Quantcast
Channel: anthropology news ticker - antropologi.info » anthropology
Viewing all 2364 articles
Browse latest View live

Erkan in the Army now...: EFD Rights Watch: Turkey frees Kurdish ex-mayors but increases pressure on radical Turkish left…

$
0
0
Turkey frees Kurdish ex-mayors, peace process edges forward from Yahoo news DIYARBAKIR, Turkey (Reuters) – Ten Kurdish defendants, including six former mayors, were released from jail on Tuesday in a trial of 175 people accused of links to militants, a further small step in Turkey’s efforts to end a Kurdish insurgency. After more than three years in prison the defendants hugged family members as they emerged from the prison gates at dawn in Diyarbakir, the largest city 167 detained in DHKP/C operation in 28 Turkish cities from Hurriyet Daily News A total of 167 people were detained in connection to the outlawed Revolutionary. Endgame in Sight for the Conflict between Turkey and the PKK? by Acturca Bulletin PISM, No. 17 (470)  18 February 2013 The Polish Institute of International Affairs Pinar Elman & Kacper Rękawek * After more than 28 years of conflict, Turkey and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) could be preparing for peace as both sides are entering direct talks. Given Turkey’s internal political considerations and the fragile situation Turkey cracks down on outlawed group after US embassy attack from Hurriyet Daily News A total of 167 people allegedly connected with the outlawed Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C). Police Escorts Kurdish Politicians Out From Mobs from Bianet :: English Sinop Governor’s Office said at least 800 people were involved in last night’s Kurdish deputy wind up case with 14 angry protestors prosecuted by local authorities – after a relatively late police intervention that left 16 protestors wounded. Supreme Court Justice Resigns: “I Will Not Be Part of This Game” from Kamil Pasha by Jenny White On January 24, Supreme Court (High Council of Judges and Prosecutors) Justice Celal Çelik, 40, resigned his post because he said he could no longer stomach changes in the Turkish justice system that have allowed politics to influence judicial process, that the Turkish justice system is “finished”. His conscience could no longer allow him to participate in a judicial system compromised by political pressure, greed and fear and unable to administer justice to the people. Justices and prosecutors are forced to jail people without any legal basis, sometimes for years, or suffer consequences themselves, such as being relieved of duty or exiled to marginal positions. Opposition writers and journalists are sent to “rot in jail.” “I will not be part of this game.” En attendant le verdict, Sevil Sevimli condamnée à l’exil dans son second pays : la Turquie. from YOL (routes de Turquie et d’ailleurs) by anne Ce vendredi  15 février  doit avoir lieu à Bursa la prochaine audience du procès de Sevil Sevimli .Normalement  cette audience du 15 février devrait aussi être celle du verdict, mais je ne peux le confirmer tellement les méandres de la justice me restent mystérieuses. Clashes outside Turkey’s four-year Ergenekon trial euronews On what was due to be the last day of a four-year trial against people accused of trying to overthrow the government, supporters and relatives clashed with police outside the Silivri Prison Complex in Istanbul. The 275 defendents allegedly have ties to Related posts: EFD Rights Watch: 44 Kurdish journalists in KCK trial… EFD Rights Watch: “A Single Person Arrested in Mob Attack Against Alevi-Kurdish Family, “William Burroughs’ Turkish publishers’ obscenity trial postponed and more.. EFD Rights Watch: Tear gas strike at hunger strike protestors… Pressure on journalists still on the agenda… EFD Rights Watch: “Turkey on 154th in press index, Maalouf’s Samarkand new target, Turkey Found Guilty in a Kurdish case… EFD Rights Watch: “Turkey’s miscarriage of justice”, İsmail Beşikçi receives Dink Award, TIHV report: Torture and Ill-Treatment on the Rise

AAA blog: Indiana Jones is to Anthropology as Fred Flintstone is to Neolithic Life

$
0
0
Below is a copy of the Letter to the Editor of the New York Times Magazine by President Mullings in response to the recent article by Emily Eakin. To the Editor, While we recognize that the figure of Indiana Jones is attractive, it is about as useful for understanding anthropology as Fred Flintstone is for [...]

