Suchergebnisse

As a significant supplier of labour migrants, Southeast Asia presents itself as an important site for the study of children in transnational families who are growing up separated from at least one migrant parent and sometimes cared for by 'other mothers'. Through the often-neglected voices of left-behind children, we investigate the impact of parental migration and the resulting reconfiguration of care arrangements on the subjective well-being of migrants' children in two Southeast Asian countries, Indonesia and the Philippines. We theorise the child's position in the transnational family nexus through the framework of the 'care triangle', representing interactions between three subject groups—'left-behind' children, non-migrant parents/other carers; and migrant parent(s). Using both quantitative (from 1010 households) and qualitative (from 32 children) data from a study of child health and migrant parents in Southeast Asia, we examine relationships within the caring spaces both of home and of transnational spaces. The interrogation of different dimensions of care reveals the importance of contact with parents (both migrant and nonmigrant) to subjective child well-being, and the diversity of experiences and intimacies among children in the two study countries.

Frontmatter -- Table of Contents -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- 1. How the Predicament Arose -- 2. Rice Knowledge Systems in Transition -- 3. Reference Models for Transmitting Knowledge -- 4. Technological Choice in the Wake of Migration -- 5. Land-Use Strategies -- Conclusion: A Skill Perspective on Migration -- Appendix -- References -- Index

 A few weeks ago, the New York Times had an article on rising support for the National Rally in rural France, which it said was due to a feeling of being neglected by the national government:  "Residents in this sparsely populated region ... - describe what is happening to their community as 'desertification,' by which they mean an emptying out of services, and of their lives."  Rural areas in the United States are also moving to the right, and people often give a similar explanation--they are "left behind" by changes in the economy, think the government isn't interested in their problems, and in some accounts resent the places and groups that seem to be moving ahead of them.  Economic growth has clearly been lagging in many small towns and rural areas, but I haven't seen much information about changes in political views, so I'll look at that issue in this post.  The General Social Survey classifies places into six groups:  central city of the twelve largest metropolitan statistical areas, suburbs of the 12 largest MSAs, central city of the 13-100 MSAs, suburbs of the 13-100 MSAs, counties with towns of 10,000 or more, and counties without towns of 10,000 or more.  I combined the first four, so that there are three groups.  Then I calculated the correlation between year and opinions for each question.*  I'll start with two general measures of political orientation:  self-rating as liberal, moderate, or conservative; and whether the government is trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and private business.  Each is coded so that a positive correlation means that opinions have tended to move in a liberal direction since the question was first asked (in the 1970s).                          MSA     Town      RuralPOLVIEWS       .00        -.05         -.07HELPNOT         .01        -.01         -.07So urban areas have stayed about the same, while rural areas have become more conservative on both (generally, differences of about .03 or more are statistically significant).  Now a few "social issues," again with positive signs meaning liberal trends:  legal abortion, whether sex between two adults of the same sex is wrong, whether there should be prayer in public schools, and whether a police permit should be required in order to buy a gun:                             MSA     Town      RuralABSINGLE           -.05       -.05        -.03HOMOSEX            .37        .32          .32PRAYER                .07        .02          .01GUNLAW             -.03        -.03        -.06Rural areas have become more conservative relative to MSAs on three of the four.Now some opinions related to race and ethnicity:  whether racial inequality is mostly due to discrimination against blacks, whether it's because blacks don't have the motivation and will power to get ahead, and whether the number of immigrants should be increased or reduced.  Again, a positive sign means a liberal trend:                              MSA           Town         RuralRACDIF1                 .06              .04            -.06RACDIF4                 .22              .15              .17LETIN1A                  .18              .15             .21Rural areas have become relatively more conservative on the two questions about race, but there's no clear difference on immigration (that question has been asked only since the 1990s, so the standard errors are larger).Now some questions about government spending on various issues.   Positive numbers mean a trend towards support for more spending.  There are a lot of questions, so I won't list them all, just talk about the general pattern and some notable cases.                             MSA    Town    RuralNataid                .15  .10         .07Natpark                .01  .05         .03Natarms                .01  .05         .12Natroad                .09  .08         .07Nateduc                .13  .15         .16Natrace                .14  .10         .09Natheal                .00  .01         .06Natenvir                .02  .01         .04Natcity               -.02  .02         .05 Natmass                .05  .04         .10Natfare                .11  .08         .06Natsoc                .03  .05         .09Natfarey                .06  .01         .05Natspac                .19  .18         .22Almost all of the trends are positive (towards favoring more spending)--the 1970s were a time of backlash against government spending.  The average across the questions is about the same for all groups, but there are some differences for individual items.  The upward trend is stronger in rural areas for spending on defense and the military (NATARMS), and weaker for foreign aid (NATAID), spending to help blacks (NATRACE), and welfare (NATFARE).  So far, it's a relative conservative shift in rural areas.  But the upward trend is also stronger for social security (NATSOC), health care (NATHEAL), mass transity (NATMASS), and even "solving the problems of big cities" (NATCITY).  Finally, there's a question on the amount of federal income taxes you pay.  A positive number means that it's too low or about right rather than too high.                              MSA       Town      RuralTAX                       .06            .04          -.01People in MSAs have been getting more satisfied (or less dissatisfied) and people in rural areas have stayed about the same.  That is, although people in rural areas have become more favorable towards spending on a lot of things, they haven't become more willing to accept taxes.Overall, the movement in rural areas hasn't been a straightforward conservative one.   The spending questions suggest that people in rural areas have moved towards wanting the government to do more for Americans in general, but not for blacks specifically, and not for foreign nations.  There doesn't seem to be growing resentment against cities--if anything, it's diminished (see NATCITY and NATMASS).  And although rural areas have become relatively more conservative on race (NATBLACK, RACDIF1, RACDIF4), they haven't generally turned against "outsiders" (see LETIN1A).  *I limited the analysis to whites.

