Suchergebnisse

The essay I want to discuss here was published in the 'pre-global' era. I find it telling that Meaghan's 'Politics Now: Anxieties of a Petit-Bourgeois Intellectual', dated 14 July 1985 in its appearance inThe Pirate's Fiancéein 1988, was first published inInterventionin Sydney and shortly afterwards as lead essay inFrameworkin London: that way people in London would actually be able to read it as well.1In his introduction, theFrameworkeditor Paul Willemen linked the essay to one of Judith Williamson's inNew Socialistin September 1986, where she had occasion to protest 'against the prevailing tendency on the British cultural "left" to proclaim the virtues of ideological regimes exemplified byDallasandDynasty'.2These were connections that had to be forged by hand, as it were, rather than simply by clicking a 'follow' button on Academia.edu.

In der deutschen Nachkriegspolitik finden sich einige fundamentale Richtungswechsel. Sie trafen und treffen auf ein politisches System, das der Zielerreichung von Politikwenden hohe Hürden setzt, zugleich aber auch eine bemerkenswerte Offenheit und Flexibilität erkennen lässt. Politik und Verwaltung erweisen sich im Rückblick in einem Ausmaß als wandlungsfähig, wie es gängige Restriktionsanalysen nicht erwarten ließen. Die im politischen System angelegten Konsenshürden und Koordinationsprobleme wurden in transformativen Wendeprojekten fallweise unterschiedlich angegangen und verarbeitet. "Muddling Through", flexible Verhandlungspraktiken und "auf Sicht fahren" sind im föderalen Mehrebenensystem mit Koalitionsregierungen und starken gesellschaftlichen Spitzenverbänden seit jeher anzutreffen. Neu sind Veränderungen im Modus der Interessenvermittlung, insbesondere der Niedergang korporatistischer Steuerungsformen und der Verlust berechenbarer Mehrheitsverhältnisse in Bund und Ländern, die im früheren Dreieinhalb-Parteiensystem der Bundesrepublik noch gegeben waren. Insgesamt ist eine Zerfaserung der Interessenvermittlung in diverse Ad-hoc-Kommissionen und Gipfelrunden festzustellen, die - wie am Beispiel der Energiewende gezeigt wird - die Bildung einer breiten operativen Konsensbasis und Koordination erschwert.

"Heterarchy in World Politics challenges the fundamental framing of international relations and world politics. IR theory has always been dominated by the presumption that world politics is, at its core, a system of states. However, this has always been problematic, challengeable, time-bound, and increasingly anachronistic. In the 21st century, world politics is becoming increasingly multi-nodal and characterized by "heterarchy" - the coexistence and conflict between differently structured micro- and meso quasi-hierarchies that compete and overlap not only across borders but also across economic-financial sectors and social groupings. Thinking about international order in terms of heterarchy is a paradigm shift away from the mainstream "competing paradigms" of realism, liberalism, and constructivism. This book explores how, since the mid-20th century, the dialectic of globalization and fragmentation has caught states and the interstate system in the complex evolutionary process toward heterarchy. These heterarchical institutions and processes are characterized by increasing autonomy and special interest capture. The process of heterarchy empowers strategically situated agents - especially agents with substantial autonomous resources, and in particular economic resources - in multi-nodal competing institutions with overlapping jurisdictions. The result is the decreasing capacity of macro-states to control both domestic and transnational political/economic processes. In this book, the authors demonstrate that this is not a simple breakdown of states and the states system; it is in fact the early stages of a structural evolution of world politics. This book will interest students, scholars and researchers of international relations theory. It will also have significant appeal in the fields of world politics, security studies, war studies, peace studies, global governance studies, political science, political economy, political power studies, and the social sciences more generally"--

