Search

Begin New Search Political Geography United States Publication Year within 10 Years

381. The California Voting Rights Act and Local Governments

Author:
David C. Powell
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
California Journal of Politics and Policy
Institution:
Institute of Governmental Studies, UC Berkeley
Abstract:
On July 9, 2002, Governor Gray Davis signed the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) into law. The intent of the CVRA was to build upon the voting rights protections embodied in the Federal Voting Rights Act (FVRA) by enhancing the influence of minority populations in local government elections. The CVRA has led to multiple legal challenges of at-large electoral systems in dozens of governments in California. This paper explores the impacts of the CVRA on local governments as well as potential impacts of recent changes to the CVRA.
Topic:
Government, Elections, Democracy, Voting, and voting rights
Political Geography:
United States and California

382. The Chicago Merchandise Mart: How the World’s Largest Commercial Building Fueled an American Political Dynasty

Author:
Kevin M. Higgins, Oenone Kubie, Courtney Bruno, and Christopher McKenna
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Case Study
Institution:
Oxford Centre for Global History
Abstract:
Spanning 4.2 million square feet, two city blocks, and rising twenty-five stories high, the Merchandise Mart – the largest commercial building in the world – stands on the northern bank of the Chicago River. From the merchandising Hall of Fame in front of the Mart, one can watch passing architectural tours admiring the impressive Art Deco exterior of the building. These days, the Mart is home to high-end designers, advertising firms, and, increasingly, tech companies and start-up incubators. Within its vast interior, the industries of the Third Industrial Revolution have taken hold. Yet, when the Mart opened on 5 May 1930, no economic revolution was already established. By the early 1900s, the Second Industrial Revolution had brought assembly lines to factories, and the disassembly line to Chicago’s slaughterhouses, and it had seen electrification, telegraphs, and the railroads span the North American continent. But the revolution was already slowing by the third decade of the twentieth century. What had revolutionised industry in the nineteenth century now served as commonplace and not until well after the Second World War would Americans feel the first stirrings of another revolution as computation, telecommunications, and genetics again transformed the economy.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Capitalism, Commodities, Manufacturing, and Economic Development
Political Geography:
United States and Chicago

383. HOW LIBERAL IS NEOLIBERALISM? RETHINKING THE CONCEPTIONS OF THE WELFARE STATE, LEGISLATIVE ORGANS, SOCIAL JUSTICE, AND COMPETITION IN HAYEK’S THOUGHT

Author:
Selma TOKTAŞ
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Alternative Politics
Institution:
Department of International Relations, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Turkey
Abstract:
With the expansion of US-led economic policy following the economic depression of the 1970s and the proliferation of new information and communication technologies, the 1980s became a crucial period signaling dramatic changes all around the world. By the end of these years, the Keynesian economy, which accredited states as active and interventionist players in the economy in order to ensure both growth and equity, began to break down. In this period economic liberalism gained power again and political and economic theories and practices turned towards neoliberalism. As a result, deregulation, privatization and the withdrawal of the state from many areas were accelerated. All these changes were significant and affected the structure of almost everything, including education, culture, life and trends in thought. Friedrich A. von Hayek was one of the pioneers of this transformation. Therefore, this descriptive study attempts to understand the points where neoliberalism combines with liberalism and how it is separated from liberalism through Hayek's views about the welfare state, legislative body, social justice, and competition terms. In other words, this study aims to explore the extent to which Hayek’s neoliberalism is a continuation or a break from liberalism.
Topic:
Economic structure, Neoliberalism, Social Justice, Welfare, and Liberalism
Political Geography:
United States, North America, and Global Focus

384. ACKNOWLEDGING THE FLEXIBILITIES OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT: ENSURING THE RIGHT TO ACCESS TO MEDICINES OR A STRATEGY OF PASSIVE REVOLUTION?

Author:
Sevgi BALKAN-ŞAHİN
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Alternative Politics
Institution:
Department of International Relations, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Turkey
Abstract:
The Doha Ministerial Declaration on the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement and Public Health adopted in November 2001 clarified the right to use the TRIPS flexibilities to promote public health. Examining the hegemonic struggle of opposing social forces from a neo-Gramscian perspective, the paper attributes this outcome to the strategy of trasformismo used by market-oriented social forces to legitimize the policies of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and prevent resistance against the market-driven TRIPS Agreement. It argues that although non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as Medecins Sans Frontieres, Third World Network, and Oxfam worked as a counter-hegemonic force to ensure the access of least developed countries to generic versions of patented drugs, flexibilities confirmed by the Doha Declaration can be seen more as a strategy of trasformismo to absorb counter-hegemonic ideas than the counter-hegemonic groups’ successful incorporation of the right to ensure public health into the TRIPS Agreement.
Topic:
Health, World Trade Organization, Hegemony, Health Care Policy, NGOs, and Public Health
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Asia, and North America

