Postsocialist patronage: Expressions of resistance and loyalty

Research on patronage in postsocialist Russia focuses on structural and exchange aspects, but neglects deeper cultural forces that contribute to its reproduction. This study adopts a “bottom-up” approach to understanding the culture of patronage by analyzing the claims of ordinary citizens in “letters to the editor” from a postsocialist Russian locality. The common conventions authors use to legitimize claims share many characteristic features with patronage. Rather than judge authorities based on policy or ability to represent citizen interests, authors evaluate the moral and ethical worth of individuals, making their claims highly personalized. Evidence from these analyses suggests clients help sustain patronage by publicly expressing claims in a language infused with particularlism. Andrew D. Buck is a lecturer in sociology at the University of Reading, England. His interests include social network analysis and postsocialist transitions. He has written on aspects of the privatization process, as well as on the relationship between elite networks and democracy in postsocialist Russia. Research for this article was supported in part by a grant from the international Research and Exchanges Board (IREX). Grateful thanks to Vladimir Levitchev for research assistance. Special thanks to Antonina Bambina for her insightful suggestions and criticisms throughtout different stages of the research. I would also like to acknowledge the helpful comments I received from Roberto Franzosi, Jeff Hass, Jorge Rodriguez, and David Stark on a previous draft.     

The International Community in Bosnia: Enduring Questions of Legitimacy

This analysis explores the legitimacy of the international communityin Bosnia and the outcome of international involvement in theprocess of democratization. The paper discusses normative definitionsof legitimacy and their relation to certain elements of theinternational community's involvement in Bosnia. The first partof the paper discusses the foundations of distrust of the internationalcommunity during the war, specifically the presence of the UN.The second part of the paper explores the legitimacy of theDayton Peace Agreement and the consequent Constitution. Thefinal part of this paper explains how the Office of the HighRepresentative presents an enormous challenge to legitimatedemocracy in Bosnia and concludes with questions relating tothe future of the Bosnian government.     

Darwall,Habermas, and the Fluidity of Respect

What moral commitments do we manifest when we make claims upon one another? The practice of claiming is inescapable, and so any normative presuppositions of that practice are similarly inescapable (at least on pain of self‐contradiction). This inquiry thus promises an Archimedian point from which to address intractable moral disagreements in modern society. Whatever we happen to differ about, we can be shown to agree about these premises, and therefore to share commitment to whatever can be derived from these premises. The most prominent developer of this approach is Jürgen Habermas, who has sought to ground, inter alia, religious and cultural rights on this basis. I will argue that the strategy cannot resolve disagreement in the way Habermas hopes, and that this has been shown, perhaps inadvertently, by Stephen Darwall, who for very different reasons seeks to work out the premises of the practice of claiming (and who never discusses Habermas). Darwall has no apparent interest in finding a universally convincing basis for resolving moral controversies. He seeks to address, not the practical problems of a pluralistic society, but some specialized, albeit important, questions of metaethics, having to do with what kind of entity a moral claim is 1 1 These are the focus of a symposium on Darwall's book The Second Person Standpoint (Darwall 2006) in Ethics 118 (Oct. 2007). To avoid misunderstanding: I am not here attempting a comprehensive comparison of Darwall and Habermas, but only juxtaposing their views on a single important issue.
. Both Habermas and Darwall think that discourse presupposes a kind of respect among persons. Darwall, however, shows that respect is too fluid, and takes too many possible forms, to ground any but the most trivial specific moral claims.     

The Effect of Conjugal Visitation on Sexual Violence in Prison

Using yearly state-level data drawn from a variety of different sources and a pooled cross-sectional time-series research design, we examine whether conjugal visitation attenuates sexual violence in prison. The determination of whether sexual violence in prison is less apt to transpire in states that allow conjugal visitation is theoretically relevant. Feminist theory argues that conjugal visitation has little if any influence on the occurrence of rape and other sexual offenses in prison, notwithstanding the gender of the offender and victim, because such offenses are crimes of power that are employed by the offender as an instrument to dominate and humiliate the victim. On the other hand, sexual gratification theory postulates that conjugal visitation provides inmates with a means of sexual release. Therefore, conjugal visitation should reduce sexual offending in prison. Results support sexual gratification theory by showing that states permitting conjugal visitation have significantly fewer instances of reported rape and other sexual offenses in their prisons. The policy implications of these findings are discussed.     

Let the Sunshine In,or Else: An Examination of the “Teeth” of State and Federal Open Meetings and Open Records Laws

Public access laws are at the heart of transparent democracy, in place to ensure that government meetings and records are open to the public. However, compliance with these laws is often problematic, a fact that can be attributed, in part, to ineffective remedies available for violations of state and federal open government laws. This study examines the enforcement provisions of the public access laws in jurisdictions across the United States to explore the remedies available, including equitable relief such as injunctions and mandamus, actual and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, and civil and criminal sanctions. Structural difficulties were revealed that can make these remedies toothless for people unlawfully denied access. The article concludes by suggesting improvements such as enhanced and uniform penalties, more consistent enforcement, and alternatives to litigation.