Agonism and Hope in William Apess’s Native American Political Thought

This article examines the Native American thinker, William Apess (Pequot), and especially his Eulogy on King Philip (1836), which argues, ironically, that King Philip—the seventeenth century Wampanoag leader who launched the bloodiest rebellion in New England’s history—ought to be embraced as an American pioneer and canonized as a founding father. Apess satirizes conventional founding narratives, even as he upholds the principles of freedom those narratives support. The effect of this irony is to interrupt and invert discourses of progressive history and American patriotism that underlie Manifest Destiny policies, in ways that open spaces for new historical accounts to surface and compete in a force field of agonistic powers. I argue that Apess’s ironic historical revisionism expresses a political theory of hope, one that I contrast with representations of hope by other nineteenth century Native American political thinkers, such as Plenty Coups (Crow).     

Policy feedback and pathways: when change leads to endurance and continuity to change

Policy Sciences - The policy feedback literature was initially concerned with explaining how positive feedback could lead to self-reinforcing policy trajectories. More recently, policy scholars...     

Zwischen Biologisierung des Sozialen und neuer Biosozialität: Dynamiken der biopolitischen Grenzüberschreitung

The article deals with recent developments in the field of biopolitics, which may lead to a fundamental change in the relationship between medicine, society and the individual. While the social scientific debates evaluated these developments rather controversial, there seems to be a tacit consensus regarding the homogeneity of the biopolitical field: its dynamics is interpreted either in terms of a biologisation and naturalisation of social life or in terms of increasing individual self-determination and of the emerging new forms of biosociality. This opposition is, however, ignoring the fact that, within biopolitics, we are rather facing different and heterogeneous social and technological dynamics. To comprehend this complexity, we are discerning four biopolitical dynamics: the extension of medical diagnosis, the extension of therapies and medical technologies, the detemporalisation of illness and the direct enhancement of human nature. These dynamics are not only questioning well-established conceptions of human nature, but tend to affect or even undermine the distinctions between health/illness and therapy/enhancement. In our conclusion, we are addressing the question of possible social limits to these tendencies of biopolitical transgressing of boundaries.     

Electoral and structural losers and support for a national referendum in the U.S.

The U.S. is one of only a few democracies in the world never to hold a national referendum. Recent national surveys reveal that a majority of respondents approve of a national referendum both cross-nationally and in America is relatively stable. Building on previous work (Bowler and Donovan, 2007), we find public opinion on a reform proposal is fluid and responsive to electoral politics, rather than stable as reported in earlier work. In this paper, we argue that contemporary support for a national referendum in the U.S. is contingent on whether a citizen is a short- or long-term “winner” or a “loser” when it comes to electoral politics. We expect that public support for a national referendum in the U.S., where legislation referred by Congress would be subject to a popular vote, may vary at the individual level because of short-term electoral fortunes as well as long-term structural conditions. Strategic voting as well as losing in candidate races and policy issues may be important, but so might be partisanship, with non-partisans the most likely to benefit from citizen law-making at the national level. Support for a national referendum might also be contingent upon state context, that is, upon use of direct democracy in the state where a person lives, as well as the population of a state. The results based on a natural experiment and 2008 panel survey data provide an important window into understanding public opinion on institutional change more broadly.     

The ideal subject distance for passport pictures

In an age of global combat against terrorism, the recognition and identification of people on document images is of increasing significance. Experiments and calculations have shown that the camera-to-subject distance - not the focal length of the lens - can have a significant effect on facial proportions. Modern passport pictures should be able to function as a reference image for automatic and manual picture comparisons. This requires a defined subject distance. It is completely unclear which subject distance, in the taking of passport photographs, is ideal for the recognition of the actual person. We show here that the camera-to-subject distance that is perceived as ideal is dependent on the face being photographed, even if the distance of 2m was most frequently preferred. So far the problem of the ideal camera-to-subject distance for faces has only been approached through technical calculations. We have, for the first time, answered this question experimentally with a double-blind experiment. Even if there is apparently no ideal camera-to-subject distance valid for every face, 2m can be proposed as ideal for the taking of passport pictures. The first step would actually be the determination of a camera-to-subject distance for the taking of passport pictures within the standards. From an anthropological point of view it would be interesting to find out which facial features allow the preference of a shorter camera-to-subject distance and which allow the preference of a longer camera-to-subject distance.     

Short Term Change in Attitude and Motivating Factors to Change Abusive Behavior of Male Batterers after Participating in a Group Intervention Program Based on the Pro-Feminist and Cognitive-Behavioral Approach

The Domestic Abuse Education Project (DAEP), in Burlington, Middlebury, and St. Albans, Vermont, is a group based domestic abuse intervention program, based in a pro-feminist and cognitive-behavioral approach for domestic violence intervention and prevention. A pre and post-test instrument was developed and implemented to determine short-term change in attitude of participants and motivating factors to change behavior, after completing the twenty-seven session program. After the program, participants reported a positive change in attitudes regarding their abusive behavior and stereotypical beliefs about women. Participants were also more motivated to change their behavior by the effect abuse has on their family relationships. However, many participants continued to agree that insecurity, jealousy, and alcohol and drug use can cause violence. The positive changes in attitude and motivational factors show that this is an effective model in changing underlying batterer attitudes that provide rationale for abusive behavior.