7,290 research outputs found
Towards ending incarceration of Indigenous peoples in Canada: A critical, narrative inquiry of hegemonic power in the Gladue report process
Abstract
This study is concerned with the possibility that Gladue perpetuates the hegemonic powers of settler colonialism, white supremacy, patriarchy, and neoliberalism. Gladue is intended to remediate systemic anti-Indigenous racism by requiring judges to consider all alternatives to incarceration when sentencing Indigenous peoples, yet Indigenous incarceration rates continue to rise precipitously. On the surface, Gladue does not appear to disrupt the hegemonic status quo. How is it that the Canadian state, even when âremediating,â keeps producing the same â colonial, oppressive, and tyrannical â result?
This qualitative study used a critical, narrative methodology, interviewing Gladue report writers (n=9) and judges (n=12) about their perspectives and experiences with Gladue, particularly Gladue reports. The study purposefully emphasized settler accountability â research as reparation â in the research design, data collection, and analysis. A careful, ethical protocol for researching with Indigenous peoples (n=9) was followed, premised in Truth and Reconciliation âCall to Actionâ number 30 to reduce Indigenous incarceration in Canada.
This study found that Gladue is falling short of achieving its systemic aim because of (a) a hyper-individualistic, dehumanizing configuration that discursively shifts judges away from dealing with the systemic issue of anti-Indigenous racism, towards judging the individual Indigenous person before the court; (b) colonial mentalities (e.g., whiteness and patriarchy) persisting in the process; (c) a lack of funding for Gladue writers, as well alternatives to incarceration, constraining judgesâ capacities to divert Indigenous away from prisons. The study points towards the need for a more radical framework for Gladue that honours Indigenous self-determination and foundational treaties such as the Two Row Wampum
The Practicality of Practical Inference
In Intention, Anscombe says that practical reasoning is practical, not by virtue of its content, but rather by virtue of its form. But in her later essay âPractical Inferenceâ, she seems to take this back, claiming instead that (1) the practicality of practical reasoning (or inference) resides in the distinctive use it makes of the premises, and (2) âit is a matter of indifferenceâ whether we say that it exemplifies a distinctive form. I aim to show that Anscombe is right about (1) but wrong about (2): the distinctive use (or teleology) of practical reasoning explains its distinctive formal features, and when the former is thought through, the latter are revealed to be more numerous and significant than Anscombe seems to recognize
Economics is converging with sociology but not with psychology
The rise of behavioral economics since the 1980s led to richer mutual influence between economic and psychological theory and experimentation. However, as behavioral economics has become increasingly integrated into the main stream in economics, and as psychology has remained damagingly methodologically conservative, this convergence has recently gone into reverse. At the same time, growing appreciation among economists of the limitations of atomistic individualism, along with advantages in econometric modeling flexibility by comparison with psychometrics, is leading economists to become more pluralistic than psychologists about the ontology of behavioral causation and structures. This, combined with economistsâ growing interest in network models, is drawing economists closer in theory and practice to sociologists who use quantitative or mixed methods
A cosmopolitan international law: the authority of regional inter-governmental organisations to establish international criminal accountability mechanisms
The overall aim of this thesis is to investigate the potential role of regional inter-governmental organisations (RIGOs) in international criminal accountability, specifically through the establishment of criminal accountability mechanisms, and to make a case for RIGOsâ active involvement. The thesis proceeds from the assumption that international criminal justice is a cosmopolitan project that demands that a tenable conception of state sovereignty guarantees humanityâs fundamental values, specifically human dignity. Since cosmopolitanism emphasises the equality and unity of the human family, guaranteeing the dignity and humanity of the human family is therefore a common interest of humanity rather than a parochial endeavour. Accountability for international crimes is one way through which human dignity can be validated and reaffirmed where such dignity has been grossly and systematically assaulted. Therefore, while accountability for international crimes is primarily the obligation of individual sovereign states, this responsibility is ultimately residually one of humanity as a whole, exercisable through collective action. As such, the thesis advances the argument that states as collective representations of humanity have a responsibility to assist in ensuring accountability for international crimes where an individual state is either genuinely unable or unwilling by itself to do so. The thesis therefore addresses the question as to whether RIGOs, as collective representations of states and their peoples, can establish international criminal accountability mechanisms. Relying on cosmopolitanism as a theoretical underpinning, the thesis examines the exercise of what can be considered as elements of sovereign authority by RIGOs in pursuit of the cosmopolitan objective of accountability for international crimes. In so doing, the thesis interrogates whether there is a basis in international law for such engagement, and examines how such engagement can practically be undertaken, using two case studies of the European Union and the Kosovo Specialist Chambers and Specialist Prosecutorâs Office, and the African Union and the (proposed) Hybrid Court for South Sudan. The thesis concludes that general international law does not preclude RIGOs from exercising elements of sovereign authority necessary for the establishment of international criminal accountability mechanisms, and that specific legal authority to engage in this regard can then be determined by reference to the doctrine of attributed/conferred powers and the doctrine of implied powers in interpreting the legal instruments of RIGOs. Based on this conclusion, the thesis makes a normative case for an active role for RIGOs in the establishment of international criminal accountability mechanisms, and provides a practical step-by-step guide on possible legal approaches for the establishment of such mechanisms by RIGOs, as well as guidance on possible design models for these mechanisms
Invisibility cloaks, prisons, and a pandemic: Did COVID-19 render the prison invisibility cloak ineffective?
