Suchergebnisse

After descending an escalator of his hotel at Central Park West on a June day in 2015, Donald Trump ascended a podium and proceeded to accuse Mexico of "sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us (sic). They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists" (Time 2015). It was a moment that marked the launch of his bid for president of the United States. From that point forward, Trump made immigration restriction one of the centerpieces of his campaign. Paired with an economically populist message, the nativist rhetoric shaped a narrative that helped launch him to the White House. His effectiveness partly lay in his ability to understand and exploit preexisting insecurities, partly in his outsider status, and partly in his willingness to tap into apparently widespread public sentiment that is uneasy with, if not overtly hostile to, migrants. This paper will try to make sense of the restrictionist logic that informs the Trump administration's worldview, alongside some of the underlying cultural, philosophical, and political conditions that inspired support for Trump by millions of Americans. This paper contends that the Clash of Civilizations (CoC) paradigm is a useful lens to help understand the positions that President Trump has taken with respect to international affairs broadly, and specifically in his approach to migration policy. This paradigm, originally coined by the historian Bernard Lewis but popularized by the political theorist Samuel Huntington (Hirsh 2016), provides a conceptual framework for understanding international relations following the end of the Cold War. It is a framework that emphasizes the importance of culture, rather than political ideology, as the primary fault line along which future conflicts will occur. Whether Trump ever consciously embraced such a framework in the early days of his candidacy is doubtful. He has been candid about the fact that he has never spent much time reading and generally responds to problems on instinct and "common sense" rather than a conceptually defined worldview developed by academics and intellectuals (Fisher 2016). Nevertheless, during the presidential campaign, and continuing after his victory, Trump surrounded himself with high-level advisers, political appointees, and staff who, if they have nothing else in common, embrace something roughly akin to the Clash of Civilizations perspective (Ashford 2016).2 The paper will focus primarily on Trump's approach to refugee resettlement. One might think that refugees would elicit an almost knee-jerk sympathy given the tragic circumstances that drove their migration, but perceptions of refugees are often tied up with geopolitical considerations and domestic political realities. Following 9/11, the threat of Islamic-inspired terrorism emerged as a national security priority. With the onset of the Syrian Civil War and the significant refugee crisis that ensued in its wake, paired with some high-profile terrorist attacks in the United States and Europe, the "Islamic threat" became even more pronounced. The perception that Islamic-inspired terrorism is a real and imminent threat has contributed to a growing antagonism toward the resettlement of refugees, and particularly Muslims. When viewed through the lens of the CoC paradigm, victims of persecution can easily be transformed into potential threats. Insofar as Islam is understood as an external and even existential threat to the American way life, the admission of these migrants and refugees could be deemed a serious threat to national security. This paper will begin by examining some of Trump's campaign promises and his efforts to implement them during the early days of his administration. Although the underlying rationale feeding into the contemporary reaction against refugee resettlement is unique in many respects, it is rooted in a much longer history that extends back to the World War II period. It was during this period that a more formal effort to admit refugees began, and it was over the next half century that the program developed. Understanding the historical backdrop, particularly insofar as its development was influenced by the Cold War context, will help to clarify some of the transitions that influenced the reception of refugees in the decades after the fall of the Soviet Union. Such an exploration also helps to explain how and why a CoC paradigm has become ascendant. The decline of the ideologically driven conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union has, according Huntington's thesis, been superseded by culturally based conflicts that occur when competing civilizations come into contact. The conceptual framework that the CoC framework embodies meshes well with the cultural and economic dislocation felt by millions of Trump supporters who are concerned about the continued dissolution of a shared cultural and political heritage. It is important to keep in mind that the CoC paradigm, as a conceptual framework for understanding Donald Trump and his approach to refugee resettlement and migration more broadly, is at its core pre-political; it helps to define the cultural matrix that people use to make sense of the world. The policy prescriptions that follow from it are more effect than cause.

This article aims to analyze the role of intellectuals in times of a global pandemic, whereby their discourse is assumed as a counterbalance to the hegemony of experts. It takes as a case study several exemplar speeches by Noam Chomsky, linguist and political activist, which were produced since the beginning of March 2020 regarding Covid-19. We will try to show that what marks Chomsky's discourse is related to the ethos (Maingueneau 2020) of an "intellectual engagement" (Bourdieu 2003). Within the universe of possibilities for choosing intellectuals' speeches, who are not necessarily convergent on topics affecting the world, and who, in general, don't talk about the same things, we chose to circumscribe our research on a specific intellectual: Noam Chomsky. In our view, he is an actual example of "intellectual action", representing properly "the relations between intellectuals and power" (Bobbio 1997). Therefore, it is necessary to understand the statements of intellectuals like Chomsky in moments of global uncertainty, and as a discourse of a different nature that stands against the experts' power in major media corporations or in government technocracy. Thus, far from wanting to exhaust the possibilities of interpreting the role of the wider category of intellectuals during the pandemic, our proposal is to outline the main points of how an intellectual like Chomsky has been developing and taking the same political positions since the beginning of his activism, in the 1960s, which refers to a type of intellectual engagement similar to that taken since the Dreyfus Affair. In the Dreyfus Affair we have an "inaugural archetype" of the concept of an "engaged intellectual" (Bourdieu 2003, p. 73–74), from which the one who has social capital as an erudite, a scientist or a writer, comes out publicly criticizing the established powers and denounces crimes committed by "the reasons of State" (Chomsky 1973). Therefore, we understand that Chomsky comes from a lineage whose representatives are inserted into a form of intellectual activism; a lineage that became known as "the century of intellectuals" (Winock 2000), the intellectual conceived as the one who "tells the truth", as Chomsky (1996, p. 55) himself define the "intellectual's responsibility": "At one level, the answer is too easy: the intellectual responsibility of the writer, or any decent person, is to tell the truth." On the one hand, there is a patent argument of authority behind the experts, based on a "scientific discourse", but, on the other hand, there is a kind of "moral commitment to the truth" behind the intellectuals' discourse that becomes a "deeper criticism". That is, a holistic view to ponder, in the case of Covid-19, the humanitarian problems created due to the pandemic, but also to think about relating this crisis to previous and further geopolitical reasons, from a freer position, not committed to companies and States. This position of the intellectual engagement is idealized in opposition to the "normal science discourse": the genre of the scientific discourse is produced under official means; it is plastered, blunted, does not allow the spokespeople of science to speak beyond what their research allows. In other words, the scientific experts are inscribed in discursive structures of "scenes of enunciation" (Maingueneau, 2006) that don't permit them to surpass the barriers of "objectiveness" and enter the field of moral judgment. Seeking to understand how Chomsky acts as an engaged intellectual during the pandemic, we searched his political network and the media in which he is involved. From that, we chose our corpus of analysis, selected from Noam Chomsky's innumerous speeches to a left-wing or clearly progressive press during the first months of Covid-19 pandemic in the form of interviews from March to June: an interview to Michael Brooks (2020), at the Jacobin Magazine (Brooks, M. 2020); an interview with his longtime interviewer, David Barsamian (2020), an Armenian-American journalist and political activist, published on the website Literary Hub; an interview with the British socialist newspaper Morning Star (2020); two interviews he gave to Amy Goodman (2020a, 2020b) for the American journal Democracy Now; an interview with the Croatian philosopher Srecko Horvat (2020), from which we will use only the parts of the transcript that we found published by Al Jazeera and not the video; an interview to the writer Chris Brooks to the magazine Labor Notes, channel for the proletarian movement; an interview to Cristina Magdaleno (2020) for the Euroactiv, a non-profit organization for democracy in European Union, as well as an interview Chomsky and Robert Pollin gave to C. J. Polychroniou (2020). We believe that through this corpus it is possible to cover the vast majority of Chomsky's speeches on the Covid-19 pandemic, centered on media where Chomsky usually features and that name themselves as having a more progressive bias. We assume that what gives Chomsky's speech authority to talk about the pandemic, to be invited multiple times to do so, is not his expertise in the subject; it is not his background in epidemiology studies, which he lacks, neither his linguistics theories, that do not relate to the topic, but his image as a great surviving intellectual. It's to say, what authorizes Chomsky to speak and, therefore, to make his contribution to the studies of this pandemic situation, is not what interests the State, or what would lead the actions of government officials, as they are in general centered on the discourse of experts. Instead, it is his trajectory as a critic without corporate scruples, engaged in telling another kind of "truth", as one that can discuss and propose a different future for humanity. So, with this article we intended to produce a discussion about the following problem: the type of discourse raised by Chomsky is not that of government experts, men of science who must anchor themselves in statistical studies on disease proliferation curves, researchers who need to give prevention guidelines or economists who provide "get out of the crisis" scenarios. In other words, differently from a biologist, a disease proliferation specialist or a market administrator, Chomsky conceives the pandemic beyond Covid-19, as a long-term crisis, which will cover economic, social and environmental aspects of much greater proportions. In short, with this article we seek to understand how Chomsky assumes himself as a spokesman for all of humanity and how he constructs this position discursively. He is concerned with "bigger problems", not diminishing the dangers of the Covid-19 pandemic, but insisting on the fact that global warming and the economic crisis created by the debacle of neoliberalism, as well as nuclear war menaces, are much greater threats to human species survival and the maintenance of the planet. We also bring an overview of three important intellectuals who also acted and contributed their reflections on the Covid-19 pandemic during its inception. They are Judith Butler, Giorgio Agamben, and Byung-Chul Han. The purpose of incorporating these distinct views is, in the first instance, to compare to what extent they may resemble the Chomskyan discourse, but also to show how intellectual discourse is constructed in times of a global pandemic in the face of the discourses of health experts or specialists who occupy the spaces of intellectual speech authority.

