President or Predator? The Social Construction of Donald Trump in a Divided America

ABSTRACT

During the presidential election, numerous women accused Donald Trump of sexual harassment and/or assault. Then a presidential candidate, he denied these complaints and said the women were all untruthful – a position he has continued to espouse. To explore “who the public believes,” we commissioned YouGov to conduct an opt-in online survey of a national sample of 1,000 Americans. Notably, half of Americans (51.0%) believed that “the women are telling the truth when they reported that Mr. Trump sexually harassed or assaulted them” versus 23.1% who sided with the president. Nearly two-thirds (64.9%) stated that it was unlikely that all the women were lying, and 3 in 5 Americans (60.5%) supported President Trump’s impeachment by the U.S. Congress if these accusations could be proven. Informed by research on political psychology (especially Haidt’s The Righteous Mind), the data are explored to see why Americans embrace divergent moral narratives – with some seeing Mr. Trump as a truthful president and others seeing him as a predator unworthy of the office he holds.     

Everything to Everyone: The Electoral Consequences of the Broad‐Appeal Strategy in Europe

Parties often tailor their campaign message differently to different groups of voters with the goal of appealing to a broader electorate with diverse preferences and thereby winning their votes. I argue that the strategy helps a party win votes if it can convince diverse groups of voters that the party is ideologically closer to their preferred positions. Using election data from nine Western European democracies, I first show that parties gain votes when they appeal broadly. Analysis of individual‐level survey data suggests that voters perceive broadly appealing parties as ideologically closer to their own positions, a finding that identifies a plausible mechanism behind the aggregate positive effect of this strategy on party election performance. These findings not only help explain the behavior of some European parties, but they may also offer a potential recipe for electoral success in multiparty democracies.     

Whom Do They Recruit?: Profiling and Recruitment in the PKK/KCK

Terrorist organizations use a proactive strategy in identifying potential candidates for recruitment. In such a strategy, miscellaneous vulnerabilities, grievances, and feeling destitute, inter alia, render certain individuals perfect candidates for terrorist organizations. It is therefore crucial to have an integrative approach to understand the interplay between the profiles of terrorists and their reasons to join terrorist groups on the one hand and processes of recruitment on the other. Proceeding from such a fulcrum, this article provides a general profile of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party [PKK]/Kurdistan Communities Union [KCK] members and various recruitment techniques used by this group. To this end, records of 2,270 group members were content analyzed, in addition to face-to-face interviews with 42 group members and a range of individuals from public and private institutions. Our findings suggest that a variety of individual and organizational factors influence individual paths toward terrorism.     

Neighbourhood Ethnic Diversity,Child Health Outcomes and Women’s Empowerment

Much of the existing literature suggests that ethnic diversity undermines economic development. However, there are also ways in which local ethnic diversity might be beneficial, and we show that in the case of Ethiopian child health, the benefits of diversity can outweigh the costs. We find that children in relatively diverse communities are better nourished and more likely to receive a full set of vaccinations. There is some evidence that one explanation for this effect is that women in relatively diverse communities are better informed about health issues and more empowered in making healthcare decisions.     

Contextualizing multiculturalism

Multiculturalist critics of liberalism have condemned difference-blind liberal laws as generally insufficient for addressing contemporary questions of justice. Some academic studies have interpreted every contemporary challenge to laws in effect for the general public, whether these laws are liberal or not, as a conflict between liberalism and the demand for group-differentiated rights. This conceptual and normative challenge to liberalism rests on an insufficient number of case analyses of generally poor quality. Critics often fail to differentiate between the concrete terms of political conflict over the public expression of cultural difference and the conceptual and/or normative conflict over underlying principles, in this case difference-blind liberalism versus liberal-multiculturalism. A close empirical analysis of an actual political conflict shows that the tenets of difference-blind liberalism can indeed be marshaled to defend cultural difference. In this article, I challenge the common tendency of the liberal-multiculturalists to present difference-blind liberalism as the “sick man” of western political theory. The argument has five parts. I underscore in the first three sections some conceptual, methodological, and normative problems arising from liberal-multiculturalism itself. In the last two sections I analyze in detail two actual political conflicts over a public expression of difference—the headscarf affairs in France and in Turkey—which suggest that it is state-nationalism rather than difference-blind liberalism that underlies intolerance of cultural diversity.     

A serious medicolegal problem after surgery: gossypiboma

After surgery, the most common foreign bodies retained in the abdominal cavity are the surgical sponges. The aim of the present study was to emphasize the importance of gossypiboma, which is a serious and medicolegal problem. The records of 12 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of gossypiboma after abdominal surgery at Dicle University Hospital were retrospectively reviewed between January 1994 and December 2009. Eight of the 12 patients were females, and 4 were males. Previously, 7 patients had been operated on electively, and 5 had undergone operations on an emergency basis. Abdominal ultrasonography clearly demonstrated gossypibomas in 5 patients, and computed tomography demonstrated a more precise image of retained surgical sponges in 3 patients. One patient died because of ventricular fibrillation; the other 11 patients were discharged in good health. To eliminate the risk of gossypibomas, all sponges should be counted at least twice (once preoperatively and once postoperatively); use of small sponges should be avoided during laparotomy, and only sponges with radiopaque markers should be used. The surgeon should explore the abdomen before closure. In cases in which the sponge count is uncertain, an abdominal x-ray should be performed before closure.     

Judicial Activism in Perilous Times: The Turkish Case

Under what circumstances do courts act in ways that challenge the political hegemony of the military in countries with weak democratic institutions? This article addresses this question by focusing on a critical case of judicial activism in Turkey. It argues that lower courts unexpectedly can be centers of judicial activism that contributes to expansion of civil liberties and restrictions on arbitrary state power when the high judiciary supports the political status quo. This is because lower courts provide greater access to legal mobilization pursued by civil society actors. At the same time, judicial activism in lower courts is sustainable only when political power is distributed among elites with conflicting interests, and the civilian government offers support and protection to activist members of the judiciary.     

Rethinking Kurdish geopolitical space: the politics of image,insecurity and gender

Global publics and local actors are increasingly saturated with variegated still and moving images. The important role played by images in world politics, however, remains understudied in the International Relations (IR) discipline. This article argues that the Kurdish geopolitical space is increasingly tied to a new regional and global imagination, which emanates from verbal–visual meaning-making strategies such as narrative reconstructions and pictorial representations (for example illustrations, pictograms, or photographs). The article’s investigation illustrates how the construction of new Kurdish geopolitical imagination became increasingly regionalized and internationalized during the war against the so-called Islamic State (IS), particularly after the Kobane siege in Syria in late 2014. It shows how the war between the Syrian Kurdish forces and the IS involved gendered and aesthetic signification for the global and regional audiences. Such strategies of meaning-making served as vital venues for gendering and making the threat of the IS and its “distant war” proximate, familiar and urgent for otherwise disinterested western audiences. These verbal–visual strategies vitally acted as a transmission belt between individual, state and systemic levels, turning the struggle against the IS into a globalized cultural-symbolic war. The article employs critical visual semiotics and critical discourse analysis to investigate the regional and global politics of image and offers three empirical cases to illustrate its argument: the narratives of the Kobane siege; the cartoon depicting a “Kurdish homeland” and globally circulated Kurdish female fighter photographs.