385. The Witness as Object: Video Testimony in Memorial Museums

Author:
Steffi De Jong
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
Berghahn Books
Abstract:
In recent years, historical witnessing has emerged as a category of "museum object." Audiovisual recordings of interviews with individuals remembering events of historical importance are now integral to the collections and research activities of museums. They have also become important components in narrative and exhibition design strategies. With a focus on Holocaust museums, this study scrutinizes for the first time the new global phenomenon of the "musealization" of the witness to history, exploring the processes, prerequisites, and consequences of the transformation of video testimonies into exhibits.
Topic:
Mass Media, Media, Holocaust, and Museums
Political Geography:
United States, United Kingdom, Israel, and Global Focus

386. What We Know About Race and Ethnicity

Author:
Michael Banton
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
Berghahn Books
Abstract:
Attempts of nineteenth-century writers to establish “race” as a biological concept failed after Charles Darwin opened the door to a new world of knowledge. Yet this word already had a place in the organization of everyday life and in ordinary English language usage. This book explains how the idea of race became so important in the USA, generating conceptual confusion that can now be clarified. Developing an international approach, it reviews references to “race,” “racism,” and “ethnicity” in sociology, anthropology, philosophy, and comparative politics and identifies promising lines of research that may make it possible to supersede misleading notions of race in the social sciences.
Topic:
Race, Sociology, and Ethnicity
Political Geography:
United States and North America

387. Are Iran’s ballistic missiles designed to be nuclear capable?

Author:
Michael Elleman and Mark T. Fitzpatrick
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
Iran has the largest and most diverse ballistic-missile arsenal in the Middle East – could these systems one day be used to launch nuclear weapons? In a new report, IISS analysts Michael Elleman and Mark Fitzpatrick offer a detailed assessment of the design intentions behind each missile within Iran’s inventory. The result is a clear picture as to which platforms the United States and its allies should seek to remove, and which ones can be discounted. The common claim that Iran’s missile development must be stopped altogether because these systems could deliver nuclear weapons in the future rests on broad generalisations. While there is reason for concern, priority attention should be given to those missiles that might realistically be used for such a purpose, if Iran were to go down a perilous nuclear path. The international standard – but not treaty – for determining the inherent nuclear capability of missiles is the threshold developed in 1987 by the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), which seeks to forestall exports of missile systems able to deliver a 500kg payload a distance of 300km or more. Eight of Iran’s 13 current ballistic missile systems – the largest and most diverse arsenal in the Middle East – exceed this threshold and are thus deemed to be nuclear capable. The other five, all within the Fateh-110 family of missiles, are certainly lethal, especially when shipped to Hizbullah for use against Israel, but they are clearly not intended for nuclear use. Because capability does not equal intent, the MTCR guidelines should be just the first step in an assessment of Iran’s intentions for its missiles. When the United Nations Security Council drafted a new resolution in July 2015 to accompany the Iran nuclear agreement finalised that month, an element of intent was added to previous sanctions resolution language that prohibited launches of Iranian missiles that were ‘capable of delivering nuclear weapons’. The 2015 resolution calls upon Iran not to engage in activity concerning missiles ‘designed to be’ capable of delivering nuclear weapons. What it means ‘to be designed’ is undefined. Judging intent is partly subjective, but technical clues and intelligence information can guide analysis. The soundest approach is to disaggregate Iran’s various missile systems, and to assess design intentions on the basis of the technical capabilities and lineage of the different missiles.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and North America

