Suchergebnisse

"Met any American communists lately? Between 1919 and the late 1950s, the Communist Party of the United States of America (CP-USA) engaged in a wide variety of challenges directed against the U.S. government and its economic system. Because of this, many aspects of the organization became well known to the American public. Indeed, in their day, the names of the organizational leadership (i.e., William Foster, Earl Browder and Eugene Dennis) were as popular as any at the time. Bent on dramatically transforming US political-economic relations, the Party attempted to raise awareness regarding the evils of the American political-economic system and engage in numerous struggles against it. The activities put forth toward these ends were as numerous as they were varied, from editorials to unionization to political campaigns to mass protests"--

This extension of Christian Davenport's virtual Presidential address to the Peace Science Society International attempts to: (1) identify as well as confront some of the issues that divide the Peace Science community and (2) provide some ideas/actions about what can be done to fix them. The article is as much a reflection on where we have been as it is a call to where we must go.

The legacies of racial violence are generally understudied and thus not well understood. Extant academic work on the topic generally focuses on a specific form of contention like war or rebellion as well as specific consequences like economic development or voting. I use insights from a global evaluation of the political and economic consequences of contention to identify the pitfalls of this typical approach and argue for an alternative that I call integral violence studies: a comprehensive approach that brings together the best that social sciences and humanities have to offer in an effort to understand legacy effects.

Existing research, social movements, nongovernmental organizations, and many national governments herald democracy as a, or perhaps the, resolution to state repression. Interestingly, very little attention has been given to the topic of when democracies kill their citizens for political reasons. Drawing upon insights derived from research in three countries (the United States, India, and Northern Ireland), I focus on three strategies that democratic governments use to facilitate their use of violent repressive behavior. These highlight not only areas for subsequent investigation as the world turns to political democracy as the dominant form of regime type but also have implications for those calling for democratic governments as well. Indeed, it may be useful to develop a new phrase as everyone's political dreams/aspirations come true: 'Caveat Civis' – citizens beware.