Halfmann CV 2017
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Passionate Politics: Emotions and Social Movements
Passionate Politics Passionate Politics Emotions and Social Movements Edited by Jeff Goodwin, James M. Jasper, and Francesca Polletta The University of Chicago Press Chicago and London Jeff Goodwin is associate professor of sociology at New York University and author of No Other Way Out: States and Revolutionary Movements, 1945–1991. James M. Jasper is an independent scholar and the author of Restless Nation and The Art of Moral Protest. Francesca Polletta is associ- ate professor of sociology at Columbia University, and the author of Free- dom Is an Endless Meeting: Democracy in American Social Movements (forthcoming). The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637 The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London 2001 by The University of Chicago All rights reserved. Published 2001 Printed in the United States of America 10987654321 54321 ISBN (cloth): 0-226-30398-5 ISBN (paper): 0-226-30399-3 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Passionate politics : emotions and social movements / edited by Jeff Goodwin, James M. Jasper, and Francesca Polletta. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-226-30398-5 (cloth) — ISBN 0-226-30399-3 (pbk.) 1. Social movements. 2. Emotions. 3. Political science. I. Goodwin, Jeff. II. Jasper, James M., 1957–. III. Polletta, Francesca. HM881 .P38 2001 303.48′4—dc21 2001000938 ᭺∞ The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992. To all those who have pursued social justice with passion Contents Preface and Acknowledgments xi Introduction: Why Emotions Matter Jeff Goodwin, James M. -
THEORIES of SOCIAL MOVEMENTS Week 1
THEORIES OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS Fall, 1999 James M. Jasper This course will examine the main approaches to the study of social movements over the last forty years, with an emphasis on theoretical assumptions rather than on empirical or methodological aspects. Each student will also read an empirical study, selected from the list below. Weekly memos will address the applicability of the readings to that case, using empirical evidence to launch an evaluation of the approach. I have tried to pick case studies that are relatively free from heavy theoretical selection of the materials presented. Let me know if you have other cases you would prefer to use. You need to start reading these immediately. Taylor Branch, Parting the Waters. (On the civil rights movement) Craig Calhoun, Neither Gods nor Emperors. (Chinese student movement) James Jasper and Dorothy Nelkin, The Animal Rights Crusade. David Meyer, Winter of our Discontent. (The freeze movement) Jonathan Rieder, Canarsie. (Backlash against affirmative action and civil rights) Verta Taylor, Rock-a-Bye Baby. (Post-partum depression self-help movement) Nancy Whittier, Feminist Generations. Week 1. Economic Models, Rational Individuals. Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action (Harvard University Press, 1965). Week 2. Resource Mobilization Models: Political and Economic Versions. Charles Tilly, From Mobilization to Revolution (Addison-Wesley, 1978). John McCarthy and Mayer Zald, "Resource Mobilization in Social Movements," American Journal of Sociology 82 (1977). 2 Week 3. Political Process Models. Sidney Tarrow, Power in Movement, second edition (Cambridge, 1998). Herbert Kitschelt, "Protest Strategies and Policy Impacts of Social Movements: A Comparison of Anti-nuclear Movements in Four Countries," British Journal of Political Science 16 (1986). -
What Explains the Quality of Coverage of the Civil Rights Movement*
MAKING GOOD NEWS: WHAT EXPLAINS THE QUALITY OF COVERAGE OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT* Edwin Amenta, Thomas Alan Elliott, Nicole Shortt, Amber C. Tierney, Didem Türkoğlu and Burrel Vann Jr.