Suchergebnisse

In E-cigarettes and the Comparative Politics of Harm Reduction: History, Evidence and Policy, Virginia Berridge, Ronald Bayer, Amy L. Fairchild and Wayne Hall scrutinise the history underlying the current debate over electronic cigarettes. Exploring the reasons for contrasting public health approaches to nicotine use in the US, UK and Australia, this edited volume makes an important contribution to the discourse on e-cigarette policy and … Continued

In E-cigarettes and the Comparative Politics of Harm Reduction: History, Evidence and Policy, Virginia Berridge, Ronald Bayer, Amy L. Fairchild and Wayne Hall scrutinise the history underlying the current debate over electronic cigarettes. Exploring the reasons for contrasting public health approaches to nicotine use in the US, UK and Australia, this edited volume makes an important contribution to the discourse … Continued

Jens Jungblut Several people have argued in recent years that higher education has become a more important policy sector in most if not all countries around the world (see e.g. Busemeyer, Garritzmann, & Neimanns, 2020; Garritzmann, 2016; Gornitzka & Maassen, 2014). An increasing percentage of the global population pursues or attains a tertiary education degree, […]
The post Comparative Higher Education Politics. Policymaking in North America and Western Europe appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Jens Jungblut Several people have argued in recent years that higher education has become a more important policy sector in most if not all countries around the world (see e.g. Busemeyer, Garritzmann, & Neimanns, 2020; Garritzmann, 2016; Gornitzka & Maassen, 2014). An increasing percentage of the global population pursues or attains a tertiary education degree, […]
The post Comparative Higher Education Politics. Policymaking in North America and Western Europe appeared first on Europe of Knowledge.

[…] of Democratic Audit. She recently completed an MSc in Comparative Politics at LSE and edits the South Asia @ LSE blog. She […]

Cyrine Kortas is a Tunisian postdoctoral fellow at MECAM centre, majored in English literature. She is an associate professor at the Higher Institute of Languages, Gabes, Tunisia and a researcher at the LAD lab unit at the faculty of arts and humanities Sfax. Her research interests include: comparative literature, feminist and gender studies, as well as teaching literature in EFL classrooms.

Contributor(s): Dr Jonathan Hopkin, Dr Brian Klass, Professor Tomila Lankina | Welcome to LSE IQ, a monthly podcast from the London School of Economics and Political Science. This is the podcast where we ask some of the leading social scientists - and other experts - to answer intelligent questions about economics, politics or society. Earlier this year, the independent watchdog organisation Freedom House published a report cautioning that, in 2017, democracy had faced its most serious crisis in decades. In this episode, Jess Winterstein asks what might lie behind this decline in global freedom and what the future might hold for democracy. This episode features: Dr Jonathan Hopkin, Associate Professor of Comparative Politics, LSE Department of Government and co-director of Democratic Audit; Dr Brian Klass, a Fellow in Comparative Politics at LSE's Department of Government; and Professor Tomila Lankina, LSE Department of International Relations and lead of the Political Mobilisation and Democracy project. For further information about the podcast visit lse.ac.uk/iq and please tell us what you think using the hashtag #LSEIQ.

Seit den Terroranschlägen vom 7. Oktober 2023 und der anhaltenden Eskalation des Nahostkonfliktes kommt es auf anti-israelischen Demonstrationen wiederholt zu Anzeigen wegen Aufrufen zur Gewalt und Volkverhetzung. Dieser Trend ist bei genauerem Hinsehen gar nicht so neu: Bereits seit längerem gibt es Stimmen, die vor einem islamisierten Antisemitismus in Deutschland warnen. Eine entsprechende gesellschaftliche Debatte gestaltet sich jedoch als schwierig, weil rechte Akteure die Situation nutzen, um Muslim*innen und Geflüchtete unter einen Generalverdacht zu stellen. Der Beitrag beleuchtet die daraus resultierenden verzerrten Kommunikationsbedingungen sowie die Genese des islamisierten Antisemitismus und präsentiert empirische Erkenntnisse über seine Verbreitung und Ursachen.
Author information