In his September 2002 report to the United Nations General Assembly, Secretary‐General Kofi Annan identified migration as a priority issue for the international community. Subsequent initiatives prompted by the UN resulted, in December 2003, in the formation of a Global Commission on International Migration. This independent body has three mandates: to bring international migration issues to the top of the global agenda, to analyze shortcomings in approaches to international migration and examine inter‐linkages with other issue‐areas, and to make practical recommendations for how to manage international migration more effectively. Remarks made by Kofi Annan at the launching of the Commission in Geneva were amplified in an address he gave to the European Parliament in Brussels on 29 January 2004 upon receiving the Andrei Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought. Simultaneously a brief article covering the themes in that address, signed by Kofi Annan, was released by the Secretary‐General's office for publication in leading newspapers throughout Europe. The full text of this article (http://www.un.org/News/ossg/sg/stories/sg‐29jan2004.htm) is reproduced below.The article presents a number of propositions about international migration, with special reference to Europe, that tend to be taken for granted in discussions of the subject in international forums. Perhaps because of the article's brevity, the propositions are stated in strikingly unqualified form. Europe needs migrants. Immigration will enrich and strengthen European countries; the alternative is accepting declining living standards and social division‐‐a meaner, weaker, older Europe. In the absence of migration, jobs would go unfilled and services undelivered. Immigration cannot be controlled: closing the door would not only harm Europe's long‐term economic and social prospects, it would drive more and more people to come in through the back door. Such propositions, far from being axiomatic, are of course highly controversial. A fuller examination of them is presumably part of the Global Commission's remit.One of the biggest tests for the enlarged European Union, in the years and decades to come, will be how it manages the challenge of immigration. If European societies rise to this challenge, immigration will enrich and strengthen them. If they fail to do so, the result may be declining living standards and social division. There can be no doubt that European societies need immigrants. Europeans are living longer and having fewer children. Without immigration, the population of the soon‐to‐be twenty‐five Member States of the EU will drop, from about 450 million now to under 400 million in 2050. The EU is not alone in this. Japan, the Russian Federation and South Korea, among others, face similar possible futures‐where jobs would go unfilled and services undelivered, as economies shrink and societies stagnate. Immigration alone will not solve these problems, but it is an essential part of any solution.We can be sure that people from other continents will go on wanting to come and live in Europe. In today's unequal world, vast numbers of Asians and Africans lack the opportunities for self improvement that most Europeans take for granted. It is not surprising that many of them see Europe as a land of opportunity, in which they long to begin a new life‐just as the potential of the new world once attracted tens of millions of impoverished but enterprising Europeans. All countries have the right to decide whether to admit voluntary migrants (as op‐posed to bona fide refugees, who have a right to protection under international law). But Europeans would be unwise to close their doors. That would not only harm their long‐term economic and social prospects. It would also drive more and more people to try and come in through the back door‐by asking for political asylum (thus overloading a system designed to protect refugees who have fled in fear of persecution), or by seeking the help of smugglers, often risking death or in‐jury in clandestine acts of desperation on boats, trucks, trains and planes. Illegal immigration is a real problem, and States need to cooperate in their efforts to stop it‐especially in cracking down on smugglers and traffickers whose organized crime networks exploit the vulnerable and subvert the rule of law. But combating illegal immigration should be part of a much broader strategy. Countries should provide real channels for legal immigration, and seek to harness its benefits, while safeguarding the basic human rights of migrants. Poor countries can also benefit from migration. Migrants sent at least $88 billion to developing countries in remittances during 2002‐54% more than the $57 billion those countries received in development aid.Migration is therefore an issue in which all countries have a stake‐and which demands greater international cooperation. The recently established Global Commission on International Migration, co‐chaired by distinguished public figures from Sweden and South Africa, can help to establish international norms and better policies to manage migration in the interest of all. I am confident that it will come up with good ideas, and I hope they will win support, from countries that "send" migrants as well as those that receive them. Managing migration is not only a matter of opening doors and joining hands internationally. It also requires each country to do more to integrate new arrivals. Immigrants must adjust to their new societies and societies need to adjust too. Only with an imaginative strategy for integrating immigrants can countries ensure that they enrich the host society more than they unsettle it. While each country will approach this is‐sue according to its own character and culture, no one should lose sight of the tremendous contribution that millions of immigrants have already made to modern European societies. Many have become leaders in government, science, academia, sports and the arts. Others are less famous but play an equally vital role. Without them, many health systems would be short‐staffed, many parents would not have the home help they need to pursue careers, and many jobs that provide services and generate revenue would go unfilled. Immigrants are part of the solution, not part of the problem. All who are committed to Europe's future, and to human dignity, should therefore take a stand against the tendency to make immigrants the scapegoats for social problems. The vast majority of immigrants are industrious, courageous, and determined. They don't want a free ride. They want a fair opportunity for themselves and their families. They are not criminals or terrorists. They are law‐abiding. They don't want to live apart. They want to integrate, while retaining their identity. In this twenty‐first century, migrants need Europe. But Europe also needs migrants. A closed Europe would be a meaner, poorer, weaker, older Europe. An open Europe will be a fairer, richer, stronger, younger Europe‐provided Europe manages immigration well.