388. The conventional military balance on the Korean Peninsula

Author:
James Hackett
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
As US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un meet in Singapore on 12 June, it is useful to keep in mind what is at stake. The long-standing tinderbox of the Korean Peninsula, if ignited through another provocation or miscalculation, could spark a full-scale war that could well go nuclear. The prize of diplomacy – sustainable peace on the peninsula – is all the more valuable when one considers the range of military capabilities potentially in play. This information is of use in assessing both the goals of diplomacy and the risks should the current efforts fail. Weapons based on the Korean Peninsula have become faster, more precise and more powerful. North Korea has tested a thermonuclear weapon, an intercontinental ballistic missile and more accurate shorter-range missiles, all designed to offset the relative qualitative weakness of its broader conventional forces. It has also pursued advanced cyber capabilities. South Korea, meanwhile, has focused on developing military systems allowing for more rapid and precise strikes. US forces on the peninsula have introduced yet more advanced capabilities. For these reasons the IISS provides this independent, measured and detailed analysis of military dynamics on the peninsula. The report focuses on the defence policies and military capabilities of the two Koreas, and the US military forces stationed in South Korea which can be brought to bear in a crisis. While it does not ignore unconventional systems, it principally focuses on conventional capabilities. Due to its poverty and isolation, North Korea’s conventional forces have become relatively weaker, compared with those of South Korea and its US ally. Aware of this qualitative inferiority, Pyongyang has invested in asymmetric capabilities, particularly the pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to deliver them. Nonetheless, Pyongyang’s armed forces remain equipped with a wide range of conventional military systems, including large numbers of artillery pieces and multiple-launch rocket systems. Its armed forces, at around 1.2 million, are the fourth-largest in the world. Its conventional military power remains significant, not least because of these numbers (for instance, 4,000 main battle tanks and 8,500 self-propelled- and towed-artillery systems) and the weight of fire they could rapidly bring to bear if employed. Seoul, for instance, is within range of many of North Korea’s artillery systems. North Korea has also developed increasingly advanced cyber capabilities as another aspect of its asymmetric power. The North will continue to improve these, if only to slow the decline in military parity between it and the South. US and South Korean defence authorities assume that the North will, in the event of major conflict, use cyber attacks against South Korean critical infrastructure and command-and-control networks. However, recent events like the Wannacry ransomware attacks have shown that North Korea is now using its cyber power for another purpose: raising revenue to support the regime. Meanwhile, South Korea’s defence policy and military posture is dominated by the security challenge from the North. This has led Seoul to pursue military capabilities, and strategies, designed to defeat North Korean provocations. These range from developments in air-defence, intended to tackle North Korea’s air force and missile capabilities, to strategies designed to pre-empt a potential North Korean provocation. To enable these strategies, South Korea has developed and procured increasingly advanced military systems, ranging from its own Hyeonmu ballistic- and cruise-missiles, to advanced air-to-ground air-launched weapons and, in the next few years, squadrons of F-35A combat aircraft. Working closely with the South Korean armed forces, the US maintains a military presence some 28,500-strong in South Korea, augmented by advanced military systems on the peninsula like the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) ballistic-missile-defence system, and the military power deployed by the US in the broader Indo-Pacific. This publication builds on the contributions of expert analysts of military power on the Korean Peninsula, and the extensive information holdings available in the IISS Military Balance+ database. It was prepared with the support of the Korea Foundation.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, China, Asia, South Korea, and North Korea

389. European Strategic Autonomy and Brexit

Author:
Peter Round, Bastain Giegerich, and Christian Mölling
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
The United Kingdom is among the few European Union member states with full-spectrum military and defence-industrial capabilities. Through Brexit, the EU could lose 20% of its military and 40% of its defence-industrial capabilities, and thereby its influence and credibility as a security actor. The pertinent question is how to arrange the UK’s future participation in European defence.  Decision-making on defence matters in the international arena requires skilled diplomacy and the momentum to carry plans through the scrutiny of multiple parliaments. The EU risks inaction through inertia without the UK’s soft powers, placing strategic decision-making at risk. The Union needs the UK’s military enablers, but only until it can deliver its own. In addition, with the UK’s ‘special relationship’ with the United States suffering, London’s influence is on the wane.  More autonomy for the EU is possible within a framework of political partners that reaches beyond the EU, incorporating actors such as the UK, and also Norway.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, European Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
United States, United Kingdom, Europe, and North America

390. The UK’s potential role in enabling EU–NATO cooperation after Brexit

Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
The United Kingdom, having expressed interest in a strong EU–UK security partnership and having indicated that, if anything, its commitment to NATO will be even stronger after Brexit, has an opportunity to be a leader and facilitator in the context of EU–NATO cooperation in meeting emerging threats. Several of the priority areas and action items defined by these two organisations, following a declaration to enhance their cooperation at NATO’s 2016 Warsaw Summit, play to the UK’s strengths: To increase the level of cooperation between the EU and NATO, and in order to implement the cooperation agenda, the UK should invest both financially and in terms of personnel, via voluntary national contributions to NATO. The UK taking on a leadership role in the area of inter-organisational cooperation would signal to EU partners that stronger support for NATO is not intended to weaken EU initiatives; it is an opportunity to stress the complementary nature of EU and NATO capabilities. Given its limited resources, the UK could, in effect, use engagement in EU–NATO cooperation to hedge its bets on both organisations. Stronger support for NATO can directly benefit the EU’s security and defence initiatives, while making sure that cooperation results in added value in both multinational frameworks, rather than fostering institutional competition.
Topic:
NATO, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, European Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
United States, United Kingdom, Europe, London, and Brussels