Ellul (1964). Front matter. (The Technological Society.)

“… the challenge is not to scholars and university professors, but to all of us. … While waiting for the specialists to get on with their work on behalf of society, each of us, in his own life, must seek ways of resisting and transcending technological determinants.” (p xxxii)

See this page at https://kinasevych.ca/index.php

Marcuse (1991). The New Forms of Control. (One-Dimensional Man.)

“The people recognize themselves in their commodities; they find their soul in their automobile, hi-fi set, split-level home, kitchen equipment. The very mechanism which ties the individual to his society has changed, and social control is anchored in the new needs which it has produced.” (p 11)

See this page at https://kinasevych.ca/index.php

Kellner (1991). Introduction to the Second Edition. (One-Dimensional Man.)

“The book contains a theory of ‘advanced industrial society’ that describes how changes in production, consumption, culture, and thought have produced an advanced state of conformity in which the production of needs and aspirations by the prevailing societal apparatus integrates individuals into the established societies. Marcuse describes what has become known as the ‘technological society,’ in which technology restructures labor and leisure, influencing life from the organization of labor to modes of thought. He also describes the mechanisms through which consumer capitalism integrates individuals into its world of thought and behavior.” (p xii)

See this page at https://kinasevych.ca/index.php

Molnar (2012). Responsibility as the Welcoming of Difference: Thoughts on Levinas and a Teacher’s Experience.

“There are powerful arguments that exist in advocating for educators’ involvement in anti-racist and social justice undertakings, yet at the core of these exists how responsibility is understood and enacted in face-to-face interactions.” (p 46)

See this page at https://kinasevych.ca/index.php

Spivak (1988). Can the Subaltern Speak? (Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture)

“Derrida is hard to read; his real object of investigation is classical philosophy. Yet he is less dangerous when understood than the first-world intellectual masquerading as the absent nonrepresenter who lets the oppressed speak for themselves.” (p 292)

See this page at https://kinasevych.ca/index.php