Author's introductionPeople participate in social movements and protest events in part to pressure elites and institutions to alter the reward structure within society. When attempting to pressure their targets, activists are often confronted by the state. Whether the state is a target of protest or not, it oftentimes engages those seeking to promote extra‐institutional change. Within democratic societies, police are charged to maintain social order and protect the rights of those expressing dissent. Because of this dual charge and a variety of political, social, and economic factors, police have adopted strategies or repertoires of social control for policing protests. These repertoires can facilitate, channel, or prevent protest from occurring. A growing scholarly consensus suggests that since the 1990s, authorities in the United States and other democratic states have shifted how they react to protests. Until the 1970s, police often utilized what scholars call the 'escalated force' protest control repertoire. During this era, police saw protest as an illegitimate form of political expression. They placed a low priority on freedom of speech and assembly and often used excessive force and widespread arrests when dealing with protesters. In the 1970s to 1990s, police developed what is called 'negotiated management' to respond less confrontationally to protesters. This repertoire relied on a permitting process to facilitate police and protester efforts to negotiate the time, place, and manner of protest activities in ways satisfactory to both protesters and police. Police placed a premium on protecting freedom of speech and assembly and tolerated community inconveniences related to large rallies, marches, and the occasional staged arrest. They used violence and arrests as a last resort and only for significant violations of the law. However, following the disruptive 1999 Seattle WTO protests and the new cycle of global protests that followed, law enforcement agencies around the United States and in other western democracies began developing and adopting the 'strategic incapacitation' repertoire of protest control. With strategic incapacitation, police selectively protect civil liberties and selectively tolerate community disruption, and they seek to incapacitate protests through the use of less‐lethal weapons and preemptive arrests, extensive control of public space, reliance on 'new surveillance' technologies, and the elaborate control of information. In the United States, the development and adoption of this new style of policing accelerated after the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks as authorities embraced a risk management approach to identify and neutralize potentially disruptive events, such as large demonstrations.Author recommended books and edited volumes


Boykoff,
Jules. 2007. Beyond Bullets: The Suppression of Dissent in the United States. : .
Boykoff's book explores how the U.S. government, with assistance from federal, state and local law enforcement regularly disrupted protest movements in the 20th Century. It catalogues various forms of suppression employed by authorities from the use of direct violence, surveillance, and infiltration to the use of less direct means of mass media manipulation and demonization. Chapter 1 includes a good introduction to social movements and dissent/resistance, and the concepts of repression and suppression.


Davenport,
Christian,

Hank
Johnston and

Carol
Mueller (eds.) 2005. Repression and Mobilization. : .
This compilation of essays on repression and resistance provides a broad lens for understanding the various ways that state power is exercised against social movements. Davenport's introductory chapter helpfully evaluates the broader field of repression and recommends ways to advance it.



della Porta,
Donatella and

Herbert
Reiter (eds.) 1998. Policing Protest: The Control of Mass Demonstrations in Western Democracies. : .
This collection of essays consolidates some of the best thinking of the time on protest policing. Together, it provides a comparative historical, institutional and cultural analysis of protest policing across a variety of democratic nations. The contributors explore recent trends in the evolution of protest policing, such as whether protest policing has become 'softer' and the causes and consequences of such changes. The introductory chapter identifies important variables that define the style of protest policing employed and provides a useful model to explain the different styles. The second chapter by McPhail, Schweingruber and McCarthy introduces 'negotiated management' to the scholarly lexicon and has become one of the most influential writings on protest policing. This book should be at the top of your reading list on the topic.



della Porta,
Donatella,

Abby
Peterson and

Herbert
Reiter (eds.) 2006. The Policing of Transnational Protest. : .
This collected works is a follow up to della Porta and Reiter's earlier volume described above. It explores changes in protest policing in western democracies that parallel the rise of transnational protests in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Contributors analyzed policing efforts at protests coinciding with various international summits and other large protest events. Collectively, they investigated the question of whether a new era of policing is emerging to replace the softer styles of protest policing identified in the earlier volume. Individually, authors explored a variety of topics including the transnational character of the protests and of the police effort to control these protests, how adoption of a 'new penology' paradigm within the U.S. criminal justice influenced police adoption of strategic incapacitation, and the negotiation practices used by police and activists and problems that can occur during negotiations. A concluding chapter identifies a typology of coercive, persuasive and information strategies used by police across nations to control transnational protests.


Fernandez,
Luis A. 2008. Policing Dissent: Social Control and the Anti‐Globalization Movement. : .
Fernandez applies a Foucauldian view of social control to explain the police repression of alterglobalization protests in the early 2000s. The book provides an overview of the alterglobal movement and shows how police used legal means to limit protest and physical and psychological strategies to control public space.


Marx,
Gary T. 1988. Undercover: Police Surveillance in America. : .
Marx provides a late 1980s look into the then emerging forms of surveillance used by U.S. law enforcement. The first half of the book discusses the history of police surveillance and provides a classification schematic for how surveillance is used by police. The second half of the book identifies the intended and unintended consequences of police use of undercover surveillance. It is still widely cited and it is recognized by many as providing the blueprint for understanding and exploring 'new surveillance' (see concluding chapter).


Meyer,
David S. 2007. The Politics of Protest: Social Movements in America. : .
Meyer provides a concise introduction to social movements drawing extensively from the U.S. peace and antiwar movements to illustrate his points. Included are discussions on the major social theories and chapters on protester tactics.


Stark,
Rodney. 1972. Police Riots: Collective Violence and Law Enforcement. : .
This is one of the first scholarly books to recognize the tension police experience between maintaining order and protecting civil liberties. Previous works had tended to show protest policing uncritically and as a necessary response to unruly crowds. This work examines policing response to protest highlighting the escalated force model.


Starr,
Amory,

Luis A.
Fernandez and

Christian
Scholl. 2011. Shutting Down the Streets: Political Violence and Social Control in the Global Era. : .
This book maps efforts by the state to control social movements in a global age. Written by activist‐scholars, the research draws from participant observations made at 20 major alter‐global protest events held during major global summits over the last decade. The book explores the spatial dynamics, political economy and police violence associated with efforts to repress those opposing aspects of the global political‐economic order. A concluding chapter explores activist resistance to the social control of dissent employed by the authorities.


Tilly,
Charles. 1978. From Mobilization to Revolution. : .
This is a foundational book in social movement studies. In it Tilly introduces the core concepts of repression and contentious repertoires.


Waddington,
David P. 2007. Policing Public Disorder: Theory and Practice. : .
Waddington explores public order policing across a variety of events, from commodity riots and hooliganism to labor and global protests. The first two chapters provide a detailed exploration of theories and debates within the public order policing literature, including various approaches to policing and theories on the causes of public disorder. The remainder of the book adeptly uses the theories covered earlier and other scholarly works to analyze the policing of these differing types of events.Online materialsLaw enforcement related:

Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
http://www.dhs.gov/
Department of Justice (DOJ)
http://www.justice.gov/
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
http://www.justice.gov/
International Association of Chiefs of Police
http://www.theiacp.org/
Police Executive Research Forum (PERF)
http://www.policeforum.org/Civil liberties and independent media related:

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
http://www.aclu.org
http://www.aclu.org/maps/spying‐first‐amendment‐activity‐state‐state
Independent Media Center (IMC)
http://www.indymedia.org/en/
National Lawyers Guild (NLG)
http://www.nlg.org/
Partnership for Civil Justice Fund
http://www.justiceonline.org/Academic related:

WTO History Project
http://depts.washington.edu/wtohist/
Dynamics of Collective Action Project
http://www.stanford.edu/group/collectiveaction/cgi‐bin/drupal/SyllabusTopics for lecture and discussionIntroduction, issues, and problems (2 weeks)Definitions, problems, and issues: What is the role of police in a democratic society? What is the tension or paradox between police as protectors of democracy and simultaneously potential threats to democracy? What are civil liberties? What is public order policing? How has US policing become militarized, and what are the consequences of this trend? What is 'broken windows' theory, and how has it shaped law enforcement practices in general?Readings:


Kraska,
Peter and

Victor E.
Kappeler. 1997. '.' Social Problems 44():1‐18.


Marx,
Gary T. 2001. '.' Policing, Security and Democracy: Theory and Practice, Vol. 2 edited by and . : . Available online at http://web.mit.edu/gtmarx/www/dempol.html (last accessed 1 July 2013).