This thesis acknowledges the importance of examining news media representation of prisons, and more specifically, news media representation of Canadian prisons during the COVID-19 pandemic. A thematic qualitative and quantitative content analysis of news coverage of prison before and during the COVID-19 pandemic was undertaken to analyze how news media organizations communicate meanings and messages about punishment and prison to the general public. Utilizing a social constructionist approach, I examined how the news media frames coverage of correctional institutions, consequently shaping public understanding of punishment and prison which may impact correctional policy. This thesis addressed the following questions: 1) Was there an increase in news media coverage of prison during the COVID-19 pandemic? Has coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic made the prison more visible? 2) Does the news media coverage of correctional institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic reinforce traditional myths and stereotypes surrounding punishment and prison? Or challenge them? 3) Is the news media representation of correctional institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic consistent with coverage of traditional prison newsworthy items which focus on discrete incidents? Or does the coverage reflect newer, broader systemic newsworthy issues, namely, reform? The findings demonstrate that the COVID-19 pandemic did not quantitatively bring more visibility to prisons as assessed by the amount of news items, however, qualitatively it appears COVID-19 brought more visibility to prison issues. While some traditional prison stereotypes are still present in the news media and were reinforced during the pandemic, other myths and stereotypes were challenged, or were rare. Lastly, the results demonstrate that although traditional prison newsworthy items were still often reported in the news, discussions of prison reform were prevalent in the sample.Master of Criminal Justic
Investigative Methods: An NCRM Innovation Collection
This Innovation Collection on investigative methods brings together investigators working in different domains, sectors, and on different topics of interest to help capture the breadth, scope and relevance of investigative practices over 10 substantive chapters. Each of the papers presents a different investigative method or set of methods and, through case studies, attempts to demonstrate their value. All the contributions, in different ways and for different purposes, seek to reconstruct acts, events, practices, biographies and/or milieux, to which the researchers in question lack direct access, but which they want to reconstruct via the traces those phenomena leave behind, traces themselves often produced as part of the phenomena under investigation. These include reports of methods used in investigations on: - The use of force by state actors, including into police violence, military decisions to attack civilians, the provenance of munitions used to attack civilians, and the use and abuse of tear gas; - Networks of far-right discourse, and its links to criminal attacks and state-leveraged misinformation campaigns; - Archives to establish the penal biographies of convicts and the historical practices of democratic petitioning; - Corporate structures and processes that enable tax avoidance and an avoidance of legal responsibilities to workers and the environment. A working principle of the collection is that investigative methods may be considered, alongside creative, qualitative, quantitative, digital, participatory and mixed methods, a distinct yet complementary style of research
THE ARCHEOLOGY OF MORALS TOWARDS A PHENOMENOLOGY OF MORAL RESPONSIBILITY IN EMMANUEL LEVINAS
1noThe Archaeology of Morals: Towards a Phenomenology of Moral Responsibility in Emmanuel Levinas is an attempt to explore and investigate the origins of moral rationality by phenomenologically analysing the components of responsibility. It is an inquiry into the archaeology of moral sensibility through a phenomenology of responsibility and as responsibility is the essential structure and constituent element of subjectivity in Levinas, in order to explain its conceptual foundations and to reinstate its sources and grammar, two significant contributions of Levinasâ predecessors are relied upon viz., the Kantian notion of respect, and the Husserlian intersubjective notion of empathy. Though this research principally analyses and contextually interprets the major works of Levinas, the research is also extended to explore the works of Kant and Husserl concerning their contribution both to explicate their interconnectedness and to highlight their relevance for Levinasian moral