Cemal Öztürk



Dr. des. Cemal Öztürk ist wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter von Prof. Dr. Susanne Pickel am Lehrstuhl für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft an der Universität Duisburg-Essen und Assistent im BMBF geförderten Projektes "Radikaler Islam – Radikaler Anti-Islam" (RIRA). Seine Forschung dreht sich um die sozialpsychologischen Triebkräfte gruppenbezogener Vorurteile und Ressentiments und ihre politischen und gesellschaftlichen Folgen (z. B. Rückwirkungen auf die politische Kultur, die Wahl rechtspopulistischer Parteien, Rechtsextremismus und Radikalisierung). // Dr. des. Cemal Öztürk is a research assistant to Prof. Dr. Susanne Pickel at the Chair of Comparative Politics at the University of Duisburg-Essen. University of Duisburg-Essen and assistant in the BMBF-funded project "Radical Islam - Radical Anti-Islam" (RIRA). His research focuses on the socio-psychological drivers of prejudices and resentments and their political and social consequences (e.g. effects on political culture, right-wing populist parties, right-wing extremism and radicalization).

|



Der Beitrag Der islamisierte Antisemitismus: Aufgebauschtes Schreckgespenst oder bagatellisiertes Ressentiment? erschien zuerst auf PRIF BLOG.

Welcome to another episode of Fully Automated! This week we are starting a short series of podcasts on the place of Marxism in In- ternational Relations. Next episode, we'll be joined by Sebastian Sclofsky and Kevin Funk, who are going to be discussing a piece they have in the latest issue of International Studies Perspectives, 'The Specter That Haunts Political Science: The Neglect and Misreading of Marx in International Relations and Comparative Politics'. So, look out for that episode, coming in about a week's time. Its a great interview, and I am really looking forward to posting it for you.



Meanwhile, on this episode, we are joined by Bryant Sculos, an adjunct professor at Florida International University (FIU), to discuss an 2015 piece he co-authored with Sean Walsh, of Capital University, entitled "Marx in Miami: Reflections on Teaching and the Confrontation with Ideology," which appeared in the journal Class, Race and Corporate Power. In this interview we talk about the particular challenges of teaching Marxism in a city like Miami, with its high population of Cuban immigrants. You'll hear Bryant discuss some of the unique challenges he encounters in the classroom, and some of the pedagogical approaches that he and his co-author have developed, as they seek to overcome them. Marx, of course, was one of the great thinkers of the historical situatedness of human consciousness. And, regardless of your take on his wider political program, the value of his approach to questions of human nature and political power, cannot be gainsaid.

Towards the end of the interview, we'll also ask Bryant about his recent run-in with the far-right media, who've picked up on a recent piece of his, on the Disney movie Beauty and the Beast, which Bryant argues is exemplary of toxic capitalist masculinity ... we'll ask him why he refused to go on television and defend the piece.

The new issue of the journal Transnational Legal Theory (Volume 3, Number 3, March 2013) is out. The issue includes:

Constitutional Adjudication and the 'Dimensions' of Judicial Activism: Comparative Legal and Institutional Heuristics (Pierdominici, Leonardo)
The Emergence of Global Administrative Law and Transnational Regulation (Ladeur, Karl-Heinz)
Theorising Global Governance Inside Out: A Response to Professor Ladeur (Xavier, Sujith)
The Gulf between Promise and Claim: Understanding International Law's Failure to Decolonise (Rajah, Jothie)
The Justice of International Law (Sellers, Mns)
Running from a Bear: Coordinate Constitutional Interpretation in Canada (Adams, Eric M.)
What Makes a Global Market? Reflections on Market Governance, Globalisation and the Law (Daskalova, Victoria)

This episode continues a short series of podcasts on the place ofMarxism in International Relations. Last episode, we had Bryant Sculos, of Florida International University discussing his piece "Marx in Miami: Reflections on Teaching and the Confrontation with Ideology," co-authored with Sean Walsh, of Capital University. If you haven't listed to that episode yet, check it out. We got into some great discussion about various techniques and exercises that allow us to use Marx in the classroom, and create space in students' minds for thinking about the historically-situated nature of human consciousness. And I think what we took away from the conversation was this idea, simply, that while perhaps its not our role to ensure that our students buy into Marxism as a political program, there's nevertheless a really worthwhile payoff if instructors are willing to take the time to model for students how Marxism can help us think historically about who we are. Where do our ideas come from? What is subjectivity? Marx offers a range of useful thoughts on all these subjects.