Vitale,
Alex. 2005. '.' Policing and Society 15():99–124.


Waddington,
David P. 2007. Policing Public Disorder: Theory and Practice. : . (Chapter 1 and selections.)


Wilson,
James Q. and

George L.
Kelling. 1982. '' The Atlantic (March). Available online at http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken‐windows/304465/ (last accessed 1 July 2013).Social movements and protest (2 weeks)What is a social movement? What are contentious repertoires and protest tactics? What are the similarities and differences between direct action tactics and civil disobedience tactics? What are protest events? What methods do researchers use to study these events? What are the basic assertions of collective behavior, resource mobilization, political process/political opportunity, framing, and new social movement theories?Readings:


Benford,
Robert D. and

David A.
Snow. 2000. '.' Annual Review of Sociology 26:611–639.


Buechler,
Steven M. 2005. '.' The Sociological Quarterly 36():441–464.


Diani,
Mario. 1992. '.' The Sociological Review 40():1–25.


Edwards,
Bob and

John D.
McCarthy. 2004. '.' Pp. 116–152 in The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements edited by , and . : .


Koopmans,
Ruud and

Dieter
Rucht. 2002. '.' Pp. 231–259 in Methods of Social Movement Research, edited by and . : .


Meyer,
David S. 2003. '.' Social Movement Studies 2():17–35.


Taylor,
Verta and

Nella
Van Dyke. 2004. '.' Pp. 262–293 in The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements edited by , and . : .Policing of protest–the basics and additional concepts (2 weeks)What is repression, and what constitutes a theory of repression? When does policing of protest become repressive? What is COINTELPRO, and how has the FBI and other law enforcement agencies historically undermined or facilitated US social movements? How do contained and transgressive protesters differ? How does police knowledge influence police response to protest? What aspects of globalization impact police response to protests? What are the 'flash points' that lead to escalated police responses? What other factors shape police responses to protest?Readings:


Boykoff,
Jules. 2007. Beyond Bullets: The Suppression of Dissent in the United States. : . (Chapter 1 and selections.)


Cunningham,
David. 2003. There's Something Happening Here: The New Left, the Klan, and FBI Counterintelligence. : . (Chapter 1 and selections.)



della Porta,
Donatella and

Herbert
Reiter. 1998. '.' Pp. 1–32 in Policing Protest: The Control of Mass Demonstrations in Western Democracies edited by

Donatella
Della Porta and

Herbert
Reiter. : .


Della Porta,
Donatella. 1988. '.' Pp. 228–252 in Policing Protest: The Control of Mass Demonstrations in Western Democracies edited by and . :


Earl,
Jennifer and

Sarah A.
Soule. 2006. '.' Mobilization 11():145–164.


Ericson,
Richard V. and

Aaron
Doyle. 1999. '.' British Journal of Sociology 50():589–601.


Earl,
Jennifer. 2003. '.' Sociological Theory 21():44–68.


Earl,
Jennifer. 2011. '.' Annual Review of Sociology 37:261–284.


King,
Mike and

David
Waddington. 2005. '.' Policing and Society 15():255–82.


Marx,
Gary T. 1979. '.' Pp. 94–125 in Dynamics of Social Movements: Resource Mobilization, Social Control, and Tactics, edited by and . : .


Tilly,
Charles. 2000. '.' Mobilization 5(): 135–159.


Wahlström,
Mattias. 2007. '.' Mobilization 12():389–402.Policing of protest–negotiated management (1 week)What are the general aspects of the 'negotiated management' style of protest policing? How does it differ from 'escalated force'? What are the shortcomings of negotiated management?Readings:


Earl,
Jennifer,

Sarah A.
Soule and

John D.
McCarthy. 2003. '.' American Sociological Review 68():581–606.


Gorringe,
Hugo and

Michael
Rosie. 2008. '.' British Journal of Sociology, 59(): 187–205.


Gillham,
Patrick F. and

John A.
Noakes. 2007. '.' Mobilization 12():341–357.


McCarthy,
John D. and

Clark
McPhail. 1998. '.' Pp. 83–110 in The Movement Society: Contentious Politics for a New Century, edited by and . : .


McPhail,
Clark,

David
Schweingruber and

John D.
McCarthy 1998. '.' Pp. 49–69 in Policing Protest: The Control of mass Demonstrations in Western Democracies, edited by and . : .Policing of protest–command and control, Miami model, and strategic incapacitation (2 weeks)How do the 'command and control' and 'Miami model' styles of policing differ? What are the basic characteristics of 'strategic incapacitation'? How does strategic incapacitation compare to command and control and the Miami model?Readings:


Noakes,
John and

Patrick F.
Gillham. '.' Pp. 97–115 in Policing Political Protest After Seattle, edited by , and . : .


Noakes,
John,

Brian
Klocke and

Patrick F.
Gillham. '., September 29‐30, 2001.' Policing and Society 15(): 235–254.


Vitale,
Alex S. 2005. '.' Policing and Society 15():283–304.


Vitale,
Alex S. 2007. '.' Mobilization 12()403–15.Control of space, surveillance, and info control (1‐2 weeks)What are repertoires of protest control? What are public spaces of dissent, and how do police respond to dissent in these spaces? What are the different zones of spatial control, and how do they differ? What is 'new surveillance', and how is it employed by police to control protest? What are fusion centers, and how do they operate to both consolidate and disseminate information? In what ways do police control information about production and dissemination of information about protesters and about police themselves?Readings:


Gillham,
Patrick F. 2011. '.' Sociology Compass 5():636–652.


Gillham,
Partrick F.,

Bob
Edwards and

John A.
Noakes. 2013. '.' Policing and Society 23():82–103.


Marx,
Gary T. 2004. '.' Knowledge, Technology, and Policy 17():18–37.


Newkirk,
Anthony B. 2010. '.' Surveillance and Society 8():43–60.


Roberts,
John Michael. 2008. '.' Sociology Compass 2(): 654–674.Dynamics of policing and protesting (1 week)How do interactions between police and protesters impact protest policing efforts? What ironies emerge from police and protester interactions?Readings:



della Porta,
Donatella and

Sidney
Tarrow. 2012. '.' Comparative Political Studies 45():119–152.


Gillham,
Patrick F. and

Gary T.
Marx. '.' Social Justice 27():212–236.


McPhail,
Clark and

John D.
McCarthy. 2005. '.' Pp. 3–32 in Repression and Mobilization edited by , , and . : .Intended and unintended consequences of protest policing (1‐2 weeks)What are the intended and unintended consequences of protest policing? How does protest policing impact activists, social movements, and democracy? What characteristics of the new styles of protest policing are spilling over into policing of other social phenomena?Readings:


Boyle,
Phillip and

Kevin
Haggerty. 2009. '.' International Political Sociology 3:257–274.


Cunningham,
David and

John
Noakes. 2008. '.' Pp. 175–197 in Surveillance and Governance: Crime Control and Beyond (Sociology of Crime Law and Deviance, Volume 10), edited by and

Jeffrey T.
Ulmer. : .


Earl,
Jennifer and

Sarah A.
Soule. 2010. '.' Pp. 75–113 in Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change (Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, Volume 30), edited by in . : .


Starr,
Amory,

Luis
Fernandez,

Randall
Amster,

Lesley
Wood and

Manuel J.
Caro. 2008. '.' Qualitative Sociology 31:251–270.