imaginations. The task undertaken in this phenomenological debate is therefore, threefold: firstly, to see how the notion of respect in Kantian moral metaphysics serves as the rational foundation of responsibility in Levinas; secondly, to argue how the intersubjective concept of empathy in self-other encounter gives birth to the idea of moral responsibility that is emblematic of Levinasian moral reasoning; thirdly, to re-present this novel moral responsibility as an essential structure of subjectivity to found the grammar of morality. One of the central concerns of this research is to explore how the epistemic function of intersubjective moral emotion of empathy can perform a normative function in responsibility whose metaphysical foundation can be traced back to the notion of respect. In other words, it is an attempt to redefine responsibility as of substitutional identification with the Other, making responsibility the spine of moral reasoning and explicit elaboration of subjectivity. The entire project is conceived in three parts spread into 8 chapters.
Part I, entitled Juxtaposing Kant and Levinas consists of two chapters whose intent is threefold: first of all, by placing Kant and Levinas side by side, Chapter - 1 Levinas Face to Face with Kant, makes an attempt to argue that there is a possibility to stitch several important connections between these two otherwise irreconcilable and apparently antagonistic thinkers. Placing the central themes of Kantian and Levinasian precepts in pairs there emerges a common philosophical ground to understand the claims of each of them for their merit independently and to build the strategy for the further discussions by analysing the sameness and the differences of their thoughts interdependently. Secondly, in Chapter - 2, Proximity and Distance: Kant and Levinas, an attempt is made to appreciate the proximity and the distance that can be discerned between these two gigantic moral philosophers of two different epochs. Levinasâ philosophy of alterity is not only compatible with Kantâs philosophy of practical reason; it complements it in the form of a phenomenological elaboration. While the phenomenological mode of presentation differs sharply from Kantâs formalism, the principle of responsibility to the other expressed by Levinas can be derived from the categorical imperative. Undoubtedly, several of the characteristics of Kantian morality are incorporated in the ethical edifice of Levinas. Thirdly, to open up a phenomenology of responsibility based on these connections to propose a novel moral archaeology in Levinas by analysing the moral relations of Self and Other in the triad of subjectivity alterity and intersubjectivity.
Part II - Moral Relations of Self and Other in Levinas analyses and elaborates in four chapters the self and other relations in Levinas. It is an investigation of the crucial moral concepts of Subjectivity, Alterity and Intersubjectivity which constitute the fabric of Levinasian moral edifice. In Chapter -3, entitled Selfhood and Subjectivity in Levinas, what is argued is that the question of morality is inseparably linked to the essential human distinctiveness and that the relations of self and other are at the heart of Levinasâ moral philosophy. As the relation of self to other assumes central place in his moral edifice, the ethical character of selfhood and its intimate relation to the alterity of other person is significant. Ethics, or in other words, our responsibility to the Other, is part of our subjectivity. Chapter -4 Otherness and Alterity in Levinas inscribes the essential existential problematic par excellence of Levinas viz., the question of the Other. Levinasâ phenomenology of the Other rooted in the Otherâs irreducible strangeness and an invitation to the most intimate and radical responsibility for the Other. Instead of reducing the Other to the Same, Levinas calls us to celebrate the infinity of the Other in his radical alterity. Chapter - 5 Intersubjectivity: The self in the Other explores the notion of intersubjectivity in its origin, growth and subsequent development in the history of the phenomenological tradition. The purpose of this chapter is twofold: to define the concept of intersubjectivity as it evolved in the history of philosophy and to show how the moral sentiment of empathy is closely related to intersubjectivity. In Chapter -6, entitled Levinasian Intersubjectivity: The Other-In-Me, an attempt is made to see how Levinas compliments and completes Husserlian intersubjectivity. If Husserlian intersubjectivity, in its entire structure, development and purpose was epistemic, Levinasian intersubjectivity is essentially ethical, which is nothing but a condition of both being and having the Other in me.
