Marxism.
Taking as its inspiration B.S. Chimni’s proposition that we can conceptualise that order as a “nascent global state” (which is particularly relevant in light of the relatively recent turn from globalisation to constitutionalist language within international legal scholarship to explain its contemporary dynamics), the intention is to create the conceptual space for the strategic integration of insights from domestic legal scholarship which orthodox accounts of International Law do not, or cannot, incorporate.
What is particularly interesting about the turn to constitutionalism is that, from the perspective of Marxian scholarship, an order capable of being discussed using constitutional-law concepts looks very much like a state: a collection of social and legal relationships which, while not necessarily being materialised in traditional nation-state institutions, function to preserve the stability of the social formation and maintain its ideological cohesiveness. To speak of a global state is not necessarily to speak of a supra-national facsimile of the nation-state. Rather than expecting to see the replacement at a structural level of the sovereign state system (not least because ‘replacement’ suggests the move to a post-national constellation, which is not what the most convincing analysis suggests), the project seeks to map its transformation in a manner that facilitates the construction of a global state constituted at the functional level by a network of public and private international institutions operating transnationally in an unstable equilibrium between centralisation and fragmentation.
This blurring of the boundaries between domestic and international is vital. It has the capacity to allow a far more nuanced account of the role and importance of non-state actors in global governance and law-making than found in orthodox scholarship because it recognises the continuity of class relations across borders and throughout hierarchical institutional frameworks and focuses on the individual as the real (even if not formally-recognised) principal social and legal actor.
This paper will examine the conceptual framework necessary for the construction of a coherent, sy... more This paper will examine the conceptual framework necessary for the construction of a coherent, systematic and radical international legal theory, and will argue that a number of important insights into the form, function and content of international law are available from a variety of sources within Marxist scholarship.
Miéville’s work, drawing on amongst other things Pashukanite Marxism and Newstream analyses of indeterminacy, has become a valuable focal point for critical investigation of the form of international law and the immanent connection of legal relationships to structural violence. In addition, the growth of constitutionalist language within international legal scholarship, coupled with Chimni’s conceptualisation of the international legal order as a ‘nascent (imperialist) global state’, not only provides a bridging point between the Marxist and Third World International Law approaches within his work, but also affords an useful opening for radical international legal scholarship to examine and incorporate significant analyses into the function of law supplied by radical domestic theorists.
In light of these two crucial developments, what I will focus on in this paper is how the sort of radical international theory which can be built on these two pillars of critical analysis can account for the way in which the legal form is imbued with content. In particular, I will engage in a Marxian analysis of how the relationship between the global legal and economic apparatuses determines the ways in which relations of class, and dominance and disadvantage become inscribed in international legal discourse and practice.
In doing so, I will seek to highlight some of the contributions to the radical international law project offered by a number of Marxist (legal) theorists who have failed to receive the sort of attention in critical international legal theory which has been enjoyed most recently by Pashukanis. Although the works of these hitherto overlooked theorists (such as Althusser and Poulantzas, amongst others) cannot simply be added wholesale into existing critical international scholarship, I will argue that the careful integration of their conceptual innovations can strengthen and deepen the resultant account.
I am going to talk about the imperial nature of the nascent global state B.S. Chimni describes, a... more I am going to talk about the imperial nature of the nascent global state B.S. Chimni describes, and thus will pay particular attention to the relationship between the global state apparatus and the global capitalist economy. This will engage the question of whether the logic of the global state is to be found in the product of domestic economies (inter)acting internationally, or a direct transnational economy. I will argue that what makes the global state a capitalist state is not primarily the prominence of strong capitalist states or the national- or class-composition of international institutions (and thus the democratic deficit this creates), but instead the position occupied by the state in the global capitalist mode of production: where the function of the state and the interetsts of the TCC coincide it is by reason of the structure of the system itself.
This paper will examine the contemporary left’s account of the form, function and content of law,... more This paper will examine the contemporary left’s account of the form, function and content of law, particularly in relation to the international legal order. In order to do this it will consider left-wing theorisations of the relationships amongst law, the state and the economy. Particular attention will be paid to the current tension within international legal theory surrounding the implications of China Miéville’s formulation of the ‘commodity-form theory of international law’ in light of alternative contemporary Marxian theories and the earlier theorists from whom they draw their inspiration. The focus of this analysis will be on how, and the extent to which, these theories contribute to the formation of a coherent structural analysis of the international legal order.
I will argue that Miéville’s commodity-form theory is a good basis for creating this coherent analysis, but that it has a few important gaps and potential weaknesses, especially in relation to his theorisation of the relationship between law and the state, which can be filled through the addition of insights from other Marxist theorists, particularly B.S. Chimni’s account of the international arena as a ‘nascent global state’, and the structuralism of Luis Althusser and Nicos Poulantzas.