Wood,
Lesley J. 2007. '.' Mobilization 12():377–388.Focus questions

What challenges do researchers interested in studying social movements and the policing of protest face and why?
What methodologies do researchers use to study the policing of protest events? What types of data are generated by these methodologies? What are the strengths and limitations of each methodology and the data collected using each methodology?
What is the police‐democracy paradox? How are police both defenders of democracy and simultaneously a potential threat to democracy?
What is protest policing, and how has it changed over the years? What are the central dimensions on which researchers study the different styles or repertoires of protest policing?
What dynamics and processes drive changes in the development of protest policing repertoires, and what factors influence the choice of repertoires employed by police when controlling dissent?
What are the consequences of protest policing on democracy, activists, social movements, and the institution of law enforcement?
To what extent are changes occurring in the policing of different types of social phenomena like the Olympics, World Cup, and presidential inaugurations? What are the similarities or differences to changes occurring in protest policing?

Author's introductionWhile teaching about racism can be challenging in a number of respects, the concept of 'racism' is not a particularly difficult concept to teach or to learn. Controversies occur primarily over how or when the concept should be applied, rather than over its basic meaning. The situation can be quite different for extensions of the concept of racism, including 'institutional racism' and a variety of other new racisms. It can often be difficult to convey to students, or even to understand oneself, exactly what authors are referring to by such terms. Addressing how or why the terms are confusing and controversial can potentially add to the confusion and controversy. While I have suggested in the past that a clear understanding of institutional racism will involve understanding the confusions or controversies surrounding the term, this type of pedagogy is not always effective or appreciated. Instructors should carefully consider whether to address institutional racism in undergraduate courses, and if so, how to make the course material as accessible as possible, including time for fielding questions. My own coverage of institutional racism with undergraduates has been motivated in part because textbooks raise the issue in such a manner as appeals to some students, but without effectively defining and explaining the meaning and significance of the term.In my experience, it is very helpful to illustrate the institutional nature of institutional racism with a variety of examples of social institutions which are implicated in reproducing racial inequality (e.g., institutions associated with criminal justice, with education, and with real estate). It is also very helpful to emphasize that institutional racism is claimed most often when no direct racism is apparent. Although slavery was a racist institution, references to institutional racism frequently mean to draw attention to more indirect forms of racism, in contemporary society. Although institutional leaders or staff may be racist, many authors distinguish between the problem of individual racism in institutional contexts ('bad apples') and the problem of institutional racism, which is more subtle and more pervasive. So the concept 'institutional racism' is frequently meant to refer to something more specific than racist institutions, and also something more specific than racism within institutions, getting at the role of many social institutions in the reproduction of racial inequality by means that can appear quite professional and race‐neutral and impersonal.It is important to emphasize to students that they look in any particular source for what the author has to say about the meaning and significance of the term 'institutional racism', or related terms for new racisms. Unfortunately, many authors can employ such terms without clearly addressing their meaning or significance. For students who are up to the challenge, it can be quite effective to start by distinguishing the conventional individualist understanding of racism as a type of belief or motive, from institutional disparate impact by race, the latter defined simply in terms of an institution's unequal racial outcomes (unequal graduation rates, unequal arrest rates, etc.). While institutional disparate impact can be caused by racism, in the conventional sense of racist beliefs or motives, there are other potential explanations for institutional disparate impact on racial minorities, whether in terms of social attributes which can be highly correlated with race, such as family wealth, or in terms of differential rates of behavior across racial categories, as is the case with robbery in the contemporary USA (as acknowledged by a variety of critical race scholars, in light of pronounced statistical differences). Once one has communicated that institutional disparate impact by race may be, but is not necessarily, caused by racist beliefs or motives among institutional leadership or staff, the concept of institutional racism can be introduced. Essentially, the concept of institutional racism is defined in such a manner, for example, by reference to racial inequalities in institutional outcomes, as to blur the distinctions between racism and disparate impact. In this way, institutional disparate impact is reconceived as a new type of racism, putting aside questions about what is going on in the institutions to produce disparate impact, and frequently dismissing appearances of professional personnel and color‐blind policies as misleading or irrelevant. For courses in the social sciences and in law, especially, it can be very effective to suggest that many important questions about the nature of the people and the processes which produce disparate impacts are displaced by the way institutional racism is defined or inferred. By contrast, social science should be interested in studying what is going on in these institutions to produce or reproduce racial inequalities for citizens or clients, and legal scholarship should be asking about legal standards of proof, which often address questions of intent which are not addressed by claims of institutional racism.Focus questionsWhat does 'institutional racism' mean?How is 'institutional racism' different from more conventional and older understandings of racism?Is the term 'institutional racism' useful for the purposes of social criticism?Is the term 'institutional racism' useful for the purposes of social science?Author recommendsCarmichael, Stokely and Charles Hamilton. 1967. Black Power: The Politics of Liberation in America. New York, NY: Random House.This is the original inspiration of the institutional racism literature and influential more generally on the literature addressing 'new racisms', especially the first chapter, which remains an engaging and relevant discussion despite being dated in some respects.Cashmore, Ellis. 1996. Dictionary of Race and Ethnic Relations 4th ed. New York, NY: Routledge.This provides succinct entries on a variety of relevant terms, including a very respectable entry on 'institutional racism'. It is potentially useful for students and/or as reference material for course/lecture preparation.Feagin, Joe, and Clairece Feagin. 1986. Discrimination American Style: Institutional Racism and Sexism 2nd ed. Malabar, FL: Krieger.This work addresses both institutional racism and sexism, and with substantial discussion of multiple institutional contexts. The second chapter, on institutionalized discrimination, provides one of the most sophisticated social–scientific statements on institutional racism.Leach, Colin. 2005. 'Against the Notion of a "New Racism" '. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 15: 432–445.This article smartly challenges the conventional wisdom that there is a marked historical discontinuity between 'old racism' and 'new racism', and also goes beyond the conventional focus on one national context, suggesting the need for a more historically informed and comparative understanding of racism.Marger, Martin. 2007. Social Inequality: Patterns and Processes 4th ed. McGraw Hill.This textbook provides coverage of social inequality generally, including relations between different social dimensions of inequality. There are two chapters covering racial/ethnic differentiation and racial/ethnic stratification. Importantly, this text covers issues which go well beyond race but are essential for understanding racial inequality, such as stratification and social mobility, and ideology and the legitimation of inequality. Marger's coverage is noteworthy for being both accessible in style and reliable in substance. McGraw Hill can customize textbooks as well through Primis Online (e.g., by publishing versions with only the chapters you will assign, or mixing selected content from different textbooks; e.g., from Marger's text and Newman's text discussed below), often with significant savings, making it more practical to assign readings from multiple sources.Miles, Robert. 1989. Racism. New York, NY: Routledge.This succinct book includes one of the most notable critical discussions of the concept 'institutional racism', as well as providing an important critical perspective linking racism to class relations and capitalism.Newman, David. 2007. Identities and Inequalities: Exploring the Intersections of Race, Class, Gender and Sexuality. New York: McGraw‐Hill.This is a noteworthy textbook in social inequalities, with a discussion of institutional discrimination (pp. 181–184) which is substantive but accessible for undergraduates.Smith, Robert. 1995. Racism in the Post‐Civil Rights Era: Now You See It, Now You Don't. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Smith provides one of the more sustained and thoughtful discussions of institutional racism in the last generation of scholarship, including crucial attention to matters of class as well as race, and examples across many institutional contexts in the USA.Tonry, Michael. Malign Neglect: Race, Crime, and Punishment in America. 1995. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.This book may be of interest as illustrating a critical analysis of institutional disparate impact upon racial minorities, in a manner that attends to important questions of policy analysis frequently overlooked in the 'new racism' literature. Tonry suggests, for example, that the disparate impact of US criminal justice policies upon African Americans is often due more to malign neglect than purposeful discrimination. In this manner, Tonry attends to the same type of problem identified in the new racism literature, namely institutional disparate impact upon racial minorities, but with more attention to what drives institutional policies and practices, and how exactly the relevant institutions and policymakers might be culpable even if racial disparate impact is unintentional. Such an analysis arguably makes for more illuminating, compelling and constructive critical analysis.Video resourcesThe Public Broadcasting Service sells a three‐part documentary from California Newsreel titled 'Race: The Power of an Illusion.' The first 'volume' deals especially with the science of racial categories, the second with American history and society through the 19th century, and the third with 20th century American history and society. Each is just under 1 hour in length. The series is complemented by a very useful companion website (see below) which includes transcripts of the videos, among many other resources. The third 'volume', while not addressing the concept of institutional racism specifically, provides a very accessible and effective lesson about the relevance of race for understanding social inequality in recent US history and society. For purposes of addressing institutional racism, specifically, course instructors may want to build on the third video's coverage of the correlation between racial and class inequalities, including the inter‐generational reproduction of inequalities. This would be an opportunity to discuss the many social disadvantages related to class position and family wealth, and whether disadvantages of an economic nature, which apply to many poor whites and don't apply to many middle class blacks, are examples of 'institutional racism'. Specific institutions and institutional policies are also illustrated, especially immigration and citizenship laws which affected, e.g., South Asian and Japanese immigrants to the USA, and financial and real estate practices of red‐lining and blockbusting, and to a lesser extent 'urban renewal', which have affected African Americans. With respect to real estate, the third video facilitates a discussion comparing different types of racial disadvantage associated with quite different institutional contexts, including blatant racial exclusion in a large suburban housing development, and a variety of practices (red‐lining, blockbusting, white flight) which can have financial rationales or motives while nevertheless reproducing racial inequalities and segregation.Online materialsMost on‐line materials on institutional racism are useful only as examples of common usage, and are susceptible to the same criticisms noted in the article, 'The Neglected Social Psychology of Institutional Racism'.One useful resource which addresses a variety of issues relevant to racism, although not the issue of institutional racism specifically, is the companion web‐site to the three‐part documentary by California Newsreel, 'Race: The Power of an Illusion', made available by the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS; http://www.pbs.org/race/000_General/000_00‐Home.htm).This site links to a wealth of background readings, which are divided into three categories: science, history, and society, roughly corresponding to the three 'volumes' of the video series, respectively. Generally, readings from the science section can be used to discredit the belief that racial classifications are biological in nature, readings from the history section can be used to instruct students on how to understand racial classifications as historical and social constructions of a political, legal, and ideological nature, and readings in the society section can be used to illustrate the role of a variety of American institutions in causing and perpetuating racial inequality, above and beyond issues of individual racism.Note
* Correspondence address: Kent State University. Email: tjberard@alumni.reed.edu