† When social movement organizations receive extensive newspaper coverage, why is it sometimes substantive and sometimes not? By “substantive,” we mean coverage that reflects serious treat- ment of the movement’s issues, demands, or policy claims. Scholars agree that the news media are key to movement organizations’ influence, helping them alter public discourse and effect political change, but often find that protests are covered nonsubstantively. Employing insights from liter- atures on historical institutionalism, the social organization of the news, and the consequences of movements, we elaborate an “institutional mediation” model that identifies the interactive effects on coverage of news institutions’ operating procedures, movement organizations’ characteristics and action, and political contexts. Although movement actors suffer compound legitimacy deficits with journalists, the institutional mediation model identifies the openings news institutions provide, the movement organizational characteristics, the forms of collective action likely to induce sub- stantive news treatment, and the political contexts that will amplify or dampen these effects. We derive four interactive hypotheses from this model, addressing the effects of organizational identities, collective action, and political contexts on news outcomes. We appraise the hypotheses with comparative and qualitative comparative analyses of more than 1000 individually coded articles discussing the five most-covered organizations of the 1960s U.S. civil rights movement across four national newspapers. We find support for each hypothesis and discuss the implications for other movement organizations and the current media context. -
Historical Institutionalism and the Welfare State
Historical Institutionalism and the Welfare State Oxford Handbooks Online Historical Institutionalism and the Welfare State Julia Lynch and Martin Rhodes The Oxford Handbook of Historical Institutionalism Edited by Orfeo Fioretos, Tulia G. Falleti, and Adam Sheingate Print Publication Date: Mar 2016 Subject: Political Science, Comparative Politics, Political Institutions Online Publication Date: May 2016 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199662814.013.25 Abstract and Keywords This chapter examines how historical institutionalism has influenced the analysis of welfare state and labor market policies in the rich industrial democracies. Using Lakatos’s concept of the “scientific research program” as a heuristic, the authors explore the development and expansion of historical institutionalism as a predominant approach in welfare state research. Focusing on this tradition’s strong core of actors (academic path- and boundary-setters), rules (methodology and methods), and norms (ontological and epistemological assumptions), they strive to demarcate the terrain of HI within studies of the welfare state, and to reveal the capacity of HI in this field to underpin a robust but flexible and enduring scholarly research program. Keywords: welfare state, Lakatos, research program, historical institutionalism, ideational approaches HISTORICAL institutionalism and the analysis of welfare states (including the ancillary policy domain of the labor market) overlap significantly. More than elsewhere in Political Science and public policy, much single-country, program, and comparative analysis of the welfare state since the 1980s has taken an historical approach (Amenta 2003). Relatedly, some of the major welfare state scholars have also been major historical institutionalism theorists and proponents—most prominently, but not only, Theda Skocpol, Paul Pierson, and Kathleen Thelen. -
Historical Priorities and the Responses of Doctors' Associations
Historical Priorities and the Responses of Doctors’ Associations to Abortion Reform Proposals in Britain and the United States, 1960–1973 DREW HALFMANN, University of California, Davis In the 1960s and early 1970s, policy-makers in Britain and the United States considered proposals to make abortions more readily available. The main doctors’ associations in each country responded differently to these proposals. Doctors’ associations in both countries initially sought to preserve clinical autonomy by ensuring that doctors could continue to “diagnose” the “medical necessity” of abortions. However, the American Medical Asso- ciation (AMA) eventually changed its position to allow abortion on request. The study explains this difference by way of an “historical priorities” approach to analyzing the construction of collective political demands. It argues that “policy legacies” provide contexts in which collective actors prioritize among their policy desires. The study nds that because of differing health care policy legacies British doctors’ associations viewed abortion clinical autonomy as a higher priority than did the AMA. Moreover, British doctors’ associations were most concerned about patient infringements on clinical autonomy, while the AMA was equally concerned about state infringe- ments on autonomy. In the 1960s and early 1970s, policy-makers in Britain and the United States considered, and eventually enacted, abortion reform proposals that sought to make abortions more readily available. The responses of major doctors’ associations to these proposals differed markedly. 1 Both the British Medical Association (BMA) and the American Medical Association (AMA) initially sought to preserve their power to “diagnose” the “medical necessity” of abortions and, as a result, opposed both abortion on request and abortion for grounds of economic hardship. -
