1,223 research outputs found

    The Fallacy of Systemic Racism in the American Criminal Justice System

    Get PDF
    Critics of the criminal justice system have repeatedly charged it with systemic racism. It is a tenet of the “war” on the “War on Drugs,” it is a justification used by the so-called “progressive prosecutors” to reject the “Broken Windows” theory of law enforcement, and it is an article of faith of the “Defund the Police!” movement. Even President Joe Biden and his chief lieutenants leveled the same allegation early in this administration. Although the President has eschewed the belief that Americans are a racist people, others have not, proclaiming that virtually anyone who is white is a racist. Yet, few people have defined what they mean by that term. This Article examines what it could mean and tests the truth of the systemic racism claim under each possible definition. None stands up to scrutiny. One argument is that the American citizens who run our many institutions are motivated by racial animus. But the evidence is that racial animus is no longer tolerated in society, and what is more, the criminal justice system strives to identify it when it does occur and to remedy it. Another argument says that the overtly racist beliefs and practices of the past have created lingering racist effects, but this argument cherry-picks historical facts (when it does not ignore them altogether) and fails to grapple with the country’s historic and ongoing efforts to eliminate racial discrimination. It also assumes a causal relationship between past discrimination and present disparities that is unsupported and often contradicted by the evidence. Yet another argument relies psychological research to claim that white Americans are animated by a subconscious racial animus. That research, however, has been debunked. Still another argument says that the criminal justice system is systemically racist because it has disparate effects across racial groups, but this argument looks only at the offenders’ side of the criminal justice system and fails to consider the effect of the criminal justice system on victims. Proponents of the systemic racism theory often proffer “solutions” to it. This Article examines those too and finds that many would, in fact, harm the very people they aim to help. In the context of the “War on Drugs,” where so much of the rhetoric is focused, the authors examine these arguments and solutions. The bottom line is this: the claim of systemic racism in the criminal justice system is unjustified

    Multidisciplinary perspectives on Artificial Intelligence and the law

    Get PDF
    This open access book presents an interdisciplinary, multi-authored, edited collection of chapters on Artificial Intelligence (‘AI’) and the Law. AI technology has come to play a central role in the modern data economy. Through a combination of increased computing power, the growing availability of data and the advancement of algorithms, AI has now become an umbrella term for some of the most transformational technological breakthroughs of this age. The importance of AI stems from both the opportunities that it offers and the challenges that it entails. While AI applications hold the promise of economic growth and efficiency gains, they also create significant risks and uncertainty. The potential and perils of AI have thus come to dominate modern discussions of technology and ethics – and although AI was initially allowed to largely develop without guidelines or rules, few would deny that the law is set to play a fundamental role in shaping the future of AI. As the debate over AI is far from over, the need for rigorous analysis has never been greater. This book thus brings together contributors from different fields and backgrounds to explore how the law might provide answers to some of the most pressing questions raised by AI. An outcome of the Católica Research Centre for the Future of Law and its interdisciplinary working group on Law and Artificial Intelligence, it includes contributions by leading scholars in the fields of technology, ethics and the law.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

    LIPIcs, Volume 251, ITCS 2023, Complete Volume

    Get PDF
    LIPIcs, Volume 251, ITCS 2023, Complete Volum

    HM 32: New Interpretations in Naval History

    Get PDF
    Selected papers from the twenty-first McMullen Naval History Symposium held at the U.S. Naval Academy, 19–20 September 2019.https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/usnwc-historical-monographs/1031/thumbnail.jp

    Connected World:Insights from 100 academics on how to build better connections

    Get PDF

    The Iranian-Saudi Rivalry: Prolonging the War in Yemen. External Actors, Securitisation, Sectarianisation, and Digital Media.