ZERO ANTHROPOLOGY: Documents: Investigations into the U.S. Army’s Human Terrain System

$
0
0
In line with the publication of this report in USA Today, “Army plows ahead with troubled war-zone program” by Tom Vanden Brook, February 18, 2013, we are offering readers copies of many of the documents produced by investigations into the conduct of the U.S. Army’s Human Terrain System, with mirror links for each. There are a total of [...]

FoodAnthropology: AAA 2013 Panel CFP: Politics of Public Food and Hospitality

$
0
0
Politics of Public Food and Hospitality: Diasporic and Transnational Tables  Organizers: Maria Curtis and Christine Kovic,  University of Houston Clear Lake. Following Psyche Williams-Forson and Carole Counihan’s charge of “Taking Food Public,” this panel explores foodways as confluent networks of cultural and … Continue reading →

Language Log: More on what "the" means

$
0
0
Neal Goldfarb, "The Recess Appointments Clause (Part 1)", LAWnLINGUISTICS 2/19/2013: The verdict: the Recess Appointments Clause is a lot less clear than the D.C. Circuit makes it out to be, and the court’s reasoning isn’t very good.

The Immanent Frame: Reconciliation and the pursuit of peace

$
0
0
Today, at the beginning of 2013, the world is confronted by a bewildering array of protracted and new armed conflicts: Syria, Gaza, the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan, Sudan, Myanmar, Mali, Chad, the Central African Republic, and Libya are just a few of the many parts of the world wracked by violent conflict. And, although some of the rhetoric about the burden of civilian suffering compared to military casualties in these so-called “new wars” may have been overblown (not least because civilians have always paid a heavy cost in war), there is little doubting that non-combatants remain firmly in the firing line. The injustices of war are legion and extend to killing, torture, mutilation, sexual and gender based violence and abuse, forced displacement, and much else. For all that the world’s governments proclaim their commitment to the protection of civilians of armed conflict, and for all the writings on the moral and legal constraints introduced over the past three millennia or so, war always produces more than its fair share of injustice. Even “good wars” produce injustice: recall A. C. Grayling’s withering dissection of allied terror bombing in Germany during the Second World War. Not without reason, then, Daniel Philpott starts from the assumption that war leaves behind wounds of injustice. These are not just physical bodily wounds—though they are paramount—but are wounds in the form of violations of human rights, wounds of ignorance about the source and circumstance of injustice, wounds derived from lack of acknowledgement, and what Philpott describes as “the standing victory of the wrongdoer’s political injustice.” Taking a somewhat Kantian line, Philpott notes that wrongdoers are also themselves wounded by their acts, a view that also finds strong resonance in the religious traditions that he examines.. Their wrongdoing creates a moral sickness that inhibits fulfilment and happiness. As Philpott reminds us, the technology of the gas chamber was first developed as a way of saving German firing squads from the trauma caused by their deeds. When all the wounds of war and oppression are taken into account, it is perhaps unsurprising that so many peace processes—as many as half by some calculations—are doomed to fail. Sometimes, the victory of the wrongdoer is allowed to stand. Those, who like I, have visited post-war Srebrenica understand the palpable sense of injustice felt by the mothers, wives, daughters, and sisters of the more than 7,600 Bosnian Muslim men and boys who were massacred when that town was “ethnically cleansed.” Today, Srebrenica is an almost 100% Serbian town. The victory of injustice was allowed to stand. Other times, victims of rights abuse may resent the absence of acknowledgement or reparation; perpetrators may be reluctant to acknowledge their wrongs or relinquish their gains. Whatever the precise nature of the tension, the social bonds and contracts that knit societies together will have been destroyed; trust broken; resentment amassed. No matter how much effort and how many resources are dedicated to the rebuilding of institutions, infrastructure and homes, peace is unlikely to be durable unless it rests on the firm foundation of genuine reconciliation. This is why Just and Unjust Peace is such a welcome, and important, read. It makes both a well-reasoned argument in favor of a politics of reconciliation in the face of war and oppression and sets out six principal methods for achieving that goal: building socially just institutions, acknowledgement of past wrongs by the perpetrators, reparations, punishment, apology, and forgiveness. At its heart, this book is a passionate and compelling defense