Search results

Kosningaréttur er grundvallarréttur þegna í lýðræðisríkjum og þátttaka í kosningum álitin ein af mikilvægustu athöfnum borgaranna. Þó að þessi réttindi skuli tryggð öllum þegnum sýna alþjóðlegar rannsóknir að fatlað fólk er víða útilokað frá þátttöku í kosningum. Fatlað fólk er síður líklegt til að kjósa en ófatlað fólk og mætir iðulega ýmsum hindrunum ef það reynir að taka þátt í kosningum. Þessi grein fjallar um kosningaþátttöku fatlaðs fólks með hliðsjón af niðurstöðum alþjóðlegra rannsókna. Í upphafi eru raktar helstu hindranir í vegi kosningaþátttöku fatlaðs fólks og leitast við að svara hvaða áhrif þessar hindranir hafi, ekki aðeins fyrir fatlaða borgara, heldur jafnframt hvað það þýði fyrir heilbrigði lýðræðis og lýðræðislegra stofnana þegar hluti þegnanna mætir alvarlegum hindrunum varðandi borgaraleg grundvallarréttindi. Íslenskar rannsóknir á þessu sviði eru ekki fyrir hendi og engin skipuleg tölfræðileg gögn eru til varðandi þátttöku fatlaðs fólks í kosningum eða stjórnmálum hér á landi. Byggt á gögnum sem aflað var hjá tveimur fjölmennustu heildarsamtökum fatlaðs fólks hér á landi er rýnt í reynslu, aðstæður og möguleika fatlaðs fólks til þátttöku í kosningum á Íslandi, lagasetningar þar að lútandi og skyldur ríkisins til að stuðla að og tryggja þátttöku fatlaðs fólks í stjórnmálum og opinberu lífi, ekki síst í ljósi þess að Samningur Sameinuðu þjóðanna (SÞ) um réttindi fatlaðs fólks (SRFF) hefur verið fullgiltur hér á landi ; The right to vote is a fundamental right of citizenship in democratic nations, and participation in elections in one of the most important acts undertaken by citizens. Although these rights are guaranteed to all citizens, international research shows that disabled people are widely excluded from participation in elections. Disabled people are less likely to vote than non-disabled people and often encounter various obstacles when they try to participate in elections. This article discusses the voting participation of disabled people in consideration of the international research. The main barriers that disabled people encounter in the voting process will first be outlined. This will be followed by questions concerning the effects these obstacles produce, not only for disabled citizens, but what this means overall for the health of democracy and democratic institutions when a portion of the citizenry encounter serious obstacles concerning their basic civil rights. Icelandic research in this field is extremely limited and no systematic statistical data exists on the participation of disabled people in elections, or politics in general, in this country. Based on data drawn from sources from two of the largest disabled people's organization in the country, the focus here is on the experiences, circumstances and opportunities for disabled people to participate in elections in the country. The findings draw attention to the obligations of the state to promote and ensure the participation of disabled people in politics and public life in light of the recent ratification in Iceland of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) ; Peer Reviewed

Húsið (1983) or The House, directed by Egill Eðvarðsson, was the first icelandic fea-ture-length horror film. it follows the tradition of the haunted house genre which was popular between the Seventies and Eighties. The haunted house is a graveyard of gothic secrets but also the place where buried secrets come alive. The haunted house is often a traumatic location or a manifestation of the trauma haunting its inhabitants' minds. Thus, the haunted house horror is usually first and foremost dealing with the horror within the brain of the inhabitants. This article explores how the haunted house in Húsið manifests the protagonist's trauma in terms of recent studies by the psychiatrists Bessel van der Kolk and Onno van der Hart.

