Search

Public debate about Canada's role in the Middle East is divided between two camps. One camp contends that Canadian foreign policy should return to its Pearsonian roots, in which Canada plays the role of a dispassionate but honest broker. The other holds that Canada's foreign policy should be defined by high-minded principles. The disagreement is over norms, not interests. This paper refers to two former Prime Ministers who roughly embody the two schools of thought on Canada's foreign and defense policy in the Middle East: Lester B. Pearson and Stephen Harper. Contrary to conventional wisdom that Harper was a realist and Pearson, a Pearsonian, the paper demonstrates that Pearson pursued a realist foreign policy that advances Canada's national security interests whereas Harper was guided by a values-based neo-conservative ideology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores how the popular use of the expression “hitting the ground running” in reference to beginning social work practice draws upon military imagery and reflects neo-conservative expectations of first-year social workers. Discussion of the international and Canadian definitions of social work, key social work values, the neo-conservative paradigm, and the role of language in understanding human experiences provides context to this analysis. Ultimately, it is argued that it is in the best interests of the social work profession for the phrase hitting the ground running to be abandoned (or used critically) when making reference to first-year social workers, and a new metaphor is suggested that could take its place in the social work lexicon.

Copyright of Vínculos de Historia is the property of Vinculos de Historia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper examines critically the ascendance and roles of Black policy specialists as major contributors to the public policy discussion of America's postindustrial-managerial society during the 1980s. The paper looks at two theories of managerial policymaking—one in which experts dominate and another in which politicians control. The study argues that neither theory fully explains the complex process of public policymaking; rather, there is a convergence of power and knowledge—politicians and specialists. This dynamic gives rise to the growing politicization of knowledge and experts. The focus then turns to the rise of Black conservative and liberal policy technocrats and their prescriptions for dealing with urban poverty. The mounting convergence of power and expertise, and veritable politics of knowledge, in the managerial state increasingly exclude ordinary citizens from process of making public decisions. However, through struggle citizens will need to intervene in the process from below. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This thesis examines delinquency professionals’ perceptions and explanations of young male lower working class assaultive violence. Eleven semi-structured interviews were conducted with the delinquency professionals. These were then analyzed within the theoretical frameworks of Royce (2009), Garland (2001), Messerschmidt (1993, 2000) and Cohen (1985). The analysis of the data found the delinquency professionals’ perceptions and explanations of young male lower working class assaultive violence to be individualistic and pathological. Specifically, the delinquency professionals maintain that young male lower working class assaultive violence may be attributed to a “culture of the poor” which requires young men to enact violent masculinities, consists of poor family structure and provides a social learning environment conducive to delinquency. These perspectives ignore the macro structural disparities faced by young lower class males (Royce 2009; Messerschmidt 2000). Rather, they align with the neo-liberal and neo-conservative ideologies present in many post modern Western industrialized nations (Garland 2001). Through ideological semblance it becomes clear that delinquency professionals are influenced by the culture of control, serve as an extension to the culture of control and adopt the individualistic pathological ideology of the culture of control. With the proliferation and expansion of this “professional class” it is important to have a better understanding of how delinquency professionals perceive young male lower working class assaultive violence and their role in the social control system. DOWNLOAD THIS PAPER FROM SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1997458