The strength of theorising the international legal order from a left perspective is that it avoids the traditional pitfall of artificial disciplinary distinctions: as Marxian analyses are prevalent within both the domestic and international legal theoretical landscapes, a critical examination from this perspective has the potential to transcend the discontinuity between them and provide insights which are applicable to both arenas, and to the theorisation of law more generally.
This paper will examine the turn to reactionary, security-driven law-making in periods dominated ... more This paper will examine the turn to reactionary, security-driven law-making in periods dominated by the rhetoric of political crisis, particularly in relation to the idea of the rule of law as a restraining and a civilising influence on state action. It will pay particular attention to the recent resurgence of critical scholarship in the disciplines of Security Studies and International Law and the resultant reproblematisation of the relationships among the role and rule of law, politics (both radical and reactionary) and social structures at national, transnational and international levels. While rejecting vulgar reductionism with regard to the relationship between law and powerful political elites and state apparatuses, I will argue that inherent features of the juridical structure mean that we cannot simply see legally-protected human rights as being an external counterpoint to a reactionary politics which is intermeshed with law in ways both structural and immediate.
This paper will examine the security discourse in relation to its presentation of itself as being... more This paper will examine the security discourse in relation to its presentation of itself as being an apolitical and necessary condition for democratic politics, particularly in relation to Loader and Walker's idea of 'axiomatic security' as a civilised and a civilising influence on society. It will pay particular attention to the interrelation between the underlying problematisation of insecurity, the ambiguous role of the state, and the violence contained within the usurpation of civil and human rights principles (and to some extent the primacy of justice itself) by the current hegemony of security arguments grounded in expediency. I will argue that security is at its most political when it presents itself as apolitical, that it is necessarily conservative and that it fails to leave any room, practically or conceptually, for emancipatory politics – whether in the form of human rights or otherwise.
Papers by Christopher M J Boyd
Uploads
Published Articles by Christopher M J Boyd
Blog Posts by Christopher M J Boyd
Conference Posters by Christopher M J Boyd
Conference Papers by Christopher M J Boyd
Taking as its inspiration B.S. Chimni’s proposition that we can conceptualise that order as a “nascent global state” (which is particularly relevant in light of the relatively recent turn from globalisation to constitutionalist language within international legal scholarship to explain its contemporary dynamics), the intention is to create the conceptual space for the strategic integration of insights from domestic legal scholarship which orthodox accounts of International Law do not, or cannot, incorporate.
What is particularly interesting about the turn to constitutionalism is that, from the perspective of Marxian scholarship, an order capable of being discussed using constitutional-law concepts looks very much like a state: a collection of social and legal relationships which, while not necessarily being materialised in traditional nation-state institutions, function to preserve the stability of the social formation and maintain its ideological cohesiveness. To speak of a global state is not necessarily to speak of a supra-national facsimile of the nation-state. Rather than expecting to see the replacement at a structural level of the sovereign state system (not least because ‘replacement’ suggests the move to a post-national constellation, which is not what the most convincing analysis suggests), the project seeks to map its transformation in a manner that facilitates the construction of a global state constituted at the functional level by a network of public and private international institutions operating transnationally in an unstable equilibrium between centralisation and fragmentation.
This blurring of the boundaries between domestic and international is vital. It has the capacity to allow a far more nuanced account of the role and importance of non-state actors in global governance and law-making than found in orthodox scholarship because it recognises the continuity of class relations across borders and throughout hierarchical institutional frameworks and focuses on the individual as the real (even if not formally-recognised) principal social and legal actor.
Miéville’s work, drawing on amongst other things Pashukanite Marxism and Newstream analyses of indeterminacy, has become a valuable focal point for critical investigation of the form of international law and the immanent connection of legal relationships to structural violence. In addition, the growth of constitutionalist language within international legal scholarship, coupled with Chimni’s conceptualisation of the international legal order as a ‘nascent (imperialist) global state’, not only provides a bridging point between the Marxist and Third World International Law approaches within his work, but also affords an useful opening for radical international legal scholarship to examine and incorporate significant analyses into the function of law supplied by radical domestic theorists.
In light of these two crucial developments, what I will focus on in this paper is how the sort of radical international theory which can be built on these two pillars of critical analysis can account for the way in which the legal form is imbued with content. In particular, I will engage in a Marxian analysis of how the relationship between the global legal and economic apparatuses determines the ways in which relations of class, and dominance and disadvantage become inscribed in international legal discourse and practice.