Volume XIV, Issue 6 December 2020
ISSN 2334-3745 Volume XIV, Issue 6 December 2020 Special Issue Restraint in Terrorist Groups and Radical Milieus Guest Editors Joel Busher and Tore Bjørgo PERSPECTIVES ON TERRORISM Volume 14, Issue 6 Table of Contents Welcome from the Editors...............................................................................................................................1 Articles Restraint in Terrorist Groups and Radical Milieus: Towards a Research Agenda.........................................2 by Joel Busher and Tore Bjørgo Non-Involvement in Terrorist Violence: Understanding the Most Common Outcome of Radicalization Processes........................................................................................................................................................14 by Bart Schuurman Learning from the Lack of Political Violence: Conceptual Issues and Research Designs...........................27 by Leena Malkki Why the Nordic Resistance Movement Restrains Its Use of Violence..........................................................37 by Tore Bjørgo and Jacob Aasland Ravndal The Internal Brakes on Violent Escalation within the British Extreme Right in the 1990s........................49 by Graham Macklin On the Permissibility of Homicidal Violence: Perspectives from Former US White Supremacists...........65 by Steven Windisch, Pete Simi, Kathleen M. Blee, and Matthew DeMichele Internal Debates, Doubts and Discussions on the Scope of Jihadi Violence: The Case of the Turnup Terror Squad..................................................................................................................................................77 -
A Theory of Categorical Terrorism
A Theory of Categorical Terrorism Jeff Goodwin, New York University Abstract When revolutionaries or insurgents, broadly defined, indiscriminately attack civilians, they generally attack “complicitous civilians,” i.e., those categories of noncombatants which the revolutionaries see as benefiting from, supporting and/or having a substantial capacity to influence the states that the revolutionaries are attempting to displace or overthrow. Such “categorical” terrorism will be most extensive when revolutionaries view these states (or complicitous civilians themselves) as perpetrators of extensive, indiscriminate violence against the revolutionaries and their constituents. However, if significant numbers of complicitous civilians are seen by rebel groups as potential supporters (or as capable of being influenced by nonviolent appeals or protests), then they will not be indiscriminately attacked. Whether specific categories of civilians will be perceived as potential allies by revolutionaries depends mainly on the prior history of political interaction and cooperation between these civilians and the revolutionaries. Categorical terrorism is most likely where there has been little such interaction or cooperation, resulting in weak political alliances between the revolutionaries and complicitous civilians – for example, where the revolutionaries and complicitous civilians speak different languages, practice different religions, claim the same land, and/or are territorially segregated. The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, have spurred many social scientists to explore the dynamics of terrorism, most for the first time. Before 9/11, terrorism research was the exclusive preserve, with very few exceptions, of small networks of political scientists and non-academic “security experts,” relatively few of whom were interested in social-science theory. Descriptive case studies abound, replete with ad hoc, case-specific explanations of terrorism. -
War Pictures: the Grotesque As a Mobilizing Tactic*