The article addresses the transformations of Irene Adler, the female character of Arthur Conan Doyle's first Sherlock Holmes short story 'A Scandal in Bohemia' (1891) in recent literary and screen adaptations and appropriations. The focus is on the most current rendition of Irene Adler in the BBC's TV series Sherlock from 2012 (series 2, episode 1), with reference to the use of the character by the same name in the two Guy Ritchie films, Sherlock Holmes (2009) and Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011), as well as in the earlier, arguably neo-Victorian mystery novel Goodnight, Mr Holmes by Carole Nelson Douglas (1990). The article analyses the noticeable curtailment of Adler's agency combined with her overt sexualisation in the screen afterlives. Such "afterings" (Humpherys 2007: 442) of the only female character to outwit the legendarily astute detective are examined in the light of seemingly unwavering postfeminist and neo-conservative trends present in mainstream, big budget TV and film adaptations and appropriations of nineteenth-century classics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite its many failings, the discourse of Islamo-fascism continues to influence American foreign policy debates. Many Bush Administration policies have consequently remained in tact because the frame of political debate has remained largely unchanged. This is problematic for any number of reasons, but primarily because the challenge of Islamic militancy has very little to with the competing values which is the essence of the Islamo-fascist discourse. Rather, America's long war with Islamist militant groups is deeply rooted in the pursuit of American strategic interest, and is a byproduct of the American government's long-term support for a dysfunctional regional order in the Middle East and South Asia. Clarifying the nature of these ideological debates - and more accurately understanding the nature of the problem that needs to be solved - is the first step toward developing a more constructive foreign policy and extricating the Obama Administration from the legacy of its predecessor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An important issue facing Canadians today is crime control and prevention. Research done in the late 1980s and early 1990s by three sociologists shows that Canadian federal criminal justice policies and practices adopted by the Mulroney government from 1984 to 1990 were inconsistent with US 'law and order' models in place at that time. However, since the mid-1990s, Canadian federal and provincial governments have mimicked some US authoritarian and gender-blind means of curbing crime. The main objective of this paper is to provide some key examples of criminal justice policy transfer from the USA in Canada. At first glance, Canada may appear to be a 'kinder, gentler nation,' but not to the extent assumed by many, if not most, outside observers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why does it matter if the United States is an empire in any objectively definable sense? All this academic and political pundit hand-wringing, over whether the United States should technically be labeled an empire or not, seems oddly out of step with the sorts of egregious foreign policy behaviors the United States engages in on a daily basis. Yet the words we use to describe something do matter a great deal to what we see and how we act in the world. In this paper, I argue that the closer one looks at the debate over the empire designation, the more one begins to see an underlying dynamic of political self-delusion that is endemic to the American power project. America wields enormous power that affects the daily lives of people around the globe, but like a schoolchild on the playground it does not like to be called names. The extent to which political observers participate in this obfuscation is an interesting topic in its own right, as it underscores how name-calling is a political act in itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Beller's review article takes as its starting point the essays published in a recent collection exploring the question of a 'new antisemitism'. He claims that this debate has generated more heat than light. Warnings about the rise of a new antisemitism in Europe, especially on the left, are greatly exaggerated, largely unjustified and approach a form of psychological 'projection'. Anti-Zionism is not necessarily antisemitism. Zionism is an ethnonationalist ideology and, as such, contradicts the universalist logic of the socialist and liberal left; the enthusiastic support for Israel by European socialist parties from 1948 until the 1970s was anomalous. Nevertheless, the recent critical approach taken by the liberal European media to Israeli policy is not usually anti-Zionist, but rather holding Israel to its own high moral standards. If there is conflation between anti-Zionist and antisemitic attitudes this reflects the similarly conflating Zionist belief that Israel is the expression of the Jewish people's right to national self-determination. Some manifestations of Arab/Muslim anti-Zionism do indeed exhibit the worst forms of antisemitism. However, there are reasons for this hostility. Heated assertions decrying the denial of the right of Israel to exist are distractions from the very problematic issues raised by Arab grievances. A deeper question here involves the conflict between the Muslim world and two forms of western modernity: neo-conservative, uniform, nationally based rationalism; and the more 'postmodern', critical and pluralist tradition of European (and American) left/liberal intellectuals. Ironically, current American and Israeli policy now represents the former 'modernity', while the latter, critical tradition derives to a great extent from the experience of the Jewish diaspora. The diasporic Jewish tradition is the model to which Israel and its supporters should look to secure Israel's peaceful, sustainable future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article describes how the interrelationship between the media and pro-Israeli, neo-conservative lobbyists helped to create a climate of opinion in the United States that enabled the Bush administration to secure acceptance for the war on Iraq. Many neo-conservatives move easily from government positions to high-paying jobs as lobbyists or as columnists or pundits in the media -- especially the electronic media -- and then back to the government. This revolving door allows a few committed neo-conservatives and Zionist sympathizers to exercise undue influence on the formation and implementation of foreign policy as in the case of the Iraq war. In the run-up to the war, the media was complacent if not complicit in accepting government distortions and lies about the causes for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Even by 2006, having learned little or nothing from the failures in Iraq, the Bush administration and pro-Israeli lobbyists, with extensive support from the media, was considering further wars against Syria and Iran. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses various aspects of the issues on war and peace. Different views on war and peace arise from various groups of people. Through the consolidation of a world empire, ideologues and civilian militarists believe that peace could be achieved. For the political spokespeople representing multinational companies, peace and prosperity can be attained when the operation of the free market is combined with the selective use of strategic imperial force.

Evidence indicates that black families have been negatively affected at every income stratum by the conservative economic, tax, and social policies of this decade. Three areas of concern are a deemphasis action, use of idealized family types as standards, and retrenchments in social and income maintenance programs. Implications for family life therapists/counselors and policy specialists include: (a) being informed by the struggle and survival leitmotif of black families, (b) developing cultural and racial awareness as well as sensitivity to environmental constraints, and (c) use of policy analyses targeted to identify antiblack family biases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]