Now, as a follow-up to last week's episode, THIS WEEK we are joined by Sebastian Sclofsky and Kevin Funk, who have a piece in the latest issue of International Studies Perspectives, 'The Specter That Haunts Political Science: The Neglect and Misreading of Marx in International Relations and Comparative Politics' (free version can be found here). If last week's episode was about the opportunities that Marxism offers, this week's episode is about the rather weak state of Marxism in political science, these days.

Sebastián Sclofsky is a PhD Candidate in the Political Science Department & Center for Latin American Studies at the University of Florida. His research focuses on the politics of criminal justice and urban policing — Looking primarily at South Los Angeles and São Paulo, he examines how negative encounters with the police shape residents' racial identities, local space, and sense of second-class citizenship.

Kevin Funk is Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science and Law and director of International Studies at Spring Hill College in Mobile, Alabama. And his main research focus right now is on the globalizing discourses of transnational corporations, and the emergence of micro-level zones of global-urban capital, like the "Sanhattan" neighborhood, in Santiago, Chile.

Alessia Carnevale holds a PhD in Civilizations of Asia and Africa from Sapienza University of Rome. Her doctoral thesis deals with Tunisian counter-culture and the 'committed song' of the 1970s-1980s. She previously graduated in Comparative Literatures and Cultures from the University of Naples l'Orientale. Her research explores the relations between culture and politics, issues of collective memories and (counter)narratives, and grassroots/top-down interventions in the cultural field.

Welcome to another episode of Fully Automated!



With the inauguration of Joe Biden just around the corner, many are pondering what new approaches his team might bring to US foreign policy. Despite President Trump's penchant for bombast and bellicose rhetoric, it can't be gainsaid that his reign has been more or less dovish in comparison to those of his more recent predecessors. One huge exception to this rule, of course, has been Iran.



Early 2020 US forces assassinated the Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. Then, in November 2020, we saw the assassination of military scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh — a hit apparently green lit by Trump himself. In response to this latest provocation, the Iranian parliament introduced a law that will require Biden to renew the Iranian nuclear deal, or JCPOA, effectively within a month of taking office. The law also requires Iran to produce at least 120 kg of 20-percent enriched uranium annually. What does it all mean? On the one hand, as former UNSCOM inspector Scott Ritter has been arguing, Iran's response has been remarkably calm. The amount of higher enriched fuel to be produced is still very low, arguably not for military purposes, and is "in conformity" with the limits proscribed under the JCPOA. Nevertheless, as Ryan Grimm reports, even on the way out the door, the Trump Administration has been plotting military strikes against Iran.



To discuss the current situation, and the release of their new co-authored book, Understanding and Explaining the Iranian Nuclear 'Crisis': Theoretical Approaches (Lexington: 2020), our guests for this episode are Drs. Hal Tagma and Paul Lenze Jr. Tagma is Assistant Professor at the Department Politics and International Affairs, at Northern Arizona University, where he teaches Middle Eastern politics, the political economy of international conflict, and critical approaches to international relations theory. Lenze Jr is Senior Lecturer in Politics, also at Northern Arizona University. He teaches International Relations and Comparative Politics with a focus on Civil-Military Relations, Middle East politics, and US National Security. Lenze can be reached on Twitter @DrPaulELenzeJr



This is a rich book, which I think will appeal both to IR theorists, and those looking to gain a sense of the debates around US-Iran relations. On the one hand, it contains a rich meta-commentary on contemporary IR, and the theoretical possibilities it contains for dialogue between its various theoretical paradigms. Second, its a very detailed and reasoned analysis of the state of US Iran relations, and the idea that there is a 'crisis' (and what it even means to speak of crisis).



