Revolutionary challenges to the anarchical society of states

David Armstrong, Revolution and World Order: The Revolutionary State in International Society (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993), ix + 328 pp. Index. £37.50.     

Understanding the Influence of Mental Health Diagnosis and Gender on Placement Decisions for Justice-Involved Youth

Justice-involved youth have high rates of psychiatric diagnoses, and these youth are often placed out-of-home, although evidence identifies several negative implications of juvenile confinement, especially for youth with psychopathology. Furthermore, youth in the justice system may be processed differently based on gender. As males and females tend to manifest symptoms differently, the psychopathology of youth may act to moderate the relationship between gender and placement in the juvenile justice system. The present study used a large, diverse sample (n?=?9?851, 19.8?% female) to examine whether youth placed in various types of out-of-home facilities differed in terms of externalizing, internalizing, substance use, or comorbid disorders, and to determine the predictive value of mental health diagnoses in placement decisions. The moderation effect of psychopathology and substance use on the relationship between gender and placement also was explored. The results indicated that each type of disorder differed across placements, with internalizing being most prevalent in non-secure, and externalizing, comorbid, and substance use being most prevalent in secure settings. Mental health diagnoses improved the prediction of placement in each out-of-home placement beyond legal and demographic factors such that externalizing and substance use disorders decreased the likelihood of placement in non-secure settings, and internalizing, externalizing, and substance use disorders increased the likelihood of placement in secure and state-secure facilities. The relationship between internalizing pathology and placement in more secure facilities was moderated by externalizing pathology. The relationship between gender and placement was significantly moderated by mental health such that females with mental health diagnoses receive less secure placements. Implications for policymakers and practitioners are discussed, as well as implications for reforming juvenile justice within a developmental approach.     

Empire in Question: Reading,Writing, and Teaching British Imperialism,Antoinette Burton

Hawthorne and Women: Engendering and Expanding the Hawthorne Tradition, by John L. Idol, Jr. and Melinda M. Ponder. Amherst: U of Massachusetts P, 1999.

Regions of Identity: The Construction of America in Women's Fiction, 1885–1914, by Kate McCullough. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1999.

Golden Cables of Sympathy: The Transatlantic Sources of Nineteenth‐Century Feminism, by Margaret H. McFadden. Lexington: The UP of Kentucky, 1999.

Unruly Tongue: Identity and Voice in American Women's Writing, 1850–1930, by Martha J. Cutter. Jackson: UP of Mississippi, 1999.

Toni Morrison: A Critical Companion, by Missy Dehn Kubitschek. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998.

Contentions Traditions: The Debate On Sati in Colonial India, by Lata Mani. Berkeley: U of California P, 1998.

The Victorian Spinster and Colonial Emigration: Contested Subjects, by Rita S. Kranidis. New York: St. Martin's P, 1999.

Strange Secret Peoples: Fairies and Victorian Consciousness, by Carole G. Silver. New York and Oxford: Oxford UP, 1999.

Performing Gender and Comedy: Theories, Texts and Contexts, edited by Shannon Hengen. Studies in Humor and Gender. 4. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach, 1998.

Transforming Shakespeare: Contemporary Women's Re‐Visions in Literature and Performance, edited by Marianne Novy. New York: St. Martin's P, 1999.

Singlewomen in the European Past, 1250–1800, edited by Judith M. Bennett and Amy M. Froide. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 1999.     

What is the Canon in American Politics? Analyses of Core Graduate Syllabi

Many core graduate-level seminars claim to expose students to their discipline’s “canon.” The contents of this canon, however, can and do differ across departments and instructors. This project employs a survey of core American politics PhD seminar syllabi at highly ranked universities to construct a systematic account of the American politics canon. Our results offer valuable insights into the topics and literature that political scientists consider important and on which future scholars base their work. Our article breaks down the literature into a comprehensive list of topics and subtopics, which allows us to identify both an overall field canon and one for each topic, to assess whether some topics receive more attention than others, and to identify which topics are most clearly defined. We explore the extent to which diverse perspectives and methods are (or are not) taught to young scholars, and, although we identify sets of frequently assigned readings and authors within each topic, we also find considerable variation between seminars.     

Mapping the Ideological Marketplace

I develop a method to measure the ideology of candidates and contributors using campaign finance data. Combined with a data set of over 100 million contribution records from state and federal elections, the method estimates ideal points for an expansive range of political actors. The common pool of contributors who give across institutions and levels of politics makes it possible to recover a unified set of ideological measures for members of Congress, the president and executive branch, state legislators, governors, and other state officials, as well as the interest groups and individuals who make political donations. Since candidates fundraise regardless of incumbency status, the method estimates ideal points for both incumbents and nonincumbents. After establishing measure validity and addressing issues concerning strategic behavior, I present results for a variety of political actors and discuss several promising avenues of research made possible by the new measures.     

Divided We Stand? Democracy as a Method of Processing Conflicts1

Conflicts, liberty and peace do not coexist easily. Through most of history, civil peace was maintained by the threat of force. Contemporary ideologues of authoritarian regimes maintain that political conflicts inevitably result in violence, and the founders of modern representative institutions in the West have shared this view. Yet we now know that political institutions can cope with conflicts, that conflicts can be structured, regulated and contained, and that purely procedural rules can be effective in processing conflicts. Most importantly, we have come to realise that choosing governments through competitive elections is the only way to foster political freedom in divided societies. Competitive elections support social peace by enabling political forces to think in inter‐temporal terms. In turn, civil peace is maintained between elections when when opposition groups expect to be reasonably successful within the halls of representative institutions.