Author's introductionAlthough criminologists have long dominated the field of school violence research, there has been a growing body of research by cultural sociologists in this area as well. In many ways, a cultural approach to understanding school violence has taken school violence beyond the realm of just criminal and physical acts of violence. These scholars have begun to examine verbal, emotional, sexual, and racial expressions violence, as well as violence that is perpetuated by institutions, what Bourdieu has called symbolic violence. Courses that take this perspective explore how cultural concepts, or what Swidler calls a 'cultural toolkit', can be used as a lens for analyzing the experiences and practices of school violence. This can include, for example, an examination of how the dominant American ideology of meritocracy and competition can foster fights between middle school students, or how a feminine identity might push girls to be relationally aggressive towards each other rather than physically aggressive. In this regard, cultural sociology broadens our understanding of what constitutes school violence to uncover a wide spectrum of behaviors, attitudes and beliefs that may indeed lead to more overt expressions of violence. In doing so, a cultural approach can also help educators rethink discipline policies that have been created to resolve this social problem.Author recommendsSwidler, Ann 1986. 'Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies.'American Sociological Review51: 273–86.Swidler's concept of a cultural toolkit provides a strong foundation for any cultural sociology course. Swidler defines a cultural toolkit as the symbols, stories, rituals, beliefs, ideologies and practices of daily life through which people use to shape their behavior. This paper presents a broad understanding of culture, which Swidler argues is not a unified system, but rather a set of complex and changing concepts from which we select different pieces from in order to construct different strategies of actions. When considering cultural approaches to school violence, it is useful to consider this broad definition of culture.Henry, Stuart 2000. 'What is School Violence? An Integrated Definition.'Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science567: 16–30.Henry provides a definition of school violence that transcends physical violence and interpersonal violence between students to include psychological, emotional, ethical and moral violence that occurs not only between students, but also includes harm committed by teachers and organizations against students. This latter form of harm can include tracking, school security, sexual harassment, or essentially anything that hinders the creativity, learning and academic success of a student. Henry argues that school violence must include symbolic violence, which he defines as the use of authority, power, and coercion to dominate an individual or group of people.Ferguson, Ann Arnett 2000. Bad Boys: Public Schools in the Making of Black Masculinity. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Ferguson builds on Bourdieu's concept of symbolic violence and Foucault's theory of disciplinary power to examine an intervention program for 'at‐risk' students, which was comprised of mainly 5th and 6th grade African‐American males. Her ethnography provides a great example of the benefit of using a cultural approach to studying violence, discipline and punishment in schools. For example, Ferguson argues that fighting among boys should be seen as a symbolic expression of masculinity and a space for boys to do emotional work, as well as a site for the production of power and a form of resistance to authority. Her work also explores how teachers and administrators can enact a form of symbolic violence onto students. She observed how the cultural behaviors of African‐American boys, for example, their use of Black English, was often translated by the teachers as 'problem behavior' and resulted in their label of 'Troublemaker'. Such labels often condemned the boys to the bottom rung of the social order and negatively impacted their academic success.Spina, Stephanie Urso, ed. 2000. Smoke and Mirrors: The Hidden Context of Violence in Schools and Society. New York, NY: Rowan and Littlefield.This edited collection examines school violence as a complicated and multi‐faceted phenomenon, exploring how political, economic, ideological and discursive practices contribute to school violence. This interdisciplinary book includes chapters from Donna Gaines, Henry Giroux, Peter McLaren, Stanley Aronowitz, and Paulo Freire and Donald Macedo. The authors expand the definition of violence by arguing that youth violence, adult violence and societal violence are all intricately connected, and therefore prevention of school violence would requires educators to move beyond reform that only takes place in the school system. Instead, violence prevention needs to implore a broader strategy for change that includes schools, families, communities, and beyond.Brown, Lyn Mikel 2003. Girlfighting: Betrayal and Rejection among Girls. New York, NY: New York University Press.Mikel Brown conducted qualitative interviews with more than 400 girls from first grade through high school who were from different economic, racial and geographic backgrounds. She begins the book by analyzing the cultural messages that girls receive in the media; messages and images that she argues provide girls with a context for fighting among their peers. She draws on Paulo Freire's notion of horizontal violence to look at how girls' meanness to other girls is a result of their struggle to make sense of gender‐saturated images of beauty and heterosexuality that often reinforce their subordinate status in the world. Girlfighting then becomes an avenue to power for young girls in a culture that is rife with sexism. Unlike many other recent books on relational aggression among girls, Mikel Brown interrogates the complicated intersections of race, ethnicity, and class as it relates to girlfighting.Casella, Ronnie 2001. 'Being Down': Challenging Violence in Urban Schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Casella's ethnography of Brandon High School, a small city school in a diverse neighborhood in upstate New York, takes a cultural‐ecological approach to school violence, capturing systemic, interpersonal and hidden forms of violence. He provides a thoughtful critique of intervention strategies that have been created to deal with school violence, such as peer mediation programs, the use of police officers in the hallways, and D.A.R.E. programs, because these programs only address individual acts of violence and do not account for the realities of urban environments, prejudice, economic injustice and poverty that underlie and contribute to school violence.Merten, Don E. 1994. 'The Cultural Context of Aggression: The Transition to Junior High School.'Anthropology and Education Quarterly25(1): 29–43.Don Merten has published several articles that provide a useful framework for examining aggressive behavior from a cultural standpoint. The data from this article come from a larger ethnographic project of predominantly middle class students in a suburban area who recently transitioned from elementary to junior high school. Merten argues that middle class culture promotes and celebrates individualism, success and hierarchy, which in turn creates a culture that promotes aggressive behavior among students, because students learn that meanness can be an easy avenue for gaining power and status in the hierarchy of cliques in schools.Morris, Edward 2005. '"Tuck in that Shirt!" Race, Class, Gender and Discipline in an Urban School.'Sociological Perspectives48(1): 25–48.Morris draws on Bourdieu's classic reproduction theory to look at the relationship between cultural capital and bodily discipline as it relates specifically to clothing styles and manners. This article is based on an ethnographic study of an urban middle school in Texas that recently enlisted a 'Standard Mode of Dress' uniform policy. The regulation of dress became a constant source of conflict between the students and staff at the school, but had the most punitive effect on poor and racially ethnic