8 research outputs found
Cultures of Citizenship in the Twenty-First Century: Literary and Cultural Perspectives on a Legal Concept
In the early twenty-first century, the concept of citizenship is more contested than ever. As refugees set out to cross the Mediterranean, European nation-states refer to "cultural integrity" and "immigrant inassimilability," revealing citizenship to be much more than a legal concept. The contributors to this volume take an interdisciplinary approach to considering how cultures of citizenship are being envisioned and interrogated in literary and cultural (con)texts. Through this framework, they attend to the tension between the citizen and its spectral others - a tension determined by how a country defines difference at a given moment
Work and Climate Change Report 2011-2021 (PDF)
This PDF copy of the WCCR website is one long textual document containing every post from the website's 10-year existence (September 2011 - December 2021). It is captured in this way to allow for text-searching and retrieval of relevant posts
World History, Volume 2: From 1400
World History, Volume 2: from 1400 is designed to meet the scope and sequence of a world history course from 1400 offered at both two-year and four-year institutions. Suitable for both majors and non majors World History, Volume 2: from 1400 introduces students to a global perspective of history couched in an engaging narrative. Concepts and assessments help students think critically about the issues they encounter so they can broaden their perspective of global history. A special effort has been made to introduce and juxtapose people’s experiences of history for a rich and nuanced discussion. Primary source material represents the cultures being discussed from a firsthand perspective whenever possible. World History, Volume 2: from 1400 also includes the work of diverse and underrepresented scholars to ensure a full range of perspectives
Who Owns Europe?... and why it matters for Progressives
First paragraph: Ownership matters. Owners of businesses set their strategic direction, purpose and the terms of employment. Owners of land decide what should be done with it and who can access it. Owners of property decide how it is deployed and who can enjoy its benefits. These decisions have a profound impact on the rest of European economy and society. Too often when we try to understand who owns the assets on which we all rely, the beneficial owners are obscured, and capital is controlled by owners whose interests are divergent from the citizenry at large. Politicians rarely consider questions of ownership when making policy, but the frameworks that they establish for market economies have a profound effect on the levels of corporate plurality in business, and ultimately the outcomes for citizens. Progressives must offer a thoughtful critique which ensures that the benefits of ownership are not concentrated in the hands of the few. Policy should facilitate a fair ownership opportunity for all. This project seeks to examine ownership across the EU, it considers how Europe’s businesses are owned and where the benefits of business flow. It looks closely at different types of ownership model, for example - the joint-stock company, the private business, the partnership model and the mutually-owned enterprise. At the same time, it is concerned with ownership more widely. Who owns the land on which our produce is grown, the apartment blocks in which we live and the institutions in which we store our earnings? We have examined whether some forms of ownership are more conducive to the public good and to what extent public goals can be discharged by a wider range of ownership types. Ownership in the public interest can be achieved, but it requires a consistent approach across EU member states, with policy, legislative and regulatory frameworks that support and protect ownership that is designed for a common purpose, rather than simply focussed on maximising private profit. This report makes a series of recommendations which seek to ensure strong economies which are purposeful and successful, but which also benefit the wider public good
Who Owns Europe?... and why it matters for Progressives
