Suchergebnisse

Deep ecology's biocentric philosophy rejects the anthropocentrism of mainstream environmentalism. Biocentrism holds that all life has inherent value and, as such, is worthy of respect and protection. Deep ecology's action strategy emerges from disgust with the compromises made by mainstream environmentalism. Deep ecologists tend toward confrontational actions such as blockades, "tree sits," and "ecotage" ("monkey wrenching" or covert direct action). Earth First! in the United States, and Rainforest Action Network at the international level, are two well-known deep ecology groups. Bound together in a complex relationship, deep ecology is both dependent on and antagonistic toward the life sciences. As yet, there is no explicit, deep ecological statement for scientific reform. But there have been scientific developments cheering to deep ecologists, including the development and growth of the new field of conservation biology. This article begins to outline the reforms necessary to bring establishment science closer to radical ecological principles.

'Social Movements in Politics: A Comparative Study' by Cyrus Ernesto Zirakzadeh is reviewed.

Breyman reviews 'Women and Power in Parliamentary Democracies: Cabinet Appointments in Western Europe, 1968-1992' by Rebecca Howard Davis.

The cycle of social movement mobilization over the past generation moved theorists to make claims about the novelty of student, peace, ecology, and women's movements of the period. It has not been determined whether such characteristics apply to the anti‐nuclear weapons movements of the 1980s. This article reviews the theoretical underpinning of "new social movements" and assesses the extent to which it accurately describes the action, identity, and organization of recent peace movements, with special attention to the West German antimissile movement. The author argues that anti‐nuclear weapons efforts, in both Europe and the United States, evinced a distinctive blend of borrowed and innovative features but had more in common with their predecessors than previously recognized.

As the United States and NATO redouble their efforts to restore stability to Afghanistan, the importance of Pakistan's role in the conflict has become increasingly clear. Pakistan's willingness to confront insurgent groups, however, has been inconsistent at best. In this article, the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's Steve Breyman and Aneel Salman compare Pakistani counterinsurgency strategy under the presidencies of Pervez Musharraf and Asif Ali Zardari. Adapted from the source document.