minority students, whose cultural styles tended to be negatively stereotyped by the teachers. These students were more likely to punished for violating the policy, even though all social class and racial groups, to some degree, violated the policy. This harsher punishment engendered resistance and alienation among the minority students, which Morris argues had the potential of pushing these students away from school, further reproducing the very inequalities that the school was trying to change.Online materials http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2008/ The National Center for Education Statistics puts out an annual report on indicators of School Crime and Safety. The indicators in this report are based on information drawn from a variety of data sources, including national surveys of students, teachers, and principals. The report covers not just overt forms of school violence, such as bringing a weapon to school, fighting, and teacher injuries, but also covers bullying, victimization, student perceptions of school safety, and availability and use of drugs and alcohol. http://www.cdc.gov/HealthyYouth/yrbs/index.htm The Youth Risk Behavioral Surveillance System is a school‐based survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The survey is conducted every 2 years and provides a representative sample of 9th through 12th graders in public and private schools in the United States. The YRBSS asks a wide variety of questions, but most relevant to school violence include self‐reported responses about behaviors that might lead to unintentional injuries and violence, such as carrying a weapon to school, being threatened by a weapon or being in a fight on school grounds. These data serve a useful comparison between student self‐reporting of violent behavior and school reporting of incidents of school violence. http://www.sshs.samhsa.gov/default.aspx The Safe Schools/Healthy Students website is a federal initiative by the U.S. Departments of Education, Justice, and Health and Human Services. It provides many useful resources, including links federal reports on school safety, a list of related websites, and video podcast discussions of school violence that can be used in the classroom. http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/2001/uslgbt/toc.htm 'Hatred in the Hallways: Violence and Discrimination against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Students in U.S. Schools' is a report conducted by the Human Rights Watch. Data consists of interviews with 140 students, ages 12–21, and 130 parents, teachers, administrators and counselors across seven states, in every region of the U.S. The findings discuss a broad spectrum of violent behavior, including verbal harassment, homophobia, and physical violence. It can be useful for classroom discussion because each finding section of the report includes a 'case study' of one of the participants with direct quotes from their interview. http://www.aauw.org/research/hostile.cfm 'Hostile Hallways: Bullying, Teasing and Sexual Harassment in School' is a national report conducted by American Association of University Women on 8th to 11th grade students. The study found that 8 in 10 students experienced some form of harassment during their time in school. Both the executive summary and entire report are available to download on the website.Sample syllabusCourse outline and selected reading assignmentsSection 1: Introduction to cultural sociologyDefining CultureSwidler, Ann 1986. 'Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies.'American Sociological Review 51: 273–86.Jepperson, Ronald and Ann Swidler 1994. 'What Properties of Culture Should We Measure?'Poetics 22: 359–71.Cultural Capital and Symbolic ViolenceBourdieu, Pierre and Jean‐Claude Passeron 1977. Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: Sage.Lareau, Annette, and Elliott B. Weininger 2003. 'Cultural Capital in Educational Research: A Critical Assessment.'Theory and Society 32: 567–606.Reproduction TheoryMacLeod, Jay 1987. Ain't No Makin' It: Aspirations and Attainment in a Low Income Neighborhood. Oxford: Westview Press. Read Chapter 2, 'Social Reproduction in Theoretical Perspective.' Pp. 11–24 and Chapter 8, 'Reproduction Theory Reconsidered,' pp. 135–54.Cultural PedagogyGiroux, Henry 2000. 'Representations of Violence, Popular Culture and Demonization of Youth.' Pp. 93–105 in Smoke and Mirrors: The Hidden Context of Violence in Schools and Society. Edited by Stephanie Urso Spina. New York, NY: Rowan and Littlefield.Section 2: Broadening the definition of school violenceHenry, Stuart 2000. 'What is School Violence? An Integrated Definition.' Annals of the American Academy of Political and social Science 567: 16–30.Watkinson, Ailsa 1997. 'Administrative Complicity and Systemic Violence in Education.' Pp. 3–24 in Systemic Violence in Education: Promise Broken. Edited by Juanita Ross Epp and Ailsa M. Watkinson. Albany, NY: State University of NY Press.Urso Spina, Stephanie 2000. 'Violence in Schools: Expanding the Dialogue.' Pp. 1–40 in Smoke and Mirrors: The Hidden Context of Violence in Schools and Society. New York, NY: Rowan and LittlefieldCasella, Ronnie 2001. 'What is Violent about School Violence? The Nature of Violence in a City School.' Pp. 15–46 in Preventing Violence in Schools: A Challenge to American Democracy. Edited by Joan Burstyn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Elliott, Delbert S., Beatrix Hamburg, and Kirk R. Williams 1998. 'Violence in American Schools: An Overview.' Pp. 3–30 in Violence in American Schools. Edited by Delbert S. Elliott, Beatrix A. Hamburg, and Kirk R. Williams. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Newman, Katherine 2004. Rampage: The Social Roots of School Shootings. NY: Basic Books. Read Part I, Chapters 1–3, pp. 3–76.Section 3: Ideology and aggressionMerten, Don 1994. 'The Cultural Context of Aggression: The Transition to Junior High School.'Anthropology and Education Quarterly, v. 25 (1): 29–43.Willis, Paul 1977. Learning to Labour: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs. Farnborough, England: Saxon House.Newman, Katherine 2004. Rampage: The Social Roots of School Shootings. NY: Basic Books. Read Part II, Chapters 4–7, pp. 77–178.MacLeod, Jay 1987. Ain't No Makin' It: Aspirations and Attainment in a Low Income Neighborhood. Oxford: Westview Press. Read Chapter 6, 'School: Preparing for Competition,' pp. 83–111.Devine, John 1997. Maximum Security: The Culture of Violence in Inner‐City Schools. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Read Chapter 1, 'Schools or 'Schools'? Competing Discourses on Violence,' pp. 19–46.Section 4: Cultural scripts – masculinityKimmel, Michael S. and Matthew Mahler 2003. 'Adolescent Masculinity, Homophobia, and Violence.'The American Behavioral Scientist 46(10): 1439–58.Ferguson, Ann Arnett 2000. Bad Boys: Public Schools in the Making of Black Masculinity. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Read Chapter 4, 'Naughty by Nature,' pp. 77–99 and Chapter 6, 'Getting into Trouble,' pp. 163–96.Bender, Geoff 2001. 'Resisting Dominance? The Study of a Marginalized Masculinity and its Construction within High School Walls.' Pp. 61–78 in Preventing Violence in Schools: A Challenge to American Democracy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Klein, Jessi and Lynn S. Chancer 2000. 'Masculinity Matters: The Omission of Gender from High‐Profile School Violence Cases.' Pp. 129–62 in Smoke and Mirrors: The Hidden Context of Violence in Schools and Society. New York, NY: Rowan and Littlefield.Section 5: Cultural scripts – femininityEder, Donna 1985. 'The Cycle of Popularity: Interpersonal Relations among Female Adolescents.'Sociology of Education 58(3): 154–65.Merten, Don 1997. 'The Meaning of Meanness: Popularity, Competition, and Conflict Among Junior High School Girls.'Sociology of Education 70(3): 175–91.Merten, Don 2005. 'Transitions and 'Trouble': Rites of Passage for Suburban Girls.'Anthropology and Education Quarterly 36(2): 132–48.Artz, Sibylle 2004. 'Violence in the Schoolyard: School Girls' Use of Violence.' Pp. 167–90 in Girls' Violence: Myths and Realities, edited by Christine Alder and Anne Worrall. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Morris, Edward W. 2007. ''Ladies' or 'Loudies'? Perceptions and Experiences of Black Girls in Classrooms.'Youth & Society 38: 490–515.Mikel Brown, Lyn 2003. Girlfighting: Betrayal and Rejection among Girls. NY: New York University Press.Section 6: Culture resources and school violence – languageLanguage and Symbolic ViolenceFerguson, Ann Arnett 2000. Bad Boys: Public Schools in the Making of Black Masculinity. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Read Chapter 7, 'Unreasonable Circumstances,' pp. 197–226.Youth Talk about ViolenceDiket, Read M. and Linda G. Mucha 2002. 'Talking about Violent Images.'Art Education March: 11–7.Morrill, Calvin, Christine Yalds, Madelaine Adelman, Michael Musheno, and Cindy Bejarano 2000. 'Telling Tales in School: Youth Culture and Conflict Narratives.'Law & Society Review 34(3): 521–65.Burman, Michele 2004. 'Turbulent Talk: Girls Making Sense of Violence.' Pp. 81–103 in Girls' Violence: Myths and Realities. Edited by Christine Alder and Anne Worrall. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Obidah, Jennifer 2000. 'On Living (and Dying) with Violence: Entering Young Voices in the Discourse.' Pp. 49–66 in Smoke and Mirrors: The Hidden Context of Violence in Schools and Society. New York, NY: Rowan and Littlefield.Section 7: Culture resources and school violence – clothingClothing and School Safety DebatesHolloman, Lillian and Velma LaPoint, Sylvan I. Alleyne, Ruth J. Palmer, and Kathy Sanders‐Phillips 1996. 'Dress‐Related Behavioral Problems and Violence in Public School Settings: Prevention, Intervention, and Policy—A Holistic Approach.'The Journal of Negro Education 65(3): 267–281.Stanley, M. Sue 1996. 'School Uniforms and Safety.'Education and Urban Society 28(4): 424–35.Gereluk, Dianne 2008. 'Limiting Free Speech in the United States.' Pp. 41–64 in Symbolic Clothing in Schools: What Should Be Worn and Why. New York, NY: Continuum.Brunsma, David L., ed. 2006. Uniforms in Public Schools: A Decade of Research and Debate. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.Clothing, School Policies and Symbolic ViolenceHorvat, Erin McNamara 1999. '"Hey, Those Shoes are Out of Uniform": African American Girls in an Elite High School and the Importance of Habitus.'Anthropology and Education Quarterly 30(3): 317–42.Morris, Edward 2005. '"Tuck in that Shirt!" Race, Class, Gender and Discipline in an Urban School.'Sociological Perspectives 48(1): 25–48.Ferguson, Ann Arnett 2000. Bad Boys: Public Schools in the Making of Black Masculinity. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Read Chapter 3, 'School Rules,' pp. 49–73.FilmsTough guise: violence, media, and the crisis in masculinity (2002)This Media Education Foundation film explores the relationship between popular culture and the construction of violent masculinity. Of particular relevance to this class, the film examines how the construction of masculinity relates to school shootings. The film is directed by Sut Jhally and narrated by Jackson Katz. This film could be used in the section Cultural Scripts – Masculinity.Wrestling with manhood: boys, bullying and battering (2004)This Media Education Foundation film, written and directed by Sut Jhally, examines the relationship between professional wrestling and the construction of masculinity. The film looks at how wrestling contributes to homophobia, violence against women and bullying in school. This film could be used in the section Cultural Scripts – Masculinity.School violence: answers from the inside (2000)This film originally aired on PBS''In the Mix,' a television series created by and for teens. The film examines stereotyping and conflict in schools through the eyes and voices of teenagers attending a diverse suburban high school. This film could be used in the section Cultural Resources – Language.The killer at Thurston high (2000)This PBS Frontline film focuses on Kip Kinkel, who in 1998, at the age of 15, shot his mother and father, and then opened fire at his school in Springfield, Oregon, killing two and injuring 25. He is currently serving 111 years in prison. The film provides an understanding of the tragedy through multiple viewpoints, including interviews with Kip's sister, teachers and psychiatrists. This film could be used in the section Broadening the Definition of School Violence.Mean girls (2004)Written by Tina Fey and based on Rosalind Wiseman's book, Queen Bees and Wannabes: Helping Your Daughter Survive Cliques, Gossip, Boyfriends, and Other Realities of Adolescence, this fictional account of 'mean girls' is a film that most college students will be familiar with. Clips from the film can be used in the section Cultural Scripts—Femininity to begin a discussion about relational aggression between girls in schools. It can also be used to examine the role that racism and classism play in our public perception of violent behavior, particularly since 'mean girls' in this film tend to be constructed as white and upper class, whereas in contrast, 'violent girls' in film have historically been constructed as poor, young women of color.Project ideas1. Social Policy and Intervention. This assignment is intended to get students critically thinking about how educators approach school violence. Have students pick either a national intervention program, such as D.A.R.E., or a local school policy created to deal with school violence. Begin by analyzing how school violence is defined and what type of intervention/prevention is being proposed. Require students to use a cultural approach to understand and critique the policy. In writing the paper, students should consider the following questions. How would a cultural sociologist define violence? What types of violence are missing from this policy? How would this policy be different if it took into account a cultural approach? The book, 'Being Down': Challenging Violence in Urban Schools (2001) by Ronnie Casella provides a good background resource for completing this assignment.2. Observation Project: Clothing and School Safety. Students will begin by gaining permission to observe at a local middle school or high school. Begin by analyzing the school policy towards clothing. Some schools might have an official uniform policy, whereas others might have policies regarding certain types of clothing (i.e. gang clothing, clothing with profanity, etc.) Next, spend several days observing students in non‐classroom settings, like the hallways, cafeteria, bus or playground. Take detailed fieldnotes. Pay particular attention to the clothing that students wear, any discussion made about clothing by either students or teachers, the relationship between clothing and identity, how clothes are used as a site of resistance, and how clothes might cause conflict between students, or between students and teachers. (You may also want to informally interview students about their perception of the school's policy on clothing, how they negotiate rules about clothing, and how they see clothing policies as contributing to conflict and violence, as well as school safety.) As a class, develop a coding scheme for the fieldnotes. Each student will then individually write an analysis paper on the relationship between clothing, conflict, discipline policies, and school violence.3. Mean Girls: Examining Relational Aggression in Schools. There has been much public attention in recent years to 'mean girls.' As a class, view the film Mean Girls during the course section, Cultural Scripts – Femininity. As a class, develop an interview guide with about six open‐ended questions (i.e. What were your experiences with 'mean girls' in high school? How did you or a close friend deal with being the victim of relational aggression? To what extent did you ever participate in being a 'mean girl'? How did teachers at your school respond to relational aggression between girls?) Next, have students interview six female students using the class interview guide. Students can work individually or in groups to write a paper that compares and contrasts the social construction of mean girls in the film with the actual perceptions of mean girls from their research participants. The analysis should be grounded in the social science research that students are reading on relational aggression.