Suchergebnisse

What tools are at hand for residents living on the US-Mexico border to respond to mainstream news and presidential-driven narratives about immigrants, immigration, and the border region? How do citizen activists living far from the border contend with President Trump's promises to "build the wall," enact immigration bans, and deport the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States? How do situated, highly localized pieces of street art engage with new media to become creative and internationally resonant sites of defiance? CARGC Paper 11, "Dreamers and Donald Trump: Anti-Trump Street Art Along the US-Mexico Border," answers these questions through a textual analysis of street art in the border region. Drawing on her Undergraduate Honors Thesis and fieldwork she conducted at border sites in Texas, California, and Mexico in early 2018, former CARGC Undergraduate Fellow Julia Becker takes stock of the political climate in the US and Mexico, examines Donald Trump's rhetoric about immigration, and analyzes how street art situated at the border becomes a medium of protest in response to that rhetoric. ; https://repository.upenn.edu/cargc_papers/1011/thumbnail.jpg

"In den vergangenen Jahrzehnten hat ein Wandel stattgefunden vom Ausdruck offener sexistischer Einstellungen zu mehr subtilen und versteckten Formen der Diskriminierung. Da diese schwerer zu erkennen sind, wird das Konfrontieren sexistischer Handlungen zu einer Herausforderung." (Autorenreferat)

The established models predicting collective action have been developed based on liberal ideas of injustice perceptions showing that progressive collective action occurs when people perceive that the equality or need rule of fairness are violated. We argue, however, that these perceptions of injustice cannot explain the occurrence of social protests among Conservatives. The present work addresses one shortcoming in collective action research by exploring the interactive role of political ideology and injustice appraisals in predicting social protest. Specifically, we focused on injustice appraisals as a key predictor of collective action and tested whether the same or different conceptualizations of injustice instigate protest among Liberals versus Conservatives using data from two studies conducted in Germany (Study 1, N = 130) and in the US (Study 2, N = 115). Our findings indicate that injustice appraisals play an equally important role in instigating social protest both among Liberals and Conservatives. As we show, however, predicting collective action among individuals across the political spectrum requires accounting for ideological preferences for different fairness rules. Whereas Liberals are more likely to engage in protest when the equality and need rules are violated, Conservatives are more likely to protest when the merit rule is violated. We recommend that studies on collective action consider not only the strength of injustice appraisals but also their content, to assess which fairness principles guide one's perceptions of (in)justice.

The established models predicting collective action have been developed based on liberal ideas of injustice perceptions showing that progressive collective action occurs when people perceive that the equality or need rule of fairness are violated. We argue, however, that these perceptions of injustice cannot explain the occurrence of social protests among Conservatives. The present work addresses one shortcoming in collective action research by exploring the interactive role of political ideology and injustice appraisals in predicting social protest. Specifically, we focused on injustice appraisals as a key predictor of collective action and tested whether the same or different conceptualizations of injustice instigate protest among Liberals versus Conservatives using data from two studies conducted in Germany (Study 1, N = 130) and in the US (Study 2, N = 115). Our findings indicate that injustice appraisals play an equally important role in instigating social protest both among Liberals and Conservatives. As we show, however, predicting collective action among individuals across the political spectrum requires accounting for ideological preferences for different fairness rules. Whereas Liberals are more likely to engage in protest when the equality and need rules are violated, Conservatives are more likely to protest when the merit rule is violated. We recommend that studies on collective action consider not only the strength of injustice appraisals but also their content, to assess which fairness principles guide one's perceptions of (in)justice. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion

Abgesehen von dem ohnehin komplexen Austrittsverfahren wirft das Brexit-Votum neue Fragen zur Verfasstheit des Vereinigten Königreichs (VK) auf: Die schottische Regierung »droht« mit einem erneuten Unabhängigkeitsreferendum, um eine Sonderregelung mit der EU durchzusetzen. Weniger beachtet, aber politisch mindestens genauso kritisch ist Nordirland, wo die offene Grenze zur Republik Irland und die Stabilität des Friedensprozesses durch den Brexit in Gefahr geraten. Das verkompliziert nicht nur für die britische Regierung die Verhandlungen mit der EU enorm. Auch Brüssel und Berlin brauchen eine Strategie für den Umgang mit Schottland und Nordirland. Insbesondere in Vertretung der Interessen des EU-Mitglieds Irland sollte die EU offen für flexible Lösungen sein. (SWP-Aktuell)