of political reconciliation written in the spirit of some of the great peacemakers of our time. Desmond Tutu and some of the controversies he has aroused is a frequent point of reference, but the tenor of the book also reminds us of the logic behind Ramos Horta’s decision to privilege the normalizing of relations with Jakarta above retribution and punishment after the bloodshed in East Timor. The central points—and the tools for restoring societies to balance—will be familiar to students of peace studies. Mark Amstutz’s work on political forgiveness springs to mind. But what this book adds—brilliantly to my mind—is a deep and well-argued account of why communities, states and international organizations should pursue this path, and an account firmly rooted in political philosophy and religious tradition. Naturally, there are points that could be quibbled with in terms of the logic of some of Philpott’s argument. As other reviewers have pointed out, reconciliation is not necessarily a prerequisite to peace—if we understand that term to mean “the absence of war.” There are plenty of cases where peace has prevailed without reconciliation. North and South Korea, Japan and Russia, and Bosnia are conflicts where there has been little evidence of reconciliation of the sort espoused by Philpott but also no resumption of armed conflict—yet. However, I am less worried than others about this possibility because whilst what Johan Galtung described as “negative peace” (i.e. the absence of war) may prevail without reconciliation, “positive peace” (i.e. the absence of fear, the fulfilment of human rights) almost never will. Without reconciliation and the forging of positive peace, communities will always be wary, always insecure, always unsatisfied and—for the utilitarians among us—will always misdirect precious resources and energies away from productive and fulfilling activities and towards their own protection from future threats. As scholars in International Relations know only too well, this can in turn create “security dilemmas” in which one group’s preparations for self-defense appear aggressive to another, sparking that group to step up its own preparations. Herein lies one of the ways in which negative peace can degenerate back into violent conflict. What is more, peace without reconciliation is much easier when the unreconciled parties have an international boundary or ocean between them. Where the lines of dispute are communal and fuzzy, as they often are in the aftermath of civil war (by far the most common kind of war today), the day-to-day necessities of engagement make reconciliation all the more pressing. Another source of criticism has been that Philpott grounds his ethic of reconciliation in three major religious traditions—Christianity, Islam and Judaism—and a secular ethic he describes as the “liberal peace.” The cornerstones of the politics of reconciliation he sets out are derived from what Philpott claims to be an “overlapping consensus” across these traditions. Of course, though, this remains a decidedly partial account of justice principles, none of which originate from Africa for example. This problem worries me less than it worries others primarily because most of the ethical traditions I’m familiar with embrace most of the values that Philpott includes within his account of reconciliation and because Philpott himself acknowledges two key caveats to his argument—that reconciliation will never be complete or perfect and that the precise form that it takes should differ according to the context. Philpott is right, in my view, to recognize that religious traditions have ethical content that can be useful to reconciliation. We need to recognize, however, that the application of religious arguments and concepts may be more helpful in some circumstances than in others, and that Philpott’s own reading of the essential aspects of those traditions is itself partial and downplays elements that are antithetical to reconciliation. As Norwegian diplomats engaged in the Oslo peace process in the Middle East would attest, contested claims to ownership over sacred sites rooted in a theological epistemology that knows no compromise are one of the few utterly impenetrable obstacles to reconciliation. Yet these strike me as issues that present themselves in particular contexts. Of course—as Philpott acknowledges—the politics of reconciliation must make sense in the time and place in which it occurs; it must be rooted in the locale. Tutu’s use of religion during his time as chair as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa was right in that time and place. It was right, precisely because it was Tutu. It may not be right in other settings. Whatever the configuration, however, it is clear that the politics of reconciliation should be front and center of any attempt at building peace in the aftermath of war and grave injustice.