Part III - Towards a Phenomenology of Moral Sentiments consists of two chapters. It essays to look for the foundations and the rationality of the moral sensibility in Levinas in the twin concepts of Respect and Responsibility, and their interconnectedness. Chapter â 7 Respect as the Source of Moral Motivation aims at analysing the moral emotions of respect as well as tracing the foundations of our moral nature in the Kantian notion of respect. The thesis that we all have a radical sensibility which invites us to an imperative of responsibility is thus forwarded; an attempt is also made to affirm that this vocation is inherent in humans and has its foundation in the Kantian notion of respect. It is Kantâs analysis of respect that provides a bridge between moral philosophy and anthropology. Levinasian moral rationality of alterity, simplifying to extreme, is the responsibility for the Other, and can be seen as a reformulation and enrichment of Kantian concept of respect. Chapter â 8 entitled A Phenomenology of Moral Responsibility, analyses the concept of responsibility phenomenologically in order to maintain how Levinas redefines responsibility both as the essential structure of subjectivity and as an imperative of alterity. Responsibility in Levinas is typically being for the other, or as the essence of subjectivity it is responsibility that individuates me as a moral subject. The subject finds its moral identity in being infinitely and asymmetrically responsible, in being elected without freedom to substitute for the other.
The entire edifice of Levinasian moral rationality is a phenomenon of relationality that operates in the matrix of sensibility. The metaphysical roots of alterity can be located in the concept of respect and the foundations of ethical experience, made manifest in the analysis of intersubjective phenomenon of empathy create the conditions of radical responsibility and finds its perfection in the face of the Other. This further reiterates the Levinasian claim: to be a subject is to be for the other, making subjectivity and alterity essentially morally intersubjective. My natural propensity to be responsible for the other has its metaphysical foundation in the idea of respect and provides the obligation that is essential for any ethic to be rationally conceivable. To say that responsibility is foundational for ethics and interpersonal relations is to say then not only that responsibility is what relates one subject to another, but it is to affirm that the meaning of the otherness of the other person is given in responsibility, and not in my interpretation of the other person. The very meaning of being an other person is âthe one to whom I am responsible.â The Other who makes me responsible is at the heart Levinasian moral phenomenology and responsibility becomes the archĂŠ of moral rationality.openâLâarcheologia della Morale: verso una fenomenologia della responsabilitĂ morale in Emmanuel Levinasâ e un tentativo di esplorare e investigare le origini della razionalitĂ morale analizzando fenomenologicamente i componenti della responsabilitĂ . Si tratta di unâindagine sullâ archeologia della sensibilitĂ morale dal punto di vista della fenomenologia della responsabilitĂ . Essendo la responsabilitĂ in Levinas la struttura essenziale e lâelemento costitutivo della soggettivitĂ , conveniva per spiegare i suoi fondamenti concettuali e per scoprire le sue fonti e la sua grammatica, invocare due contributi significativi dei predecessori di Levinas ossia il concetto kantiano di rispetto e il concetto intersoggettivo husserliano dâempatia. Questa ricerca analizza e interpreta principalmente le opere maggiori di Levinas ma essa esplora anche le opere di Kant e di Husserl per esplicitare la loro interconnessione e per sottolineare la loro pertinenza nellâimmaginario morale levinassiano. In questo dibattito fenomenologico il compito è dunque triplice : in primo luogo, studiare come il concetto di rispetto nella metafisica morale kantiana fa da fondamento razionale alla responsabilitĂ in Levinas ; in secondo luogo, argomentare come il concetto intersoggettivo dâempatia nellâincontro tra sĂŠ e lâaltro dia origine allâidea di responsabilitĂ morale che è emblematica del ragionamento morale levinassiano ; in terzo luogo, presentare questa nuova responsabilitĂ morale come una struttura essenziale della soggettivitĂ per fondare la grammatica della moralitĂ . Una delle preoccupazioni centrali di questa ricerca sta nellâesplorare come la funzione epistemica dellâemozione morale intersoggettiva dellâempatia possa assumere una funzione normativa nella responsabilitĂ il cui fondamento metafisico può essere ridotto al concetto di rispetto. In altri termini, si tratta di un approccio che mira a ridefinire la responsabilitĂ come una identificazione sostitutiva allâaltro, facendo della responsabilitĂ la colonna vertebrale del raggiamento morale e dellâelaborazione esplicita della soggettivitĂ . Lâinsieme del progetto è concepito in tre parti divise in otto capitoli.