WAR PICTURES: THE GROTESQUE AS A MOBILIZING TACTIC* Drew Halfmann and Michael P. Young† This article examines the uses and effects of grotesque imagery in the antislavery and antiabortion movements and considers implications for theories of movement framing and mobilization. Grotesque images can produce strong emotions that may increase the resonance of movement frames and provide physiological “evidence” of immorality. Such images may also produce confusion and ambiguity that deeply engages readers or viewers and potentially breaks frames. But grotesque images can also be counterproductive for activists. They can cause readers or viewers to turn away in disgust, and their use can taint activists as prurient, irrational, uncivil, or manipulative. Finally, the effects of grotesque images are likely to vary across audiences, social contexts, and the skill of the activists that deploy them. The use of shocking and gruesome images has been a much remarked-upon feature of the antiabortion movement in the Untied States. But such images have been utilized by many other movements as well, including those against slavery, racial oppression, child labor, war, nuclear weapons, alcohol, drunk driving, tobacco, pornography, immigration, and the mistreatment of animals. In this article, we examine uses of such images in the antiabortion and antislavery movements and consider implications for theories of movement framing and mobilization. Utilizing the literary and artistic concept of “the grotesque”—images of distorted bodies and the border between human and inhuman—we argue that this aesthetic technique is available to most moral movements and discuss its tactical strengths and weaknesses. Over the last twenty years, scholars of social movements have made great strides in understanding the cultural frames that movements use to diagnose social problems, identify targets of action, and mobilize adherents (Benford and Snow 2000; Snow and Benford 1988; Snow, Rochford, Worden, and Benford 1986). -
Citizenship Beliefs and Political Participation Across Three Geopolitical Regions
UC Irvine CSD Working Papers Title Diverse Democracies: Citizenship Beliefs and Political Participation Across Three Geopolitical Regions Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7zh4w33g Authors Bolzendahl, Catherine Coffé, Hilde Publication Date 2010-08-14 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California CSD Center for the Study of Democracy An Organized Research Unit University of California, Irvine www.democ.uci.edu Introduction Scholars may disagree regarding the specifics of how much and in what ways citizens should be active in their democratic systems of governance, but in general, a participatory public is seen as crucial for democratic responsiveness and as an intrinsic democratic good (Arendt 1958; Lijphart 1997; Verba 1996). However this says nothing about whether or how much average citizens view participation as an important part of citizenship in particular, or what other aspects might be important in general. Even less is known about how beliefs about the meaning of citizenship are tied to actual behaviors. Discussions of democracy, citizenship, and political participation are often forwarded with little consideration of how they are viewed by citizens themselves or how such relationships might vary across different democracies. While democracy has emerged as the most popular form of government for a variety of reasons, it is important to remember that democratic forms and practices vary a great deal within and across nations. Thus, discussion in public arena among democratic nations on how to help other nations “build democracy” or “foster democratic citizenship” would benefit from knowing what citizenship actually means to the democratic public and how such meanings relate to political behavior and differ cross- nationally. -
Cveigh, Rory, Kraig Beyerlein, Burrel Vann Jr, and Priyamvada Trivedi
Burrel Vann Jr San Diego State University B [email protected] School of Public Affairs 619·594·0512 5500 Campanile Drive, AH–4117 v 619·594·1165 San Diego, CA 92182 m burrelvannjr.com Academic Positions 2019– Assistant Professor, Criminal Justice, San Diego State University Education 2019 Ph.D. Sociology, University of California, Irvine 2012 M.A. Sociology, California State University, Fullerton 2010 B.A. Sociology & Psychology, California State University, Fullerton Areas of Specialization Politics and Policy; Drugs and Crime; Social Movements; Inequality; Race; Quantitative and Computational Methods Publications 2021 Vann Jr, Burrel. 2021. “Persuasive Action and Ideological Polarization in Congress.” Social Problems 68(X):1-22. Ò 2019 Amenta, Edwin, Thomas Elliott, Nicole Shortt, Amber Tierney, Didem Turkoglu, and Burrel Vann Jr. 2019. “Making Good News: What Explains the Quality of Coverage of the Civil Rights Movement.” Mobilization 24(1):19-37. Ò 2018 Vann Jr, Burrel. 