In doing so, I will seek to highlight some of the contributions to the radical international law project offered by a number of Marxist (legal) theorists who have failed to receive the sort of attention in critical international legal theory which has been enjoyed most recently by Pashukanis. Although the works of these hitherto overlooked theorists (such as Althusser and Poulantzas, amongst others) cannot simply be added wholesale into existing critical international scholarship, I will argue that the careful integration of their conceptual innovations can strengthen and deepen the resultant account.
I will argue that Miéville’s commodity-form theory is a good basis for creating this coherent analysis, but that it has a few important gaps and potential weaknesses, especially in relation to his theorisation of the relationship between law and the state, which can be filled through the addition of insights from other Marxist theorists, particularly B.S. Chimni’s account of the international arena as a ‘nascent global state’, and the structuralism of Luis Althusser and Nicos Poulantzas.
The strength of theorising the international legal order from a left perspective is that it avoids the traditional pitfall of artificial disciplinary distinctions: as Marxian analyses are prevalent within both the domestic and international legal theoretical landscapes, a critical examination from this perspective has the potential to transcend the discontinuity between them and provide insights which are applicable to both arenas, and to the theorisation of law more generally.
Papers by Christopher M J Boyd
Taking as its inspiration B.S. Chimni’s proposition that we can conceptualise that order as a “nascent global state” (which is particularly relevant in light of the relatively recent turn from globalisation to constitutionalist language within international legal scholarship to explain its contemporary dynamics), the intention is to create the conceptual space for the strategic integration of insights from domestic legal scholarship which orthodox accounts of International Law do not, or cannot, incorporate.
What is particularly interesting about the turn to constitutionalism is that, from the perspective of Marxian scholarship, an order capable of being discussed using constitutional-law concepts looks very much like a state: a collection of social and legal relationships which, while not necessarily being materialised in traditional nation-state institutions, function to preserve the stability of the social formation and maintain its ideological cohesiveness. To speak of a global state is not necessarily to speak of a supra-national facsimile of the nation-state. Rather than expecting to see the replacement at a structural level of the sovereign state system (not least because ‘replacement’ suggests the move to a post-national constellation, which is not what the most convincing analysis suggests), the project seeks to map its transformation in a manner that facilitates the construction of a global state constituted at the functional level by a network of public and private international institutions operating transnationally in an unstable equilibrium between centralisation and fragmentation.
This blurring of the boundaries between domestic and international is vital. It has the capacity to allow a far more nuanced account of the role and importance of non-state actors in global governance and law-making than found in orthodox scholarship because it recognises the continuity of class relations across borders and throughout hierarchical institutional frameworks and focuses on the individual as the real (even if not formally-recognised) principal social and legal actor.
Miéville’s work, drawing on amongst other things Pashukanite Marxism and Newstream analyses of indeterminacy, has become a valuable focal point for critical investigation of the form of international law and the immanent connection of legal relationships to structural violence. In addition, the growth of constitutionalist language within international legal scholarship, coupled with Chimni’s conceptualisation of the international legal order as a ‘nascent (imperialist) global state’, not only provides a bridging point between the Marxist and Third World International Law approaches within his work, but also affords an useful opening for radical international legal scholarship to examine and incorporate significant analyses into the function of law supplied by radical domestic theorists.
In light of these two crucial developments, what I will focus on in this paper is how the sort of radical international theory which can be built on these two pillars of critical analysis can account for the way in which the legal form is imbued with content. In particular, I will engage in a Marxian analysis of how the relationship between the global legal and economic apparatuses determines the ways in which relations of class, and dominance and disadvantage become inscribed in international legal discourse and practice.
In doing so, I will seek to highlight some of the contributions to the radical international law project offered by a number of Marxist (legal) theorists who have failed to receive the sort of attention in critical international legal theory which has been enjoyed most recently by Pashukanis. Although the works of these hitherto overlooked theorists (such as Althusser and Poulantzas, amongst others) cannot simply be added wholesale into existing critical international scholarship, I will argue that the careful integration of their conceptual innovations can strengthen and deepen the resultant account.
I will argue that Miéville’s commodity-form theory is a good basis for creating this coherent analysis, but that it has a few important gaps and potential weaknesses, especially in relation to his theorisation of the relationship between law and the state, which can be filled through the addition of insights from other Marxist theorists, particularly B.S. Chimni’s account of the international arena as a ‘nascent global state’, and the structuralism of Luis Althusser and Nicos Poulantzas.
The strength of theorising the international legal order from a left perspective is that it avoids the traditional pitfall of artificial disciplinary distinctions: as Marxian analyses are prevalent within both the domestic and international legal theoretical landscapes, a critical examination from this perspective has the potential to transcend the discontinuity between them and provide insights which are applicable to both arenas, and to the theorisation of law more generally.