Suchergebnisse

Report on Pepperdine College receiving the George Washington Medal of Honor by the Freedoms Foundation located in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. (Southwest Wave, Los Angeles, California) ; x1967

"Fifty years after Freedom Summer, To Write in the Light of Freedom offers a glimpse into the hearts of the African American youths who attended the Mississippi Freedom Schools in 1964. One of the most successful initiatives of Freedom Summer, more than forty Freedom Schools opened doors to thousands of young African American students. Here they learned civics, politics, and history, curriculum that helped them instead of the degrading lessons supporting segregation and Jim Crow and sanctioned by White Citizen's Councils. Young people enhanced their self-esteem and gained a new outlook on the future. And at more than a dozen of these schools, students wrote, edited, printed and published their own newspapers. For more than five decades, the Mississippi Freedom Schools have served as powerful models of educational activism. Yet, little has been published that documents black Mississippi youths' responses to this profound experience"--

"Alternative education models like home‐​school, micro schools, and hybrid schools are the wave of the educational future," says Josiah Enyart, founder of Freedom Learning Academy in Kansas.

This paper involves a critical survey of the major representative views of sport highlighting in what ways freedom is defined or addressed. The first, traditional account regards sport as essentially an extension of play, while the second, contemporary account regards sport as a extension of alienated capitalist labour. Underlying these accounts of sport are distinct political ideologies that, when fully uncovered, reveal basic differences in how freedom in sport is examined and understood.

In this manuscript I explore an example of an over‐privileged white woman who encounters two young Black men in a parking garage stairwell. Two related axioms are central to the oppressive script that lies before these subjects: the hetero‐patriarchal axiom that women are not safe alone at night and the racist axiom that Black men, especially young ones, are dangerous. These axioms are intended to ensure a practical conclusion—white women and Black men are supposed to avoid each other—thereby conferring legitimacy on the white male, hetero‐patriarchal order. If this is a performance of oppression, we must ask, what is the performance of freedom?Freedom, I argue, is the practice of allowing and encouraging a subject's multiple selves to interact so that one may devise and pursue courses of action that have been strategically hidden by systems of domination designed to cultivate pliant agency. My project augments accounts of multiplicitous subjectivity wherein our multiple social worlds socially constitute persons as both oppressor and oppressed, empowered and pliant. The practice of freedom conceived here acknowledges multiplicity while positioning us to seek feminist and antiracist futures that are not configured by oppression.

'The Freedom Not To Speak' by Haig Bosmajian is reviewed.

Reason, Freedom, and Democracy in Islam by Abdolkarim Soroush is reviewed.

Dombrowski reviews The Impossibility of Religious Freedom by Winnifred Fallers Sullivan.

Basic concepts in political science have been used in a purely classificatory way ever since Aristotle established the sixfold classification of the forms of government: monarchy, aristocracy, constitutional government, and their respective "perversions": tyranny, oligarchy, democracy. Similarly, a modern writer distinguishes among four types of political systems: the Anglo-American, the Continental European, the pre-industrial (or partially industrial), and the totalitarian. All these are categorical concepts; a political system is either monarchical or not, either of the Anglo-American or of another type. Such key terms as influence, control, authority, power, and freedom also tend to function categorically: one actor either has or lacks power over some activity of another actor; with respect to one actor, another is either free or unfree to act in a certain way.However, concrete political situations exhibit such characteristics to different degrees. Just as the substances we encounter in nature have varying degrees of hardness (rather than being either hard or soft), so a given political system is more, or less, totalitarian (or of the Anglo-American or of the pre-industrial type) than another. The United States and Soviet Russia have at present more power than any other country, and both are perhaps about equally powerful. Soldiers in general have less freedom than civilians, but they have more than prisoners. There can (or there cannot) be equal freedom for all.Since we do make such assertions, the question arises whether it is possible to give them precise empirical meaning. To do so, we must replace such categorical concepts as power and freedom by the corresponding comparative concepts, e.g., "more power than," "as much freedom as," and provide operational definitions for these expressions.