Bob Jessopi nimi ei ole siinse uudistevoo lugejale ilmselt võõras. Tekst ise leidis oma koha põhjusel, et avab vaateid riigile, demokraatiale ja ühiskonna mõtestamisele üldiselt, aga ka väga spetsiifilisi mõttekäike konkreetsete autorite või tööde kohta. Intervjuu vorm on lugemiseks lihtne, kuigi kaetavad teemad ja nende sügavus-ulatus nõuab paljudelt lugejatelt ilmselt siiski veidi mõtlemisaega. Aga see ongi vist nauditav-kasulik. Siin allnevalt vaid mõned väljavõtted intervjuu teemade avaruse näitamiseks ja lugemishuvi suurendamiseks.


Bob Jessop is Emeritus Professor of Sociology, Lancaster University. Jessop is perhaps best known as a leading authority on theory of the state (e.g. Jessop 2015b, 2007c, 2002b, 1990c, 1980a, 1978a, 1977) and as a proponent of the Regulation School in political economy (e.g. Jessop 2013b, 2005a, 2002c, 1997b, 1996a, 1995a, 1990b; Jessop and Sum 2006).

Marx uurimistööst ja selle tulemuste esitamisest:

Marx also distinguished between the method of research and the order of presentation of the results in the finished work. The method of research is more ad hoc and exploratory whereas the method of presentation proceeded systematically from the abstract to the concrete, dealing with determinations that could be established at a given level of abstraction and complexity and suspending discussion of issues at more concretecomplex levels of analysis.

Kriitilisest realismist:

Critical realism in general can be defended against alternative general accounts, such as empiricism or idealism, but cannot be used to identify the particular critical realist approach needed to address specific questions.

Relatsioonilisusest (tegelikult väga huvitav mõttevahetus ja oleks kasulik tervikuna lugeda):

Margaret Archer’s work, as: The strategic-relational approach goes beyond all three positions (although it is closest to the morphogenetic theory). It examines structure in relation to action, action in relation to structure, rather than bracketing one of them.

Niklas Luhmanni kohta:

BJ: Niklas Luhmann is a constructivist phenomenologist who argued that systems become autopoietic, i.e. self-referential, when they are reproduced through self-reflexive action guided by the rules of the system. […] I have found Luhmann’s work interesting because it enables me to solve unresolved problems in Marxism. For example, he rejected the idea that there is a pregiven hierarchy of autopoietic systems and added that there is no relation of economic determination in the last instance, which he regarded as an illustration of a pre-modern principle corresponding to a hierarchical ordering of systems rather than a societal order based on functional differentiation. Instead, he argued for the ecological dominance of systems.


BJ: The standard popular meaning of globalization treats it as if it were a new process with its own logic. This is misleading. As Marx argued, capital accumulation presupposes the world market but also treats this as an emerging effect of the forms of capital accumulation, with distinct phases of colonialism and imperialism and different forms of interaction.


Neoliberalism is associated with a specific set of state policies: liberalization, privatization, deregulation, the introduction of market proxies into the residual public sector, internationalization, and a turn from direct to indirect taxation. These promote free market forces as opposed to monopoly, privatize state-owned enterprises, withdraw state control over the private sector, advance market forces within the public sector, further internationalization to enhance competitive pressures within the world market, and free consumers to spend their income in line with market demand rather than tax incomes directly.


BJ: For Gramsci, hegemony involves intellectual, moral and political leadership as opposed to domination based on coercion; he also explored a range of other modes of political rule besides full consenting hegemony and open class war. These included tacit consent; passive revolution based on the selective recruitment of subaltern leaders into the elite, leading to the decapitation of subaltern movements; a resort to force, fraud, and corruption to maintain power; and so on.


BJ: I am a pessimist regarding the state of British politics and, more generally, about the future of democracy on a world scale. […] A liberal regime requires the ability to maintain laissez-faire despite public opinion, a corporatist regime requires effective trade union organization and business representation and a state able to negotiate with both unions and business, and an étatiste regime requires effective means of state planning and intervention. Britain fails in all three respects and this is seen in the post-war oscillation of failed liberalism, failed corporatism, and failed statism

Bob Jessop & Jamie Morgan (2021) The strategic-relational approach, realism and the state: from regulation theory to neoliberalism via Marx and Poulantzas, an interview with Bob Jessop, Journal of Critical Realism