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to look at the role of community participation in reducing anxiety and trauma in communities during two New Zealand earthquakes: the 1987 Edgecumbe and 2003 Te Anau events and explore the effectiveness of various approaches in providing information, reducing stress, and facilitating a recovery process.Design/methodology/approachThe principle methods of data collection were semi‐structured interviews were undertaken between October 2006 and March 2007 with key agencies and individuals involved in the response and comprehensive analysis of papers, reports and articles in newspapers. The research was undertaken prior to the 4 September 2010 and 2011 earthquakes in Canterbury, New Zealand, and therefore community recovery from these events are not discussed in this paper.FindingsEffective survival and recovery from disasters depends not just on people's abilities to cope with the physical impacts of the event, but also on how the societal environment complements and supports the complex and protracted processes of community recovery. Central to recovery is how society organises, mobilises and coordinates the diverse range of organizational and professional resources that can be called upon to assist recovery.Originality/valueThe paper offers insight into the effectiveness and benefit of incorporating of community participation in reducing anxiety and trauma in communities during earthquakes.

In two experiments, the present research identifies basic mechanisms for reducing endorsement of benevolent and modern sexist beliefs. Responses to attitudinal measures and a collective action measure on policy beliefs in Study 1 (N = 164) as well as to dating profiles in Study 1 and Study 2 (N = 159) support the hypothesis that endorsement of benevolent sexist beliefs can be reduced by providing information about its harmful consequences. Moreover, women and men become more aware of the full scope of gender discrimination and reduce their endorsement of modern sexist beliefs when they are provided with information about the harmful nature and pervasiveness of benevolent sexism. Theoretical implications regarding the linkage between benevolent and modern sexist beliefs and practical implications for reducing sexism are discussed.

Can it be confirmed that times of crisis are times of executive dominance, as the general hypothesis expressed in the public discourse suggests? The Eco-nomic Stimulus Package II had been Germany"s reaction to the current fi-nancial crisis placing nations all over the world under dramatic pressure. In that case, executive federalism, a trademark of the German political system, should be expected to manifest itself. At the same time – and this shall also be investigated as the flip side of efficient performance of governments – is it possible that the normative, i.e. the constitutionally prescribed standards of democracy have, if not violated, then at least been neglected in these times of crisis? If so, that would certainly indicate "deparliamentarization". The latter has been increasingly viewed as a result of the executive domin-ance in Germany"s cooperative federalism model, even though the popularly elected parliaments should have a wide-ranging, substantive regulatory power. We address this dual issue by focusing on the policy-making process leading to the introduction of the National Environmental Premium. We will look both empirically at its political and legal background as well as its legal precursors set through federal law and European law principles. In doing so, the democratic legitimacy of the Environmental Premium can be scruti-nized. ; peerReviewed

Given New Zealand's susceptibility to a range of natural hazards, reducing exposure is an important step towards strengthening community resilience and reducing potential social, environmental and economic consequences. Land-use planning has long been recognised as a contributor to achieving this goal. Focusing on earthquake hazards, this paper examines the evolution of risk reduction measures in local government land-use planning documents for 3 earthquake-prone regions of New Zealand in 2000 and again in 2016. While some progress has been made in planning for earthquake hazards, overall the planning documents in these regions remain inadequate. As such, resilience from a land-use planning perspective has not significantly improved. This is surprising in the context of major seismic events in New Zealand over the last decade that have caused considerable damage and loss of life. Future anticipated changes to the planning systems in the country provide opportunities for improvements to be included in documentation.

Abstract. Two studies examined the effects of exposure to positive gender stereotypes on performance in counter-stereotypical domains and pursuit of agentic and communal goals. Exposure to stereotypes about women's communality (Study 1, N = 108) led to impaired math performance among women, regardless of their math identification. Exposure to stereotypes about men's agency (Study 2, N = 129) led to impaired performance in a test of socio-emotional ability among men high in domain identification. Moreover, among women with high math identification, exposure to the communality stereotype increased the pursuit of agentic goals. Among men, exposure to the agency stereotype tended to decrease the pursuit of communal goals. These results are consistent with accumulating evidence for the "dark side" of positive stereotypes, yet, for women, they also point to active attempts to counteract them.

Why do societal crises often lead to intergroup conflict? We propose that the interplay of unspecific threat and causal attributions differentially predicts increases in ethnic prejudice and anti-Semitism. We tested this hypothesis in the context of the 2008 financial crisis. The results of Study 1 ( N = 890) demonstrated on the basis of representative survey data that threat elicited by the financial crisis was related with ethnic prejudice once the cause was attributed to immigrants, whereas it was related with anti-Semitism once the cause of the crisis was attributed to bankers and speculators. In Study 2 ( N = 157), we experimentally manipulated threat and type of causal attributions and replicated the results of Study 1. Moreover, we found that regardless of the threat manipulation, participants did not respond with increased prejudice against out-groups if a system-level explanation for the crisis, namely the economic system, was salient.