La prima parte intitolata âgiustapporre Kant e Levinasâ è composta di due capitoli il cui proposito è triplice: prima, contrapponendo nel primo capitolo âLevinas di fronte a Kantâ, tentiamo di dimostrare che è possibile tessere parecchi legami importanti tra questi due pensatori, per altro inconciliabili e apparentemente antagonisti. Affiancando i temi centrali dei precetti kantiani e levinassiani a due a due, emerge un terreno filosofico comune il quale permette di capire le rivendicazioni di ognuno per i loro meriti, in maniera indipendente e di costruire la strategia per le discussioni ulteriori analizzando le similitudini e le differenze dei loro pensieri di maniera interdipendente. Poi, nel secondo capitolo âProssimitĂ e distanza: Kant e Levinasâ, è fatto un tentativo per apprezzare la prossimitĂ e la distanza discernibili tra questi due giganteschi filosofi morali separati nel tempo. La filosofia dellâalteritĂ di Levinas è compatibile con la filosofia della ragione pratica di Kant, inoltre la completa sotto la forma di unâelaborazione fenomenologica. Se il modo di presentazione fenomenologica differisce fortemente dal formalismo di Kant, il principio di responsabilitĂ verso lâaltro espresso da Levinas può essere derivato dallâimperativo categorico. Indubbiamente molte caratteristiche della morale kantiana sono incorporate nellâedificio etico di Levinas. Infine, conveniva aprire una fenomenologia della responsabilitĂ fondata su queste connessioni per proporre una nuova archeologia morale in Levinas analizzando le relazioni morali tra il sĂŠ e lâaltro nella triade: soggettivitĂ , alteritĂ e intersoggettivitĂ .
La seconda parte âle relazioni morali del sĂŠ e dellâaltro in Levinasâ analizza e elabora in quattro capitoli le relazioni del sĂŠ e dellâaltro in Levinas. Si tratta di una indagine sui concetti morali cruciali della soggettivitĂ , alteritĂ e intersoggettivitĂ che costituiscono il tessuto dellâedificio morale levinassiano. Il terzo capitolo intitolato âsoggettivitĂ in Levinasâ dimostra che la questione della moralità è indissociabile dalla specificitĂ umana essenziale e che le relazioni tra sĂŠ e lâaltro sono nel cuore della filosofia morale di Levinas. Siccome la relazione di sĂŠ allâaltro occupa un posto centrale nel suo edificio morale, il carattere etico del sĂŠ e la sua relazione intima con lâalteritĂ sono significativi. Lâetica, o in altri termini, la nostra responsabilitĂ verso lâaltro, fa parte della nostra soggettivitĂ . Il quarto capitolo âalteritĂ in Levinasâ iscrive la problematica esistenziale essenziale, per eccellenza, di Levinas ossia la questione dellâaltro. La fenomenologia dellâaltro in Levinas si radica nellâirriducibile estraneitĂ dellâaltro e in un invito alla responsabilitĂ piĂš intima e piĂš radicale rei confronti dellâaltro. Invece di ridurre lâaltro al Medesimo, Levinas ci invita a celebrare lâinfinita dellâaltro nella sua alteritĂ radicale. Il quinto capitolo âintersoggettivitĂ : il sĂŠ nellâaltroâ esplora il concetto dâintersoggettivitĂ nella sua origine la sua crescita e il suo ulteriore sviluppo nella storia della tradizione fenomenologica. Duplice è lâobiettivo di questo capitolo: definire il concetto dâintersoggettivitĂ quale è evoluto nella storia della filosofia e mostrare come il sentimento morale dâempatia è strettamente collegato allâintersoggettivitĂ nel sesto capitolo intitolato âintersoggettivitĂ levinassiana: lâaltro-in-meâ cerchiamo di vedere come Levinas completa lâintersoggettivitĂ husserliane. LâintersoggettivitĂ husserliana nella sua struttura, il suo sviluppo e la sua finalitĂ era epistemica, lâintersoggettivitĂ levinassiana invece è essenzialmente etica, il che non è altro che una condizione di essere e di avere lâaltro in me.
