Suchergebnisse

Reading Havel's essay 'The Power of the Powerless' has always been an ambiguous experience for me. Written in an intriguing and intuitively appealing literary style, it features many original political-philosophical insights. The conceptual references, however, are underdeveloped, theoretically incoherent, and self-contradictory. And yet, Havel articulates a consistent and penetrating critique of a totalitarian regime from the standpoint of a closely connected, personally engaged critic. Adapted from the source document.

The article aims to expose and contest the gendered representation of betrayal in resistance movements. For a theoretical framework, I draw on Simone de Beauvoir's critique of masculinist myths of femininity inThe Second Sex, combined with contemporary feminist scholarship on the oppressive constructions of female subjectivity in debates on war and violence. I trace how the hegemonic visions of virile resistance tend to subsume the grey zones of women's resistance activity under two reductive myths of femininity – the self-sacrificial mother and the seductivefemme fatale– while obscuring the complexities of betrayal arising from women's embodied vulnerabilities. I demonstrate the political relevance of this theoretical exploration on the example of two representative French Resistance novels, Joseph Kessel'sArmy of Shadowsand Roger Vailland'sPlaying with Fire.

In 2001, the Task Force developed an initial Action Plan, outlining specific issues, goals, and actions important for addressing the problem of AR. This document, entitled A Public Health Action Plan to Combat Antimicrobial Resistance, Part I: Domestic Issues, reflected a broad- based consensus of participating federal agencies, which was reached with individual input from state and local health agencies, universities, professional societies, pharmaceutical companies, healthcare delivery organizations, agricultural producers, consumer groups, and other members of the public. Continued collaboration with these partners has been vital to achieving successful implementation of the Action Plan. In 2011, the Action Plan was revised based in part on individual input obtained at a consultants' meeting held in Atlanta, Georgia in December 2007. Present at the public meeting were consultants with wide-ranging expertise in areas such as human and veterinary medicine, pharmaceutical and diagnostics manufacturing, animal husbandry, clinical microbiology, epidemiology, and infectious diseases and infection control, and state and local public health officials. This 2012 update reflects changes since the 2011 Action Plan. The Action Plan includes action items organized into four focus areas: Surveillance, Prevention and Control, Research, and Product Development. Within each of these four areas, specific goals are listed. ; Executive summary -- Introduction and overview -- The Focus Areas -- Focus Area I: Surveillance -- Focus Area II: Prevention and Control -- Focus Area III: Research -- Focus Area IV: Product Development -- Acronyms and abbreviations -- Appendix A: Retired Projects and Implementation Steps ; Interagency Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance ; co-chairs: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food and Drug Administration. ; Title from caption (viewed on October 1, 2012). ; The Interagency Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance (hereafter referred to as the Task Force) was created in 1999 to coordinate the activities of federal agencies in addressing antimicrobiala resistance (AR) in recognition of the increasing importance of AR as a public health threat. The Task Force is co-chaired by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and also includes the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (HHS/ASPR), and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health (HHS/OASH). ; Mode of access: Internet; PDF reader (Acrobat .pdf file: 339 KB, 40 p.). ; Text (electronic publication)

A great deal has been written in the International Relations literature about the role of resilience in our social world. One of the central debates in the scholarship concerns the relationship between resilience and resistance, which several scholars consider to be one of mutual exclusivity. For many theorists, an individual or a society can either be resilient or resistant, but not both. In this article, we argue that this understanding of the resilience–resistance connection suffers from three interrelated problems: it treats resilience and resistance as binary concepts rather than processes; it presents a simplistic conception of resilient subjects as apolitical subjects; and it eschews the 'transformability' aspect of resilience. In a bid to resolve these issues, the article advocates for the usefulness of a relational approach to the processes of resilience and resistance, and suggests an approach that understands resilience and resistance as engaged in mutual assistance rather than mutual exclusion. The case of the Palestinian national liberation movement illustrates our set of arguments.

In this extraordinary book one of the world's leading authorities on Islam explains what is happening in the Muslim world today and assesses the underlying causes.