First paragraph: Ownership matters. Owners of businesses set their strategic direction, purpose and the terms of employment. Owners of land decide what should be done with it and who can access it. Owners of property decide how it is deployed and who can enjoy its benefits. These decisions have a profound impact on the rest of European economy and society. Too often when we try to understand who owns the assets on which we all rely, the beneficial owners are obscured, and capital is controlled by owners whose interests are divergent from the citizenry at large. Politicians rarely consider questions of ownership when making policy, but the frameworks that they establish for market economies have a profound effect on the levels of corporate plurality in business, and ultimately the outcomes for citizens. Progressives must offer a thoughtful critique which ensures that the benefits of ownership are not concentrated in the hands of the few. Policy should facilitate a fair ownership opportunity for all. This project seeks to examine ownership across the EU, it considers how Europe’s businesses are owned and where the benefits of business flow. It looks closely at different types of ownership model, for example - the joint-stock company, the private business, the partnership model and the mutually-owned enterprise. At the same time, it is concerned with ownership more widely. Who owns the land on which our produce is grown, the apartment blocks in which we live and the institutions in which we store our earnings? We have examined whether some forms of ownership are more conducive to the public good and to what extent public goals can be discharged by a wider range of ownership types. Ownership in the public interest can be achieved, but it requires a consistent approach across EU member states, with policy, legislative and regulatory frameworks that support and protect ownership that is designed for a common purpose, rather than simply focussed on maximising private profit. This report makes a series of recommendations which seek to ensure strong economies which are purposeful and successful, but which also benefit the wider public good
Näkökulmien laajuus ja suhteet suomalaisissa ja yhdysvaltalaisissa, Etelä-Afrikkaan ja Brasiliaan liittyvissä ulkomaanuutisartikkeleissa
My doctoral research creates and applies a methodology to systematically measure and compare the proportions of perspectives in world news. By perspectives, I mean news frames and the voices of people affiliated with different political, cultural, and economic institutions (i.e., institutional fields), quoted or paraphrased in the news. My method also assesses the relative positivity (tone) of frames. I focus on American and Finnish world news articles concerning South Africa and Brazil, as these Southern countries prepared to host the FIFA World Cup, thereby receiving global media attention. My primary sample consists of print and online news articles published in The New York Times and Helsingin Sanomat between 2006 and 2014. In their pursuit for more global democracy, South Africa and Brazil, along with other nations in the so-called Global South, have demanded a greater voice in the international public sphere. Building on Pierre Bourdieu’s field theory, I examine what the proportions of perspectives in American and Finnish news reveal about the power relations between Southern and Northern countries and the institutions involved.
The findings of this research challenge the prevailing claims that the Global South is voiceless or marginalized in Northern news: in both American and Finnish news, Southern sources received between 70–80 percent of total quoting space, on average, to express their views. However, the Southern fields were also depicted more negatively than the Northern fields. I found that American journalists try to maintain a neutral tone: negative definitions of Southern institutions in American news mostly appear in quotes from other Southern institutions and anonymous sources. Finnish journalists express critical opinions toward Southern institutions more explicitly than American journalists. My study also revealed significant differences between the American and Finnish forms of news: While the American news manages to reveal the complexity of the South African and Brazilian situations at the article level, which Finnish news does not, the views in American news articles are not developed as fully as in the Finnish news articles. My study concludes by providing concrete suggestions as to how the American and Finnish forms of news could be combined to create world news that abounds in both depth and a larger quantity of diverse perspectives.Tutkimukseni tavoite oli kehittää menetelmä näkökulmien laajuuden ja sävyn mittaamiseksi ulkomaanuutisissa. Näkökulmilla tarkoitan uutiskehyksiä sekä uutisissa siteerattujen instituutioiden ja henkilöiden ääniä. Kehittämäni menetelmän avulla vertailin Helsingin Sanomissa ja the New York Timesissa sekä muissa suomalaisissa ja yhdysvaltalaisissa uutisvälineissä vuosien 2006 ja 2014 välillä julkaistuja ulkomaanuutisartikkeleita. Tutkimani uutisartikkelit liittyvät Etelä-Afrikkaan ja Brasiliaan näiden Etelän valtioiden valmistautuessa isännöimään jalkapallon maailmanmestaruuskisoja globaalin mediahuomion keskiössä. Keskityin kuitenkin etupäässä yhteiskuntaan ja politiikkaan liittyviin uutisiin enkä urheilu-uutisiin. Etelä-Afrikka ja Brasilia ovat muiden Globaalin Etelän maiden ohella halunneet voimistaa ääntään kansainvälisen politiikan kentällä. Työssäni tutkin, mitä uutisnäkökulmien moninaisuus, laajuus ja sävy kertovat valtasuhteista ja niiden muuttumisesta Etelän ja Pohjoisen välillä.
