Search results

El artículo cuestiona los fundamentos neoliberales que postulan la restauración del mercado y su afirmación como "la autoridad social" por excelencia, proposición que desplaza el ámbito o la instancia de la decisión final de lo político a lo social y consagra la escisión entre Estado y sociedad. Frente a la pretensión de reducir la política a un espacio tecnocrático y la condición de ciudadano a la de mero votante (cuando no sólo mero consumidor), se reivindica la necesidad de la política como instrumento necesario para enfrentar los efectos perversos del neoliberalismo, entre los cuales destaca la fragmentación-disgregación en la base de la sociedad y la concentración en el vértice. Esa díada desestructura a los sujetos socio-políticos y, por ende, incrementa las dificultades de los mecanismos de mediación/representación. Frente a la pretensión y la intención de los neoliberales de licuar la política, de reducirla a nada, el artículo postula levantar el derecho a rebelarse, una tarea nada fácil, porque el neoliberalismo puede haber perdido batallas en materia de políticas económicas –como lo prueban varias experiencias en lo que va del siglo–, pero no ha perdido todas y menos aún la guerra. Ha obtenido un formidable triunfo en el plano de las mentalidades. Y con ellas puede regresar. ; This article questions the neoliberal principles that postulate the restoration of the market and its assertion as "social authority" par excellence, which moves the instance of final decision from the political to the social field and establishes the division between state and society. Faced with the intention of reducing politics to technocratic space and the status of citizen to that of a mere voter (and even a mere consumer), it is necessary to define politics as an instrument to address the perverse effects of neoliberalism, including disintegration fragmentation in the base of society and concentration in the vertex. This dyad dis-structures the socio-political subjects and, therefore, increases the difficulties of ...

My dissertation examines why different immigrant groups, particularly those that do not currently face much economic discrimination, on average, choose different strategies of political assimilation by the third generation. The answers to this question are important to understanding the political integration of immigrant groups of all income levels. The primary argument I make is that racial or ethnic identifications that result from experiencing discrimination often explain political behaviors and attitudes among immigrant groups. First, I argue that membership in a relatively exclusive ethnic group experiencing discrimination is associated with ethnic voting. Second, consistent with and extending Mary Waters' (1996) argument, I argue that non-white immigrant groups are more inclined to support race-based government measures, such as racial quotas for university admissions and government jobs that benefit other non-white groups because of personal experiences and awareness of racial discrimination in society. Furthermore, I argue that the agricultural cooperatives on which the first Japanese and Jewish immigrants worked provided them the social capital to form other ethnic community-based organizations, which facilitated their political incorporation in Brazil. This is an advantage not shared by current economic immigrants, and Catholic NGOs step in to help these current immigrants overcome this disadvantage.

Americans describe the new healthcare system established by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("ACA") as both a blessing and a nightmare. For millions of low and middle income Americans, the ACA offers access to health insurance they could not otherwise afford. The ACA's opponents, however, view the new healthcare system as a threat to economic prosperity, an intrusion on personal liberty and a violation of the principles of federalism at the heart of our system of government. These same kinds of arguments were made more than eighty years ago in response to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal. In the 1930s, the United States embraced far-reaching economic and social reforms including the National Industrial Recovery Act, the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA"), the Social Security Act, and a host of other federal initiatives. Many Americans welcomed these laws as a response to the economic devastation of the Great Depression and the human suffering it engendered. Others, however, viewed New Deal reforms as misguided, or even malevolent, missteps that undermined the free enterprise system, sapped individual initiative, and gave the federal government far too much control over businesses and individuals.

On the surface, King v. Burwell appears to be a simple case about statutory interpretation. In the Affordable Care Act (widely known as Obamacare), when Congress referred to the "State," in the provision triggering federal subsidies to insurance consumers for purchases made from federally-authorized insurance providers selling federally-authorized insurance products, should the "State" be understood to refer to the federal market (i.e., exchanges) as well as "State" markets. Simple tools of statutory construction–namely, that Congress knew full well how to refer to a "federal" exchange and failed to do so–would seem to be sufficient to supply a result. It would also seem be a stretch to rely on legislative history to overturn this conclusion.

Gambles may be appealing in a casino, but in the real world humans crave certainty. Essay adapted from Climate Shock (Princeton University Press, 2015).

Who are Singapore's low-income elderly? What makes some resilient in the face of multiple challenges? What are their social needs that might be filled by additional interventions via civil society or government programmes? These are some of the questions this publication tries to understand. It does so not by surveying the elderly, but via intensive interviews with 100 residents of one low-income neighbourhood in Singapore. Whereas surveys can help gather generalisable data, interviews can help us see the 'story behind the story,' illuminating potential causal connections and providing hints regarding possible effective ways to intercede. We followed this up with a series of small-group conversations with our participants, as well as 'social conversations' with representatives of Singapore's leading civil society organisations. From this we discovered important insights about social isolation, financial deprivation and physical challenges amongst participating elderly. We have already started to apply these tentative conclusions to work with our VWO partner and other engaged parties. This puts 'action' into our research – the proactive use of research results to make a change and co-create tangible improvements.