Abstract
We document that children growing up in places left behind by today's economy experience lower levels of social mobility as adults. Using a longitudinal database that tracks over 20,000 places in the USA from 1980 to 2018, we identify two kinds of left behind places: the 'long-term left behind' that have struggled over long periods of history; and 'recently left-behind' places where conditions have deteriorated. Compared to children of similar baseline household income levels, we find that exposure to left behind places is associated with a 4-percentile reduction in adult income rank. Children fare considerably better when exposed to places where conditions are improving. These outcomes vary across prominent social and spatial categories and are compounded when nearby places are also experiencing hardship. Based on these findings, we argue that left behind places are having 'scarring effects' on children that could manifest long into the future, exacerbating the intergenerational challenges faced by low-income households and communities. Improvements in local economic conditions and outmigration to more prosperous places are, therefore, unlikely to be full remedies for the problems created by left behind places.

This article explores the roles, in the public space, of women who are left behind by international migration. The qualitative research was employed. Data collection process conducted in Sakon Nakhon Province with the 26 wives whose husbands migrated at least a year to work in other countries. The results showed that wives who left behind by international migration played major roles in village development activities and community merit making, after receiving their overseas remittance. These activities led them to become loan lenders and labour brokers. Their new positions provided more opportunities to be a politician at the local level.

A key terrain of political controversy remains the concept of multiculturalism. Here, Eriksen and Stjernfelt critically examine its impact, both in Malaysia and in Europe, in The Democratic Contradictions of Multiculturalism, published by Telos Press in 2012. Part of their argument involved an examination of a specifically leftist variant. Their rebuttal, challenging the left to face up to its own Jacobin legacies: given the checkered history of more than two centuries of leftism, there is no reason not to see multicultis on the left as the current heirs of a strong and immanent tradition within the left, going all the way back to Robespierre's populism and anti-individualism. The tendency on the left to identify, if not reduce, individuals to simplistic collective categories, such as class, economic position, culture, and ethnicity, has simply been there all the time, and it has been able to merge seamlessly, in different combinations, with other classical leftist ideas such as substantial equality, paternalism, anti-capitalism, anti-Americanism, anti-bourgeois lifestyle recommendations, etc. In other words, multiculturalism is definitively a left-wing phenomenon, when it inherits the worst of the left tradition. The current return to politics will therefore have to address a legacy of repressive behavior, or else it will repeat it. Adapted from the source document.