Tutkimustulosteni perusteella haastan tutkijoiden perinteisen käsityksen, jonka mukaan Etelän äänet ovat marginaalisessa asemassa pohjoisissa/länsimaisissa ulkomaanuutisissa: Niin Helsingin Sanomissa kuin the New York Timesissa eteläiset äänet saivat peräti 70-80 prosenttia uutisten siteeraustilasta omien näkemystensä ilmaisemiseksi. Toisaalta työni myös osoitti, että eteläisiä instituutioita määritellään uutisissa negatiivisemmin kuin pohjoisia. Etenkin yhdysvaltalaiset toimittajat käyttävät paljon nimettömiä lähteitä eteläisten instituutioiden negatiiviseen määrittelyyn; suomalaiset journalistit ilmaisevat omat kriittiset näkökantansa avoimemmin ja suoremmin kuin yhdysvaltalaiset journalistit. Siinä missä yhdysvaltalaisuutiset onnistuvat paljastamaan eteläisten todellisuuksien kompleksisuuden artikkelitasolla, yksittäiset näkymät yhdysvaltalaisuutisissa eivät ole yhtä syvällisiä kuin suomalaisuutisissa. Väitöskirjani sisältääkin konkreettisia ehdotuksia, joiden avulla suomalaiset ja yhdysvaltalaiset toimittajat voisivat kehittää entistä monipuolisempia, läpinäkyvämpiä ja syvällisempiä ulkomaanuutisia toisiltaan oppien
To believe in the world again : thought becoming imperceptible
This thesis draws upon the work of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari to, firstly, diagnose some of the restrictions contemporary life places upon a Deleuzian “thought without an image,” and secondly, to offer some means through which we might enter this more creative, life enhancing thought. As such, the thesis comprises a project of Nietzschean ethics, to the extent that it mounts a critique of today’s dominant thought forms, but exercises this critique as a preparatory move before turning to thought as a more active and affirmative force of/for life. The thesis argues that the dominant images of thought operating in our current milieu are of two primary modes: representation and information. Limitative representational thought structures, such as identity, resemblance and opposition, have, according to Deleuze and Guattari, defined what it means to think since classical times, prevailing through philosophy’s Platonic, Cartesian and Kantian phases, and into the present day. Proceeding by way of a series of actual examples, the thesis examines the contemporary functioning of this image of thought, focusing on such representational axes as individualism, science, gender/ sexuality and race.In addition to this classical mode, though, the thesis also problematises our current informational milieu, proposing that it is, in fact, engendering a supplementary image of thought, one that also regulates what thought can do. This image includes the mediatisation of thought, its channelling through networks of control, and its confinement by the requirements of the digital. Cutting across both the representational and informational images, however, is the potent axiomatic of capital, which further and perhaps most powerfully delimits how thought today can function.In resistance to these restrictions, the thesis proposes a thought without an image, whereby thought is nothing less than creation: the bringing into the world of the radically new, of difference-in-itself. This thought is materially embedded, traverses such spheres as philosophy, nonphilosophy, politics, micropolitics and aesthetics, and is interlinked with Bergsonian duration, Spinozian affects, and, above all, with the Deleuze-Guattarian virtual—the full reality of all that can be. Again by way of a range of actual examples relevant during the writing of this thesis, its second part maps this more potentialising thought along three lines of flight: though “ordinary” affects and the concepts and events to which they relate, through the strange sensations that art makes perceptible, and through the creation of change that Guattari’s aesthetic approach to the “post-media” era enables. Through each of these realms the thesis conceives of life in machinic, ethological terms, expressing an ontology of becoming that bespeaks the interrelatedness of all aspects of the cosmos. In this approach, no one element is privileged (including the human), and thought is conceptualised as an intensive, connective force that produces and affirms unconstrained, unregulated difference
African leaders' state of Africa report 2011
This is the archive of the 2011 State of Africa Report, which offers much-needed commentary on politics and policies from the perspective of the individuals shaping those trends. It was released Spring 2012