    Get PDF
    Despite the scale of the conflict in Yemen and the influence of external actors, few studies to date have analysed the nature, impact, and scope of their media campaigns surrounding the war. Across digital media, especially on online news platforms and social media, Iran and Saudi Arabia have exhibited a range of behaviours, in attempts to frame their involvement in the conflict. Thus, this thesis addresses the following research question: How have Saudi Arabia and Iran used digital propaganda to legitimise and frame their involvement in Yemen to international audiences? This is the first study to examine the impact of these two competing propaganda networks on the Yemen War. In doing so, it traces Iranian and Saudi securitisation narratives across the conflict, testing their success in gaining the support of elite and non-elite actors in the international arena. It also shows the ways in which these narratives have aided Iran and Saudi Arabia in their struggle for supremacy in the region. The thesis develops an innovative approach to securitisation theory. It also incorporates critical discourse analysis and visual analysis to explore how Tehran and Riyadh have used digital media as part of their regional competition. Using evidence from the most intense periods of fighting in Yemen and tension between the two actors between 2015 and 2021, the thesis show that Saudi Arabia successfully securitised their intervention in Yemen. Ironically, however, this worked to benefit Tehran far more than it did Riyadh. Several episodes of significance for the Saudi-Iranian relationship, and for the war in Yemen, are analysed, including: Operation Decisive Storm in 2015, The Riyadh Conference in 2017, instances of prominent Saudi airstrikes in 2017-18, the murder of Jamal Khashoggi in 2018 and the Houthi ‘Operation Victory from God’ in 2019. Through discursive and visual analysis, the thesis explores the ways in which the representation of these events had an impact on framing the conflict, to the detriment of the people of Yemen. Securitisation narratives, dispersed across the Internet, regularly had a sectarian tone. These narratives fanned the flames of war, preventing any room for a meaningful prospect for peace. They also exacerbated the humanitarian situation, a dynamic properly detailed in the thesis’ conclusion. Such narratives created a deeply polarising environment, in which extraordinary measures were justified. Through visual analysis, critical discourse tracing, and analysis of dynamics specific to the world of digital media, this thesis traces this process, providing a holistic analysis of the impact of the Iranian-Saudi rivalry on the war in Yemen. The thesis offers new methodological, theoretical, and empirical insights, emphasizing the importance of digital narrative warfare as a worthwhile and insightful field of study

    Disinformation and Fact-Checking in Contemporary Society

    Get PDF
    Funded by the European Media and Information Fund and research project PID2022-142755OB-I00

    Financial reporting in Europe: Accounting for regulatory and technical challenges

    Get PDF
    This thesis explores the challenges facing financial reporting in Europe both regulatory and technical in nature. This has involved research into the background of European legislation and conducting face to face semi-structured interviews with senior elite actors from institutions governing the regulatory and technical arrangements of general-purpose financial reporting practice in Europe. European companies are required to disclose information about their financial affairs. The European legislation governing company financial reporting was delegated to the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) by the EU institutions via Regulation 1606/2002. This thesis argues that European agencies (represented by EFRAG) are caught in a devolved regulatory relationship where the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has been able to assume a relatively strong self-regulatory position. This weakens the agency that European legislative institutions have over their own legislation with regards to financial reporting practice. This thesis argues this loss of agency by European institutions over their legislation governing accounting practice is not a fait accompli but is challenged and contested as European institutions seek and need a more co-regulated arrangement. A key argument developed in this thesis is that regulatory arrangements governing accounting practice are evolving in terms of the distribution of responsibilities and control over European financial reporting practice. To understand how the regulatory landscape governing European accounting practice is changing we employ an investigative lens that is grounded in accounting. This investigative lens employs three elements that are regarded in the literature review as significant technical challenges facing accounting practice in Europe. The first of these is retaining or not prudent accounting practice, the second is concerned with the development of non-financial reporting and the third, concerns with installing the public interest not just investor interests in financial disclosures. It is through this investigative lens that this thesis assesses the extent to which regulatory arrangements and agency governing accounting practice in Europe are shifting sands
    • 

    corecore