Hitler's Shadow: Historical Analogies and the Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait

Leaders often turn to history for guidance. Margaret Thatcher and George Bush were no exception when they responded to Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait. Bush and Thatcher used analogies to the 1930s, the Vietnam War and the Falklands War to frame the crisis, which significantly influenced their policies. They argued that Saddam Hussein was another Adolf Hitler and were determined not to repeat the mistakes of the Western response to the Axis in the 1930s or of the Vietnam War. There would be no 1930s-style appeasement of Iraq, and no slow escalation as had occurred in Vietnam. The prompt use of overwhelming force in the Gulf would succeed, Bush and Thatcher believed, just as the use of force had succeeded in the Falklands crisis, and just as such a policy, they believed, would have deterred the Axis in the early 1930s.     

A systems analysis of youth in acute and subacute therapeutic residential care

The Arkansas Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) has reduced the use of therapeutic residential care (e.g., group homes, residential treatment centers) for youth placed in child welfare. Youth in acute or subacute congregate care for 30 or more days without Medicaid now are of particular interest. This is a longer-term psychiatric program, typically 3 to 6 months. The project team conducted a systems analysis to determine the specific characteristics and levels of need for 42 youth so that DCFS can more effectively serve these youth in the least restrictive form of treatment possible.     

Reflections on law and impact in the light of Brexit

ABSTRACT

The impact agenda in academic research affords rich opportunities – to inform the media, policymakers and the general public; to co-produce research with third sector organisations. In the context of Brexit, the prevailing ignorance of politicians and other stakeholders has been so profound, and the falsehoods that have had popular purchase so baseless, as to make the need for impact and public engagement all the more acute. This is not simply about fact-checking, but about making the case for the very worth of expertise, and reasserting the basic, core scientific values that drive academic work – values that have been trashed by the precepts of a postmodern nihilism, in which all positions are equally (in)valid and only your own gut can be trusted. But challenging these precepts in public arenas has personal and professional costs: significant workload implications, the acquisition of new skills and often a torrent of abuse. As such, this work needs institutional support. Departments need to value it appropriately, to promote equal access to impact opportunities and to confront the discriminatory barriers to (and consequences of) taking up the impact gauntlet. Throughout the Brexit process, expertise and experts have been dismissed and denigrated. The task now is to restore public faith in the value of the pursuit of truth.     

Simulating Models of Issue Voting

Ola Listhaug Department of Sociology and Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway e-mail: olal{at}svt.ntnu.no e-mail: rabinowitz{at}unc.edu (corresponding author) How should one analyze data when the underlying models beingtested are statistically intractable? In this article, we offera simulation approach that involves creating sets of artificialdata with fully known generating models that can be meaningfullycompared to real data. The strategy depends on constructingsimulations that are well matched to the data against whichthey will be compared. Our particular concern is to considerconcurrently how voters place parties on issue scales and howthey evaluate parties based on issues. We reconsider the Lewisand King (2000) analysis of issue voting in Norway. The simulationfindings resolve the ambiguity that Lewis and King report, asvoters appear to assimilate and contrast party placements andto evaluate parties directionally. The simulations also providea strong caveat against the use of individually perceived partyplacements in analyses of issue voting.