Aidnography - Development as anthropological object: Understanding development (book review)

$
0
0
It may be a bit unusual to put a disclaimer at the beginning of a review, but I have the privilege to approach the review of Understanding Development as a bit more than just a reader: Not only do I know the author Paul Hopper from a previous teaching job at Brighton University, but more importantly, while he was finalizing the manuscript, I used some the draft chapters and ‘field tested’ them in an introductory course on international development for undergraduate students. For most of them this was their first academic exposure to international development topics and this is clearly where the core strength of the book lies: It is a very good, but also basic starting point into ‘understanding development’ and it will probably be most useful for undergraduate courses or in teaching environments where students have little or no background in this area. But let’s have a more detailed look at the book: Each chapter is written in accessible language and focuses on fairly factual overviews over each topic. Each chapter is also wrapped up with a short summary, recommendations for further readings and websites which makes it easy to incorporate them into your own teaching materials. Many chapters are focusing a bit much on traditional governance structures and institutions like the UN, but it is important to recall that they are still somewhat powerful, set many policy-agendas and have shaped the development governance system for many decades.Theorizing Development provides a good and quick overview over key historical debates. I personally like Peter Preston’s book on Development Theory very much, but the students struggled with his writing quite a bit. Approaching Development is a very good chapter for framing the overall book; it stresses the importance of anthropology, qualitative research, knowledge & power without appearing too dogmatic or overwhelming the reader with epistemological debates. Health, Education & Population engages with three major topics which may be a bit much for one chapter. Gender and Development is definitely worth the chapter and also includes some of the more recent debates on men and masculinities at the end. Conflict, Security and Development is a bit too state- and UN-centered for my liking and emphasizing the role of civil society, especially on the local level, would have been a nice addition. Trade and Development is another undogmatic chapter which rightly focuses on the WTO-dominated trade system and its implications for development. Participation and Representation in Development is a good, classic introduction to the subject and inspired by IDS at Sussex University and Robert Chambers, of course (Paul received his PhD from Sussex). The chapter does include civil society’s role, but it focuses on traditional NGO work and does not include more contemporary debates on alternative networks and partnerships. Financing Development: Foreign Aid and Debt is a core chapter which includes a concise overview over most of the iterations of the ‘does aid work?’ debate which has been around for many years/books... Sustainable Development. This is a good preparation for subsequent debates on climate change, agricultural development or biofuels and reminds readers on some of the historical foundations and global conferences that shaped the concept. I know that Globalization and Development is Paul’s core area of expertise. So even though it is a huge discussion the chapter manages to segue the book to the final conclusion on Development – Future Trajectories. The conclusion is a bit conservative; I would have been great to flag emerging issues, e.g. on BRICS, the post-MDG policy arena or around agricultural and environmental issues looming on the development horizon. The excellent bibliography is a final gem and is a really useful resource for those who either want to read more or have to plan additional modules based on the core themes. Understanding Development is a good textbook to get intellectual debates around international development started with audiences who have little prior (academic) knowledge of some of the core themes. As an undergraduate textbook it avoids ideology and contested spaces, which also means that it is not a passionate eye-opener for students or anything close to a ‘political’ treatment, but is a good starting point for some of the intellectual groundwork. Paul manages to deliver a comprehensive introduction into development that does not want to depict the subject as a fancy, adventurous ‘industry’ for self-fulfillment or as a gloomy, cynical ‘does aid work?’ rhetorical question. Development is a complex, multifaceted endeavor, often led by large and powerful institutions that are driven by a similar political economy than most other policy arenas. For teachers, it is a good resource to plan your own introductory courses around and have at least one book they can recommend to students to keep as future reference for development-related studies. Hopper, Paul: Understanding Development. Issues and Debates, ISBN: 978-0-7456-3895-9, 332 pages, CDN $31.95, Polity Press.

