Consumerism and the new poor

He is author of Applied Mathematical Demography; Population Change and Social Policy;and co-author (with Wilhelm Flieger) of World Populations: An Analysis of Vital Data.     

So You Love Me

This essay uses the work of Gilles Deleuze, in some detail, to argue for a new practice of criticism. Not in order to purify, refine, or generally redeem anything, but rather to encourage a focusing upon the production of fields of experience as an ethical event. As such, the piece re-problematizes what it means to raise questions, and demonstrates the underlying responsibility of doing so.     

Civilizations Out of Sync

Efforts by the Bush Administration to launch an international public relations campaign — under the guidance of the marketing guru behind the Uncle ben' rice advertisements — is a bit naive. "If the Muslim world only understood our good intentions, all would be ok," seems to be the idea. And Hollywood has been enlisted to tell the world, "This is not a war against Muslims."     

Facing the Consequences

Many philosophers endorse deterrence justifications of legal punishment. According to these justifications, punishment is justified at least in part because it deters offenses. These justifications rely on empirical assumptions, e.g., that non-punitive enforcement can’t deter or that it can’t deter enough. I’ll challenge these assumptions and argue that extant deterrence justifications of legal punishment fail. I begin by isolating, in a simplified form, important claims common to deterrence justifications. I then endorse an uncontroversial claim about punishment and explore its implications for enforcement. These implications undermine the simple versions of the deterrence claims. I then evaluate several modifications of the claims to see whether they can be improved upon. I argue that they can’t easily be improved upon. In the process, I examine contemporary deterrence research and argue that it provides no support for deterrence justifications. I conclude by considering objections.     

The unintended consequences of kingpin strategies: kidnap rates and the Arellano-Félix Organization

Kingpin strategies— the targeting of the top-levels of terrorist or drug trafficking organization hierarchies— has become a centerpiece of US and Mexican efforts to combat drug trafficking. This study addresses the unintended consequences of these strategies by assessing the impact of the arrest or deaths of Arellano Felix Organization leaders on kidnap and homicide levels from the late 1990’s to 2011. Based on the study, the arrest of important AFO “lieutenants” increased kidnap rates. Arrests or the deaths of organization “kingpins” did not result in increased homicides or kidnappings, if respected successors were ready to fill leadership vacuums. When leadership succession was in question, the arrest of “kingpins” did result in internecine conflict and thus increased homicide and kidnapping rates. Following internecine conflict, kidnap and homicide rates dropped, but not to pre-conflict levels. This is likely attributable to the use of kidnapping and homicide as a dispute resolution mechanism in the growing Tijuana consumer drug market.     

Critical Junctures,Religion, and Personal Status Regulations in Israel and India

The article aims at advancing our understanding of critical junctures in the evolution of religious/secular regulations, referring to those moments in history when one particular arrangement is adopted among several alternatives, establishing an institutional trajectory that is resistant to change in the following years. It traces the regulation of personal status laws in Israel and India, which, despite attempts by political leaders at time of independence to defer clear choices regarding the role of religious law, became generally entrenched in later decades. Based on the Israeli and Indian cases, and in contrast with common approaches, the article demonstrates how decisions made by influential political actors during the foundational stage of the state appear difficult to reform, regardless of the content of these decisions—whether they introduce a radical change or maintain existing practices—or the level of decision making—whether constitutional or ordinary parliamentary legislation.