Family Obligation Values and Family Assistance Behaviors: Protective and Risk Factors for Mexican–American Adolescents’ Substance Use

Adolescent substance use is one of today’s most important social concerns, with Latino youth exhibiting the highest overall rates of substance use. Recognizing the particular importance of family connection and support for families from Mexican backgrounds, the current study seeks to examine how family obligation values and family assistance behaviors may be a source of protection or risk for substance use among Mexican–American adolescents. Three hundred and eighty-five adolescents (51 % female) from Mexican backgrounds completed a questionnaire and daily diary for 14 consecutive days. Results suggest that family obligation values are protective, relating to lower substance use, due, in part, to the links with less association with deviant peers and increased adolescent disclosure. In contrast, family assistance behaviors are a source of risk within high parent–child conflict homes, relating to higher levels of substance use. These findings suggest that cultural values are protective against substance use, but the translation of these values into behaviors can be a risk factor depending upon the relational context of the family.     

Why do voters forgive corrupt mayors? Implicit exchange,credibility of information and clean alternatives

Corruption cases have limited electoral consequences in many countries. Why do voters often fail to punish corrupt politicians at the polls? Previous research has focused on the role of lack of information, weak institutions and partisanship in explaining this phenomenon. In this paper, we propose three micro-mechanisms that can help understand why voters support corrupt mayors even in contexts with high information and strong institutions: implicit exchange (good performance can make up for corruption), credibility of information (accusations from opposition parties are not credible) and the lack of credible alternatives (the belief that all politicians are corrupt). We test these mechanisms using three survey experiments conducted in Catalonia. Our results suggest that implicit exchange and credibility of information help explain voters’ support for corrupt politicians.     

Unveiling the Forbidden: Same-sex Love as a Motif in Lydia Wahlström’s Writing

This article investigates how the historian and writer Lydia Wahlström (1869–1954) wrote about same-sex passions in a time when homosexuality was forbidden by law and tabooed in literature. There were of course also, during the first decades of the 1900s, many people who lived in same-sex relationships, some of them openly enough that this can still be discerned in the historical material. Lydia Wahlström was among them. She was active in the suffragist movement and one of its most prolific leaders, speakers, and writers. Wahlström was awarded a doctorate in history in 1898 and then became the director of studies at the Åhlinska School for girls in Stockholm. Alongside this, she wrote numerous articles and non-fiction books on a wide range of subjects as well as three romans-à-clef. In these novels, she wrote about the love that dared not speak its name, but she had to draw a veil over the forbidden motif in order to write about it. The interesting thing is that Wahlström did not mask the controversial motif more than that the observant contemporary reader could understand the underlying meaning in the novels and that it becomes even clearer to those who read her autobiography that was published many years later. This article deals with writing about same-sex love in a profoundly homophobic time.     

Pain tolerance: Economic voting in the Czech Republic

Several theoretical explanations have been proposed to explain the mixed evidence of economic voting in post-communist countries. Using aggregate-level data, this article relaxes the assumption of parameter constancy and employs rolling regression analysis to track fluctuations in parameters over time. The results contradict the existing theories of economic voting in postcommunist countries. As an alternative explanation, the article suggest that voters have a level of pain tolerance below which the economy will not play a role in evaluations of the government; voters will use economic indicators to punish and reward incumbent government only if the economic indicators exceed their pain tolerance. For example, in the Czech Republic, voters will not start punishing the incumbent party until inflation climbs above 13.44%. However, Czech voters are less tolerant of unemployment and will punish the incumbent when unemployment exceeds 8.82%.     

Folter und Menschenwürde. Zur aktuellen Debatte um die Rettungsfolter

Im Ausgang von den jüngsten Gerichtsentscheidungen (des EGMR und des Landgerichts Frankfurt) im Fall "Daschner" bzw "G?fgen" setzt sich die Untersuchung zun?chst kritisch mit Ans?tzen einer Relativierung des Folterverbots in der deutschen staatsrechtlichen Debatte auseinander. Besonderes Augenmerk gilt dem exemplarischen Vorsto? Bruggers zur Legalisierung der "Rettungsbefragung" im Ausnahmefall als Ausdruck staatlicher Schutzpflichten, die aus dem staatlichen Gewaltmonopol resultierten. Dabei werden insbesondere die utilitaristischen Grundlagen und Aporien des darin reklamierten rechtsethischen "Konsequenzialismus" sowie dessen Spannungsverh?ltnis zu freiheitssichernder Rechtsstaatlichkeit offengelegt. Im Mittelpunkt der Kontroversen um die "Rettungsfolter" steht die Frage nach dem Stellenwert der Menschenwürde - als grunds?tzlich abw?gbares "Rechtsgut" unter anderen, wie etwa auch in einer bekannten Neukommentierung von Art 1 GG im Ansatz reklamiert, oder aber als nicht relativierbares verfassungsrechtliches Fundamentalprinzip, das die Positivit?t konkreter rechtlicher Regeln notwendig überschreitet. Im Anschluss an das herrschende Verst?ndnis der Menschenwürde als unbedingtes Rechtsprinzip werden Begriff und "Ph?nomenologie" der Folter hinsichtlich ihrer charakteristischen Eingriffsintensit?t als "Totalinstrumentalisierung" des Menschen und v?llige Negation des wechselseitigen Anerkennungsverh?ltnisses n?her bestimmt. Diese Anerkennung allgemeiner menschlicher Verantwortungssubjektivit?t bildet seit den Ursprüngen modernen Staatsverst?ndnisses aber auch die eigentliche legitimierende Basis seiner zentralen Friedenssicherungspflichten und Schutzaufgaben. Eine rechtlich-politische Ma?nahme, die dieses fundamentale Rechtsverh?ltnis verletzt, kann daher auch kein Ausdruck von Souver?nit?t sein, sondern verletzt deren kontraktualistische Grundlagen. Sie bedeutet darüber hinaus einen exemplarischen Einbruch in freiheitliche Verfassungskultur, der einem weiteren Abbau demokratischer Rechtsstaatlichkeit Vorschub leisten k?nnte.