Anthropology Report: Anthropology on Noble Savages, Napoleon Chagnon

$
0
0
Before you do anything else, if you’ve ever heard of anthropology, Noble Savages, or Napoleon Chagnon, take a moment to click and read these two articles: Meet Joe Science by Jonathan Marks Sociobalderdash, and the Yanomami? Part II by Ken Weiss Not even finished with an Anthropology on Jared Diamond – The World Until Yesterday and now Napoleon Chagnon splashes in with Noble Savages: My Life Among Two Dangerous Tribes–the Yanomamo and the Anthropologists. The posts above are must reads on the issues. I’ve gathered more reviews below. The crucial point here is the one thing anthropology has learned in its past 100 years as an academic discipline: that contemporary peoples cannot be seen as pristine windows onto a primitive past or distillations of human nature. Especially not a group of people practicing slash-and-burn horticulture with steel axes. Sociobalderdash, and the Yanomami? Part II, Ken Weiss To repeat: Much more important is the degree to which observations today can be credibly extrapolated into the past, from one part of the world to all of humanity’s patrimony. All of this ado over Nap’s work is irrelevant to that question: Even were his descriptions indisputably 100% accurate, they don’t contribute to the greater legitimate debate about the nature of our evolution. Yanomami culture today, in the Amazon, says nothing about our African past 200,000 years ago. One way to see the colorful charivari that has always surrounded Dr Chagnon has to do with the knowledge of his nature, not just the nature of his knowledge. The Mermaid’s Tale, 19 February 2013 Meet Joe Science, Jonathan Marks Nicholas Wade starts off, “What were our early ancestors really like…?” – a good question, but one to which Napoleon Chagnon’s work is irrelevant. Bad start, though, because it means that even now, neither Chagnon nor Wade apparently understands what the Yanomamo actually tell us about anything. . . . Neither of the pieces puffing up Chagnon, and publicizing his hatred of his colleagues, even acknowledges the existence of alternative interpretations of Chagnon’s work. The problem, simply put, is that Chagnon’s statistics were rubbish, because he neglected to include the children of killers who had themselves been killed. Anthropomics, 19 February 2013 Tribal Warfare: ‘Noble Savages,’ by Napoleon A. Chagnon, Elizabeth Povinelli No doubt facing public accusations of large-scale wrongdoing must be harrowing. But “Noble Savages” starts by backing out of one tragedy only to end in another. It is less an exposé of truth than an act of revenge. If your belief in your culture’s superiority is founded on thinking of other societies as prehistoric time capsules, then you will enjoy this book. If not, say a requiem for the trees and make an offering to the pulp mill. New York Times – Sunday Book Review, 15 February 2013 Science, Advocacy and Anthropology, Monica Heller Leith Mullings, Ed Liebow and Alan Goodman The more general point is that at the very core of our discipline are commitments to the best of science and the best of advocacy. Advocacy suggests at minimum an ethical position to try to protect and better the lives of the individuals we work with, in particular those who are without access to power. Science stands for prediction (based on current understanding), followed by systematic observation and analysis and then, usually, revised understanding. But there is something more: we recognize that science is a practice that is undertaken in a social context, and as such it can be limited by the social hierarchies of its time, creating burdens and benefits, winners and losers. To have this awareness is not ‘anti-science.’ Indeed, it offers the sort of tough love of science that all responsible scientists ought to share. And every time the debate about ‘science’ versus ‘advocacy’ re-emerges, we cannot but hope that our discipline’s lengthy track record of critically embracing science can show that the debate itself is based on false premises. We’d love to put an end to the futility of the science versus advocacy version of “Whack a mole” so we can focus on quality anthropological work for the public good. American Anthropological Association Blog, 17 February 2013 Indiana Jones is to Anthropology as Fred Flintstone is to Neolithic Life, President Leith Mullings, American Anthropological Association To the Editor, While we recognize that the figure of Indiana Jones is attractive, it is about as useful for understanding anthropology as Fred Flintstone is for understanding life in the Neolithic. Your article perpetuates an outdated and narrow stereotype of our