Teaching Foreign Policy with Memoirs

Excerpts from the memoirs of high foreign policy officials, if carefully selected and structured, can be a valuable resource in the teaching of diplomatic history, American foreign policy, and international relations. Two decades of teaching a memoirs-only course to mid-career military officers and foreign affairs professionals in a seminar discussion format reveals many of their advantages. Memoirs are interesting reading that rarely fail to engage a reader's attention; they impart detailed knowledge of historical events; they provide a rich understanding of process and the neglected area of policy implementation; like case studies, they let students build vicarious experience in policymaking and execution; and they often provide what Alexander George called "policy-relevant generalizations." While lack of objectivity can be a serious drawback of first-person accounts, it provides its own lessons on the nature of history and can be offset by using multiple accounts of the same events and by combining memoirs with documents and historical works, or countering analytical studies. Although picking the most interesting and worthwhile excerpts, getting them in students' hands, and accommodating their length within the boundaries of a standard college course are additional challenges, professors who take them on should find that memoirs add a new level of excitement and realism to their courses.     

Managing Prisoners as Problem Populations and the Evolving Nature of Imprisonment: A Convict Perspective

This article employs a convict perspective toexamine the evolving nature of imprisonment inthe United States. Drawing from the prisonliterature, and placed within the politicaleconomy of the wider society, it utilizespersonal accounts of the author (an ex-convict)and his interactions with prisoners to providea critical look at the changing structures,inequities, and hierarchical social relationsof the prison system and their effect on thelives of people behind bars.     

Scholars and Radicals: Writing and Re-thinking Class Structure in Australian History

We wrote Class Structure in Australian History in a period of heightened social struggle. It grew out of collaborative research projects at Sydney's Free U in the late 1960s. The book was distinctive in both emphasising the socialist tradition of class analysis and trying to find new paths for it. Its first edition was ignored by mass media, and often mis-interpreted in professional journals. Nevertheless it circulated widely and has continued to be a point of reference for progressive scholarship. Its method tried to carry forward the Free U project of democratic knowledge making, linking documents with analysis and inviting shared interpretation. Its theory emphasised the reality of classes as historical formations, and the importance of understanding class structure as a whole, on both points reacting against influential frameworks of the time. Looking back, CSAH appears uncertain in its approach to race and gender, and inadequate in its handling of coloniality; it was written in isolation from similar projects in other parts of the postcolonial world. Yet its approach still has value in understanding the changing dynamics of class on a world scale, the class relations of the neoliberal era in Australia, and the current configuration of power in Australia.     

Anarchs and Social Guys

This contribution addresses the question raised by Robin Fox concerning our tribal ancestry and its relevance to modernity and civilization. The discussion centers first on the concept of communitas with the suggestion that it be defined as referring to two different states, the psychological communitas and the sociological communitas. Groups or communities organized along the lines of a sociological communitas are then examined cursorily and their properties are outlined. Numerous tribal groups of that sort have been documented and have been shown to lack the traits of what is called a social organization. The observation of their non-social organization is arguably a fact of major significance in the social sciences, one that has not been clearly highlighted so far. The hypothesis presented in this paper is that such organizations that are anarchic and complex have to be epistemologically dissociated from organizations that are social. Anarchs and social guys thus point to two different ancestries in the genealogy of humankind.