This symposium is the culmination of work that began in October 2007, when fourteen scholars from Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States convened at Case Western Reserve University to participate in the research conference Toward a Comparative Politics of Gender: Advancing the Discipline along Interdisciplinary Boundaries. The conference was funded by a Presidential Initiative Grant from the University and further supported by an ACES grant. Dr. Gregory Eastwood made available the Library of the Inamori Center for Ethnics and Excellence for our conference meetings. Many thanks to Linda Gilmore, Tonae Bolton-Dove, Gail Papay, Shelley White, and Sharon Skowronski for their expert administrative support. Professors Dorothy Miller (Women's Studies), Rosalind Simson (Philosophy, Law and Women's Studies), and Kelly McMann (Political Science and International Studies) served as discussants of the conference papers. To Theda Skocpol, who presented remarks at the opening dinner of the conference, and to the scholars who participated in the CPG conference and whose contributions are included in this symposium, I offer my deepest appreciation and gratitude.What do we mean by a comparative politics of gender? How would a comparative politics of gender advance our understanding of politics generally? What would it take to develop a gendered comparative political analysis? In the essays that follow, Teri Caraway, Louise Chappell, Leslie Schwindt-Bayer, and Aili Mari Tripp elaborate their understandings of a comparative politics of gender. Five additional essays focus specifically on issues of democratization (Lisa Baldez, Georgina Waylen), political institutions and representation (Mili Caul Kittilson, Mona Lena Krook), and comparative sex equality policies (Mala Htun and Laurel Weldon). In this introductory essay, I discuss what I mean by "gender" in the context of comparative politics. Briefly enumerating the advantages of comparative politics as a subfield for a gendered analysis of political phenomena, I discuss how a comparative politics of gender can serve to advance our understanding of politics generally, and I provide an example of subfield research—the study of political violence—where gender as a metaconcept may be particularly useful. I conclude by considering what it would mean to our study of gender and of comparative politics to place gender as a central concept in comparative political research and to move to a comparative politics of gender.

The phrase "Christian politics" evokes two meanings: political relations between denominations in one direction, and the contributions of Christian churches to debates about the governing of society. The contributors to this volume address Christian politics in both senses and argue that Christianity is always and inevitably political in the Pacific Islands. Drawing on ethnographic and historical research in Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, and Fiji, the authors argue that Christianity and politics have redefined each other in much of Oceania in ways that make the two categories ins

"Historically, women have been under-represented in politics. Patriarchal political parties, debilitating customs and discriminatory selection processes, and obstructionist attitudes have generally contributed to the inability of women to enter mainstream political life in a significant way. In Women in Caribbean Politics Cynthia Barrow-Giles and her co-contributors profile 20 of the most influential women in modern Caribbean politics who have struggled and excelled, in spite of the obstacles. Divided into four parts, this volume looks at women who led the struggle for freedom; those who agitated for equal rights and justice in the pre-independence period; postcolonial trailblazers; as well as a group which Cynthia Barrow-Giles refers to as 'Women CEOs.' The profiles cover women from 12 territories, with varying political, ethnic and socio-economic issues. Anyone with an interest in Caribbean Politics or Gender Studies will find Women in Caribbean Politics to be an excellent introduction. For students and teachers, it will be a valuable resource, as it highlights some of the little-known stories of Caribbean women who have set the foundation for, and continue to help to shape the identity of their nations and the region on a whole." --Publisher's website

THE PROBLEMS FACING CONTEMPORARY JAPANESE WOMEN ARE ESSENTIALLY THE PROBLEMS OF ADVANCED CAPITALISM, THOUGH INSERTED IN A CULTURAL FRAMEWORK THAT IS CONSIDERABLY DIFFERENT FROM THOSE OF EUROPE OR AMERICA. IN THIS ESSAY, THE AUTHOR TAKES A BROAD VIEW OF FEMINIST POLITICS IN JAPAN, MINDFUL THAT IT EXTENDS BEYOND THE WOMEN'S MOVEMENT TO CONSUMER, PEACE, AND ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS.