Afstaða Íslendinga til öryggismála hefur lítið verið rannsökuð frá því í lok kalda stríðsins. Í þessari grein eru kynntar niðurstöður könnunar um afstöðu til og hugmyndir um utanríkis- og öryggismál, en Félagsvísindastofnun HÍ vann könnunina í nóvember og desember 2016. Niðurstöður könnunarinnar eru settar í samhengi við þróun í öryggisfræðum, þá sérstaklega öryggisgeira (e. security sectors) verufræðilegt öryggi (e. ontological security) og öryggisvæðingu (e. securitization). Helstu niðurstöður eru að almenningur á Íslandi telur öryggi sínu helst stafa ógn af efnahagslegum og fjárhagslegum óstöðugleika og náttúruhamförum, en telur litlar líkur á því að hernaðarátök eða hryðjuverkaárásir snerti landið beint. Þessar niðurstöður eru í takmörkuðu samræmi við helstu áherslur stjórnvalda í öryggismálum og því mikilvægt að stjórnvöld átti sig á því hvernig hægt er að tryggja það að almenningur sé meðvitaður um þær forsendur sem áhættumat og öryggisstefna grundvallast á. ; Icelanders' views on security and foreign affairs since the end of the Cold War are an understudied issue. This article presents the findings of a large scale survey on the position and ideas about foreign affairs and security. The survey was conducted by the Social Science Research Institute of the University of Iceland in November and December 2016. The results of the survey are placed in the context of developments in security studies, with an emphasis on security sectors, ontological security, and securitization. The main findings are that the Icelandic public believes that its security is most threatened by economic and financial instability, as well as natural hazards, but thinks there is a very limited chance of military conflict or terrorist attacks directly affecting the country. These findings are incongruent with the main emphases of Icelandic authorities, as they appear in security policy and political discourse. It is therefore important that the authorities understand how to engage with the public about the criteria upon which risk assessments and security policies are based. ; Peer Reviewed

Þórarinn B. Þorláksson (1867–1924) has been credited with being the first Icelandic professional painter. His reception, both during his lifetime and posthumously, is therefore an interesting indication of the changes in the outlook and ideology surrounding the reception of Scandinavian fin­de­siécle art up to the present. He was honourably mentioned by his contemporaries and then was forgotten in the upheavals surrounding the adoption of modern styles, such as abstract art, in Ice­land around the Second World War. He re­gained attention in the sixties and has since then been revered as an important, though problematic, pioneer of Icelandic painting. This has in recent years been especially evident in the way he has been mentioned in the context of the revival of Nordic and Scandinavian late 19th and early 20th century art in Northern­Europe and America. The paper reviews and analyses the historical reception Þorláksson has received and the way his work has been inscribed into the narrative of Icelandic and Scandinavian Art History. This process is an attempt to understand and contextualise Þorláksson's work in aesthetic terms, while at the same time function as a critical mirror of the trends and ideolo­gies surrounding the Nordic revival in recent years.

The regulation of film exhibition in Iceland has closely shadowed the history of cinema exhibition itself. Although regulation practices have undergone various shifts and realignments throughout the twentieth century, they retained certain core concerns and a basic ideological imperative having to do with child protection and child welfare. Movies were thought to have a disproportionate impact on children, with "impressionable minds" often being invoked. Their interior lives and successful journey towards maturity were put at risk each and every time they encountered unsuitable filmic materials. Thus, while assuming that adults could fend for them-selves among the limited number of theaters in Reykjavík, children were a whole another matter and required protection. Civic bodies were consequently formed and empowered to evaluate and regulate films. But even in the context of fairly rigorous surveillance and codification, the turn taken by regulatory authorities in the 1980s strikes one as exceptional and unprecedented. The Film Certification Board (TFCB) was, for the first time, authorized to prohibit and suppress from distribution films deemed especially malignant and harmful. Motivating this vast expansion of the powers of the regulatory body were concerns about a variety of exploitation and horror films that were being distributed on video, films that were thought to transgress so erroneously in terms of on-screen violence that their mere existence posed a grave threat to children. Two years after finding its role so radical-ly enlarged, TFCB put together a list of 67 "video-nasties", to borrow a term from the very similar but later moral panic that occurred in Britain. Police raids were conducted and every video store in the country was visited in a nation-wide effort to remove the now illegal films from rental stores. This article posits that the icelandic nasties list can be viewed as something of a unique testament to the extent to which the meaning, aesthetic coherence and the affect of cultural objects is constructed in the process of reception, while also main-taining that the process of reception is thoroughly shaped by historical discourses, social class, embedded moral codes and a social system of values, as well as techno-logical progress. in what amounts to a perfect storm of moralizing, political games-manship and the sheer panic of a certain segment of the population, the governing institutions in iceland managed in the span of months to overturn constitutionally protected rights to free speech and privacy, as well as undermine central principles of the republic. Two decades would pass before these setbacks were recuperated, and then only on a legal and institutional level. While analyzing the history of the icelandic video nasties, the article also attempts to grapple with and articulate the symbolic register of the ban, how it speaks to the status of cinema in Iceland at the close of the twentieth century, and what ideological strains, morals and/or values were being put into play and funneled into this particular debate. Then, to close, the role of the most notorious of the nasties, Cannibal Holocaust (Ruggero Deodato, 1980), is examined in the context of media coverage and parliamentary debates at the time.

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1405.

ParlaMint 2.1 is a multilingual set of 17 comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after November 1st 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1431.