Before we get started, the authors make strong claims in the book in favor of what they term eclectic pluralism, and they are critical of the idea that there is only one truth, or one story to be told, about International relations. That might seem to imply they see all truths in IR as somehow equal or equivalent. Nevertheless, as you'll hear, the book is doesn't hesitate to land some punches. In the chapter on Marxism and World Systems Theory, for example, they write that, from the perceptive of Marxism:




Modern academic Realism is a superstructural tool that legitimizes and naturalizes the exploitative and violent polito-economic order of global capitalism. Modern academic Realism is not outside of history nor is it 'timeless wisdom.' Instead, Realism is caught up in constructing the violent, capitalist World-System that it is hopelessly trying to make sense of.




Thanks for listening. We don't ask for any financial support, in bringing you this show. But if you like what you hear, please leave a kind review on your podcast app. If you have any feedback, you can DM us @occupyirtheory on Twitter and Instagram. Thanks!

 Book CLICK:Constitutional PolarizationA Critical Review of the U.S. Political System               by Josep M. ColomerABSTRACTIn this book, Josep M. Colomer argues, against much conventional wisdom, that political polarization is embedded in the constitutional design. The book puts forth that sustained conflict and institutional gridlock are not mainly questions of character, personalities, or determined by socioeconomic or cultural inequalities. They are, above all, the result of the formula of separation of powers between the Presidency and Congress, which, together with a system of only two parties, fosters adversarial politics and polarization. Colomer contends that in the past, bipartisan cooperation and domestic peace flourished only under a foreign existential threat, such as during the Cold War. Once such a threat vanished, unsettled issues and new social concerns have broadened the public agenda and triggered again animosity and conflict. Constitutional Polarization offers innovative and relevant insights in political science to a broad readership without technical or academic jargon. It will be of high interest to those readers attentive to current affairs, as well as to public officers, journalists, pundits, and those in the study of political science, where it can also become a staple for courses in American Politics.  TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction: It's the Institutions!   1: A Tamed Democracy  1. Democracy Was Only for Small Countries 2. From Empire to Federation 3. Montesquieu Did Not Speak English   II: An Elected King with the Name of President  4. The Archaic Presidential Election 5. Biased Filters and Checks 6. The Presidentialist Temptation   III: Two Parties with Narrow Agendas  7. The Framers Did Not Like Factions 8. The Unforeseen Emergence of Only Two Parties 9. Shifting Majorities and Accordion Agendas   IV: Either Internal Anger or External Fear  10. Anarchy and Civil War 11. Cold-War Fear and Cooperation 12. The Ongoing Turmoil  V: A Future in Hope  ADVANCED PRAISE: "Many who worry about the state of American democracy adopt a narrow focus andconsequently propose specific reform proposals such as ranked-choice voting orcampaign finance restrictions. This book by an eminent scholar of comparative politicssituates American democracy in a broader historical, comparative, and—especially—international context. Along the way, it makes a welcome shift in the focus of attentionfrom what is going on inside the heads of voters to what is occurring in the larger social,economic, and international worlds in which they live." Morris P. FiorinaStanford University and Hoover Institution "In this brilliant book, Josep Colomer documents how the visionary framers of the USConstitution devised the doctrine of separation of powers to curb monarchical rule andthe follies of immoderate majorities. Although presidentialism generally succeeded in aworld long dominated by imperial powers, he shows how in recent decades theincreased gridlock of divided government continues to undermine genuine democraticgovernance."Arturo ValenzuelaGeorgetown UniversityCo-author (with Juan J. Linz) of The Failure of Presidential Democracy Constitutional Polarization: a critical review of the U.S. political system - Offers a uniqueperspective on polarization, a fertile field for investigation and debates among scholarsconcerning contemporary American problems as well as historical controversies, withplenty of teaching moments for students. The book is free of jargon and is written in away that should be accessible to a wide range of readers. Josep Colomer is an accomplished scholar in political science, an original thinker withdeep knowledge of political history. His scholarship combines the best of formal theoryand comparative empirical analysis. He is an expert on the development andfunctioning of political institutions. The issue of political polarization is of growinginterest and widely taught.BROWNS BOOKShttps://www.brownsbfs.co.uk/ PREORDER CLICK book flyer 20% discountAlso available at: Amazon |