AbstractPopulism undoubtedly has a long history in the politics of the US, and there is no doubt that populism has significantly affected American politics in a variety of ways. However, what exactly is meant by "populism" is frequently ambiguous and ill-defined. Political commentators routinely label individuals or ideas as populist, without even attempting to explain how and why the person or idea in question relates to populism. Scholars are not immune to acting in a similar fashion. Populism's presence is more often asserted than demonstrated in any convincing way. Here I engage in a thorough examination of the substance of populism in American politics. All elements of American populism – its championing of the common people, it rural roots, its anti-elitism, anti-intellectualism, and anti-government views, and its religious and cultural dimensions – will be explored. The paper closes with an attempt to suss out the place of populism in contemporary American politics.

"Diffusion in International Politics" published on by Oxford University Press.

Comparative politics often involves testing of hypotheses using new methodological approaches without giving sufficient attention to the concepts which are fundamental to hypotheses, particularly the ability of these concepts to 'travel'. Proper operationalising requires deep reflection on the concept, not simply establishing how it should be measured. Conceptualising Comparative Politics - the flagship book of Routledge's series of the same name - breaks new ground by emphasising the role of thoroughly thinking through concepts and deep familiarity with the case that inform the conceptual reflection. In this thought- provoking book, established academics as well as emerging scholars in the field collect (and invite) scholarship in the tradition of conceptual comparative politics. The book posits that concepts may be used comparatively as 'lenses', 'building blocks' and 'scripts', and contributors show how these conceptual tools can be employed in original comparative research. Importantly, contributors to Conceptualising Comparative Politics do not simply use concepts in one of these three ways but they apply them with careful consideration of empirical variation. The chapters included in this volume address some of the most contentious issues in comparative politics (populism, state capacity, governance, institutions, elections, secularism, among others) from various geographic regions and model how scholars doing comparative politics might approach such subjects. Concepts make possible scholarly conversations including creative confrontations across paradigms. Conceptualising Comparative Politics will challenge you to think of how to engage in conceptual comparative inquiry and how to use various methodologically sound techniques to understand and explain comparative politics.

Introduction: Why and how you should use this book -- Keywords (and their variants) -- 101 keywords in Australian politics

"The Bible is fundamental to Western culture. Political philosophers from Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau to modern political theorists such as George H. Sabine, Leo Strauss, and Sheldon S. Wolin have drawn upon biblical examples. American political leaders, such as Thomas Paine, Abraham Lincoln, and William Jennings Bryan all drew heavily upon the Bible. Today, most contemporary politicians display less familiarity with Scripture although many proudly proclaim themselves to be born-again Christians. Politics in the Bible has a simple goal: to help readers to think critically about how the Bible illuminates understanding of justice, leadership, and politics. For a political scientist, there are great advantages to studying the Bible. Students of the Bible have short texts to analyze, but they have a history of two thousand years of Jewish and Christian scholarly discussion. In that tradition, Paul R. Abramson analyzes stories drawn from eighteen of the thirty-nine books of the Hebrew Bible and fifteen of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament. Abramson argues that the Bible is a book that should be read even by those who do not believe it has any transcendent significance. One can choose to read it as the revealed word of God, as a source of Western morality, as a compilation of interesting stories, poetry, and history, or as a work of great literature. Although this book discusses selected stories that have political implications, it also considers parts that have literary merit. This unusual volume may stimulate new thinking about the Bible as a source of insight into political ideas."--Provided by publisher.

Our culture's attitudes towards children are ambiguous – as found also in therelationship between children and politics. The protective mood that has befallenchildren over the last two centuries entails their separations from adults – and fromthe serious business of economics and politics. How do we deal with the dilemma,which as a consequence makes it difficult to have a discourse about children andpolitics? This article nevertheless makes some reflections over the theme andsuggests that one can, as far as politics is concerned, in principle talk about (a)children as subjects, (b) children/childhood as a non-targeted object (i.e. in terms ofstructural forces' impact), (c) children/childhood as targeted objects (politicalinitiatives having children in mind), and finally as (d) instrumentalised objects.The thorny question raised in each case is to which extent children are beneficiariesor if that is the case primarily as a side effect of gains to adults/adult society. Wouldpublic investments in children have been made to the current extent, if expectationsof a surplus return were not an option?