2018. “Movement-Countermovement Dynamics and Mobilizing the Electorate.” Mobilization 23(3):285-305. Ò 2017 Amenta, Edwin, Thomas Elliott, Nicole Shortt, Amber Tierney, Didem Turkoglu, and Burrel Vann Jr. 2017. “From Bias to Coverage: What Explains How News Organizations Treat Social Movements.” Sociology Compass 11(3):1-12. Ò 2014 McVeigh, Rory, Kraig Beyerlein, Burrel Vann Jr, and Priyamvada Trivedi. 2014. “Educational Segregation, Tea Party Organizations, and Battles over Distributive Justice.” American Sociological Review 79(4):630-652. Ò Under Review Vann Jr, Burrel. “The Diffusion of Legalization in the American States.” (Revise and Resubmit at International Journal of Drug Policy) Vann Jr, Burrel. “Marijuana Policy Change in the American States.” (Under Review at Policy & Politics) Vann Jr, Burrel. -
Editors & Contributors (Pdf)
Editors David A. Snow is a Distinguished Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Irvine, where he also serves as the Co-Director of the Center for Citizen’s Peacebuilding. He has authored numerous articles and chapters on aspects of social movements and collective action, particularly on framing processes, as well as a number of books on social movements, including: Shakubuku: A Study of the Nichiren Shoshu Buddhist Movement in America, 1960–1975 (1993), The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (with Sarah Soule and Hanspeter Kriesi, 2004), Social Movements: Readings on Their Emergence, Mobilization, and Dynamics (with Doug McAdam, 1997, 2010), and A Primer on Social Movements (with Sarah Soule, 2010). Professor Snow was the 2008 recipient of the Society for the Study of Social Problems’ Lee Founders Award for career contributions to the study of social problems. Donatella della Porta lectures at the European University Institute, Florence, and directs the ERC project “Mobilizing for democracy: Democratization processes and the mobilization of civil society.” She is the co-author of Social Movements: An Introduction (with Mario Diani, 2006), Europeanization and Social Movements (with Manuela Caiani, 2009), and Mobilizing on the Extreme Right: Germany, Italy, and the United States (with Manuela Caiani and Claudius Wagemann, 2012), and editor of Democracy in Social Movements (2009) and Another Europe (2009). In 2011, Professor della Porta was awarded the Mattei Dogan Prize for political sociology. Bert Klandermans is Professor in Applied Social Psychology at the VU University of Amsterdam. He is Director of the research program Social Conflict and Change. He is the editor and co-author of Methods of Social Movement Research (with Suzanne Staggenborg, 2002) and Extreme Right Activists in Europe (with Nonna Mayer, 2006). -
Jeff Goodwin
Jeff Goodwin Professor of Sociology, New York University Associated Faculty Member, Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies Affiliated Faculty Member, Center for Latin American & Caribbean Studies PERSONAL INFORMATION Office address, phones, electronic mail address, and web page: Department of Sociology, New York University, 295 Lafayette Street, Room 4115, New York, NY 10012-9605; 212-998-8378 (office); 646-298-7797 (mobile); 212-995-4140 (fax); [email protected], [email protected]; www.jeffgoodwin.net. Home address and phone: 100 Bleecker Street, Apt. 27E, New York, NY 10012; 212-254-6996. Date of birth and marital status: January 28, 1958; married (to Renée Steinhagen); one daughter (Naomi). ACADEMIC EMPLOYMENT 2003 to present: Professor of Sociology, New York University. 2009 (Winter-Spring): Visiting Fellow, European University Institute, Florence. 1997 to 2003: Associate Professor of Sociology, New York University. 1991 to 1997: Assistant Professor of Sociology, New York University. 1989-1991: Assistant Professor of Political Science and Sociology, Northwestern University. EDUCATION Ph.D., Harvard University (Sociology), November 1988. M.A., Harvard University (Sociology), June 1983. B.A., Harvard College (Social Studies), June 1980, Magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa. RESEARCH INTERESTS Social movements, revolutions, political violence, and terrorism; political sociology; comparative and historical sociology; social theory. AWARDS Golden Dozen Outstanding Teaching Award (2010), New York University, for undergraduate teaching. Voted “Professor of the Year” by the NYU Department of Sociology’s Graduate Student Association (GSA), 2009-10, 2005-2006, 1997-1998. Best scholarly article award, honorable mention, Collective Behavior and Social Movements Section of the American Sociological Association, 2007, for “A Theory of Categorical Terrorism,” Social Forces (2006), Vol.