The ISA poster maker was not wrong I am sticking around in Montreal after a wonderful ISA conference as I have a CDSN workshop on Climate Security.  So, I am hanging in my hotel room, marveling at how lucky I am.  I had a great time, meeting old friends, making new connections, giving feedback on a wonderful book, and being really grateful.  After two cancelled ISA's (Hawaii and Vegas, damn it!) and one strange, poorly attended one in Nashville last year, I was determined to hug longer and share my gratitude with all those who helped me along the way.  As it was a conference full of special events, this was not hard to do. Lauren and me on reconstructed McTavish        Started by meeting up with a former undergrad who got hooked on IR in my Intro class at McGill . We walked around our old stomping grounds.  Lauren Konken and I had a great time, chatting about ye olde days and noticing what has changed at McGill.  The plywood instead of a real railing on my old office balcony?  Nope, that didn't change.A ritual for Montreal conferences is for my former student Ora Szekely to take me to her favorite Chinese restaurant in Montreal's mini-Chinatown.  I am always thrilled to see my former students--they are mostly doing great, and they are mostly very funny people.  So, conferences are great for both silliness and pride.  I am quite thankful that I have had such great students over the years even if I whine about reading endless drafts.I met with several editors to promote the Dave/Phil/Steve book manuscript, and they all indicated much interest. I feel good about our chances of getting our book out to a great press in the near future. This was a year full of honorary panels honoring people I know.  Which means I am getting old.  I was asked to be on Victor Asal's panel, as the Ethnicity, Nationalism, and Migration section gave him an award for all of his work, and it was my honor to join Ora, Erin Jenne, Pat James, and some other folks (my memory sucks after a week of reduced sleep).  Victor has published an incredible amount of work in many areas with many, many co-authors.  And he is a mensch.  These panels are supposed involve some roasting, so I teased him gently while also noting his contributions and his mensch-ness.For the first time, I attended the Presidential speech because the President for the past year has been Debbi Avant.  She was one of two senior IR grad students at UCSD when I arrived.  She was most welcoming, throwing a party for the prospective students, and then over my time there, most generous with her advice, and most supportive.  She was also a hell of a role model, starting with her doing security stuff at a time where no prof at UCSD did international security.  She was a pathbreaker in the field of civil-military relations, applying principal-agent theory to it before Peter Feaver made it cool to do so.  Since then, I have often asked her for advice, which she provided quickly and insightfully.  She threw yet another party when I visited Denver when I gave a talk on the Steve and Dave NATO book.  Most recently, she has served quite helpfully on the CDSN Advisory Board.  She gave a great, challenging talk, and was perhaps a little disappointed she didn't get as much pushback as she expected.The other highlight was seeing my supervisor, Miles Kahler, be honored by various IPE luminaries.  The person assigned to talk about his work as an advisor could not make it, so I was happy to stand up towards the end and tell folks what a difference Miles has made in my career.  It was great to hear from these IPE leaders how Miles stood out, making me realize how I ended up emulating him--focusing on the domestic politics of IR, being at the intersection of comparative politics and IR, being a fox rather than a hedgehog (moving around, studying a bunch of stuff, rather than being focused on one big thing), and so on.  I was the first PhD student for whom he served as chair of the dissertation committee/primary supervisor (Debbi was the first one he worked with at UCSD).  So, maybe I made a dent on him too?  I am glad I got a chance to say a few words of thanks (and of snark) and share my appreciation of not just a great scholar but a terrific person.  I am far less intimidated of him now ;)So, it was perfect that I ended my ISA by going out to dinner with Miles, his partner, and with another student of his.  It was a great dinner with a great beer, one that had a can that all admired.  "Any Time Is the Right Time."  Indeed.