La terza parte âverso una fenomenologia dei sentimenti moraliâ si compone di due capitoli. Si tratta di ricercare i fondamenti e la razionalitĂ della sensibilitĂ morale in Levinas nei concetti gemelli di rispetto e di responsabilitĂ , e la loro interconnessione. Il settimo capitolo âIl rispetto come fonte di motivazione moraleâ intende analizzare le emozioni morali nonchĂŠ rintracciare i fondamenti della nostra natura morale nel concetto kantiano di rispetto. Ă lâanalisi del rispetto da Kant che consente di stabilire il legame tra la filosofia morale e lâantropologia. La razionalitĂ morale levinassiana dellâalteritĂ , in poche parole, è la responsabilitĂ per lâaltro e può essere considerata come una riformulazione e un arricchimento del concetto kantiano di rispetto.
Lâottavo capitolo intitolato âuna fenomenologia della responsabilitĂ moraleâ analizza fenomenologicamente il concetto di responsabilitĂ a fine di dimostrare come Levinas ridefinisce la responsabilitĂ come struttura essenziale della soggettivitĂ e come imperativo dellâalteritĂ . La responsabilitĂ in Levinas è tipicamente lâessere per lâaltro o come lâessenza della soggettivitĂ e la responsabilitĂ che mi individua che mi singolarizza come un soggetto morale. In altri termini, il soggetto trova la propria identitĂ morale essendo infinitamente e asimmetricamente responsabile, essendo eletto, senza libertĂ , per sostituirsi allâaltro e per lâaltro.
Tutto lâedificio della razionalitĂ morale levinassiana è un fenomeno di relazionalitĂ che opera nella matrice della sensibilitĂ . Le radici metafisiche della alteritĂ possono essere situate nel concetto di rispetto e i fondamenti dellâesperienza etica resi manifesti nellâanalisi del fenomeno intersoggettivo dellâempatia. Essi creano le condizioni di una responsabilitĂ radicale e trovano la loro perfezione nel viso dellâaltro. Questo reitera lâaffermazione levinassiana: essere soggetto significa essere per lâaltro, il che rende la soggettivitĂ e lâalteritĂ essenzialmente e moralmente intersoggettive. La mia propensione naturale a essere responsabile dellâaltro ha suo fondamento metafisico nellâidea di rispetto e fornisce lâobbligo che è essenziale perchĂŠ ogni etica sia razionalmente concepibile. Dire che la responsabilità è fondatrice dellâetica e delle relazioni interpersonali vale a dire non soltanto che la responsabilità è ciò che ricollega un soggetto a un altro ma è affermare che il senso dellâalteritĂ dellâaltra persona è dato nella responsabilitĂ e non nella mia interpretazione dellâaltra persona. Il significato di essere unâaltra persona è a proprio âcolui di cui sono responsabileâ. LâAltro che mi rende responsabile è nel cuore della fenomenologia morale levinassiana e la responsabilitĂ diventa âlâarchèâ delle razionalitĂ morale.openJOSEPH PETTAYIL JISJOSEPH PETTAYIL, Ji
The Study of Exception: A methodological reflection on Agambenâs problematisation of the relation between law and life
This thesis engages, from a methodological perspective, with Agambenâs problematisation of the relation between law and life. More specifically, Agambenâs work on law is here considered as a veiled reflection on the potentiality of study as a form of non-instrumental praxis, i.e. study as a means without ends. The political element of Agambenâs critique of law, it is suggested, resides in his attempt at developing a method to reflect on the conditions of possibility of power, to be understood as a form of thought â i.e. the power of thought â which has left its mark, or better, its signature, on the politico-juridical tradition of the West, determining the ways in which life has been conceptualised and, eventually, lived by the subjects who have inhabited this tradition. This signature, practically, is a signature of instrumental-exceptionality which performs a fundamental biopolitical-anthropogenetic function: it allows to functionally relate an âinsideâ and an âoutsideâ of man, for the purpose of constituting (and preserving) the world as a governable space, a space in which life could be made (and thought as) governable. The law has played, and still plays, a fundamental role in producing this space and, in fact, it can be studied as a priviledged field in which this signature of exceptionality/instrumentality has organised the governability of life through the functional articulation of a form (of law) separated from life and a force (of life) which animates it from the outside (in pseudo-immanent or pseudo-transcendental terms). This considerations ground the experience of study as a sort of wandering among the ruins of legal thought, a virtual space in which power finds its expression precisely in the endless attempt at producing an articulation of form and force of both law and life. The (dis)function of the student, from this perspective, is to expose this articulating practice without partaking (uncritically, i.e. by presupposing it) to the process of its reproduction. As a result, Agambenâs work provides a critique of legal theorising itself as an articulating practice and, therefore, also the possibility to study the law anew, an experience of study as a means without end. But this also means that the signature of power is, at the same time, a signature of study: in other words, a means of both constitution and destitution
Disorderly And Inhumane: Explaining Government-Sponsored Mass Expulsion, 1900-2020
Since 2015 over two million people have been expelled, en masse, around the world. Mass expulsion is a major international issue that threatens peace and security around the globe. This dissertation examines why and how governments expel ethnic groups en masse. What motivates them to implement an expulsion policy and why donât more governments do the same? By isolating policies of intentional group-based population removalâdistinct from genocide, massacre, and coercive assimilationâI show that the motivations of expulsionist governments are informed by the phase of nation-building and the perceived threat of the target group. The four clusters of motivations are: fifth column, anti-colonialism, nativism, and counterinsurgency/reprisal. Since not all governments with one of the identified motivations to expel go on to remove populations en masse, I also identify important constraints on governmentsâ strategic choices. Through four paired-comparison case studies of similarly motivated governments with different outcomes (expulsion or non-expulsion), I show that alliances, target group homeland state(s), and the international community are the key contributing factors that enable or deter mass expulsion policies. The evidence is drawn from archival research conducted at the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the League of Nations archives in Geneva, Switzerland, as well as from other primary sources, secondary historical sources, and extant datasets. This dissertation contributes to the field of ethnic conflict and exclusionary politics. It fills a gap in the literature by systematically examining mass expulsion policies that intentionally remove ethnic groups over the longue durĂŠe. The argument expands existing explanations beyond war and security threats to highlight an entire class of expulsions that target economic threats, which requires scholarly and international policy attention. The dissertation also deepens our understanding of critical atrocity constraints and proposes tangible policy recommendations for deterring its use
Masculinities, vulnerability and negotiated identity: Understanding the reporting behaviours of men who experience violence or otherwise harmful behaviour, within a sex work context
Context The focus of sex work related discussions most commonly falls on female providers of sexual services, and male purchasers. As a result, the often victim-oriented policy response in England and Wales falls short of truly addressing the needs of men who are involved in the sale of sex, with there being limited support available for them and a systemic approach which does not fully recognise the potential for men to face harm within this context. Methods The aim of this study is to explore experiences of and reactions to violence, and otherwise harmful behaviours, faced by men in the context of their sex working, by understanding the lived realities of a sample of men who engage in this type of work. The study takes a phased approach which combines an initial informative quantitative survey, with three subsequent phases of semi-structured interviews with male sex workers, sex work-focused practitioners and police officers. The method is guided by feminist research principles which suggest that reality is situated within those with lived experience, and also by an element of co-creation which has grounded this study within the perspectives of male sex workers from its conception. Findings The findings of this research suggest that all of the men involved in the study had faced at least one of the violent or otherwise harmful behaviours outlined, though reporting of these behaviours was not at all common. Discussions with the male sex working participants, practitioners and the police highlighted the issues related to the structural influences of authority, such as the police, and the social environment, and the internalisation of these wider factors, which create barriers to reporting for groups such as male sex workers and others who face similar social marginalisation. Conclusions This study challenges existing gendered understandings of violence and otherwise harmful behaviour within a sex work context, by highlighting the harmful experiences of men. By exploring these experiences and the reporting behaviours of those involved, the study also proposes a new framework for understanding barriers to reporting, which suggests that these are formed through the influences of formal and informal measures of social control, and the internalisation of these outside influences by the individual. By better understanding the experiences of men, and the barriers to their reporting, this study attempts to nuance a gendered discussion. Within, I propose that in order to better support male sex workers, responses must begin by appreciating the heterogeneity of those involved in sex work and the influence of their individual circumstances and the social environment on their willingness to seek support
- âŚ