profession. The 11,000 members of the American Anthropological Association alone actually spend their time doing a vast array of things. Today’s anthropologists can be found in such diverse endeavors as leading the World Bank, designing health care for areas devastated by disaster, or researching the causes of the 2008 recession or the deaths of 100 boys in a defunct reform school in Florida. The representation of a field paralyzed by debates about ‘science, ’ vs. ‘advocacy ’ is similarly inaccurate, given the non-polarized ways most anthropologists today understand ‘science’, ‘advocacy’ and the nature of the field. The article also misses one of Napoleon Chagnon’s lasting legacies to our field: the reminder to engage in constant reflection about anthropological ethics. The American Anthropological Association recently did just that, releasing its new Statement on Ethics: Principles of Professional Responsibility in October 2012. Finally, we consider lively debate neither dangerous nor self-serving: it is a key to knowledge. American Anthropological Association Blog, 19 February 2013 The New York Times on Chagnon, Ryan Anderson I heard various takes on Chagnon throughout my anthropological training. I read his book about the “Yanomamo” in some of my very first classes at community college, and then as the years went on I heard about the debates, the fights, the controversies. When I first heard his name I had no idea he was such a controversial figure. But then, a lot of thing that I first heard about in my early anthropology courses became a bit more “complicated” along the way. It’s interesting to me that this author calls Chagnon the best-known living anthropologist. Maybe he is. I guess it depends on who you ask though–and where you ask. Savage Minds, 19 February 2013 Sex, Lies, and Separating Science From Ideology, Alice Dreger I spent about a year researching the Chagnon-Tierney controversy, so I know from my conversations with Chagnon that, on more than one occasion, Margaret Mead rose to personally help Chagnon in his work–most notably when she vocally objected to attempts to ban a session on sociobiology at the AAA meeting that Chagnon had organized. How painful that their reputations have both had to face authors who wove not only false stories about them, but false stories so well supplied with pseudo-documentation that reasonable people believed them. The two cases raise a question I often find myself pondering: How do you effectively face a critic who amply footnotes what amounts to a fantasy? This piece by Alice Dreger is mostly about the smearing of Margaret Mead and how that is now documented as itself a smear. I include it because it has been so often missed by many of these reviews. The Atlantic, 15 February 2013 Book Review: Noble Savages, Fierce Controversies, Charles C. Mann Prior to 1492, these researchers say, this portion of central Amazonia was a prosperous, cosmopolitan, multiethnic network of big villages, fed by fish from the great river and reliant upon a multitude of forest products. When that network was thrown into turmoil by the arrival of European slavers and European diseases, the Yanomamö and many other groups fled into the hinterlands, where they now reside. If this is correct, these people are not “pure” or “pristine”; they are dispossessed. And their existence in small bands is reflective not of humankind’s ancient past but of a shattered society that has preserved its liberty by retreat. It would be risky to base conclusions about the evolution of society on the study of posses of refugees, perhaps especially those who have survived both a holocaust and a diaspora. Note: Unfortunately Mann saves this very important critique for the end of his review. Wall Street Journal, 15 February 2013 The Weird Irony at the Heart of the Napoleon Chagnon Affair, John Horgan Napoleon Chagnon reiterated this view when I interviewed him for “The New Social Darwinists,” a critique of evolutionary psychology published in Scientific American in October 1995. He said he was disturbed at the degree to which some sociobiologists and evolutionary psychologists downplayed the role of culture in human behavior. I said he sounded like Stephen Jay Gould, a vehement critic of genetic explanations of human behavior. I meant to goad Chagnon with the comparison, but he embraced it. “Steve Gould and I probably agree on a lot of things,” Chagnon said. Cross-Check: Critical views of science in the news, 18 February 2013 Chagnon Speaks: Publishes Noble Savages, Debra Lattanzi After a decade of bad press, I’m pleased that Napoleon Chagnon’s decided to tell his own story. I’m buying the book and encourage you to do the same. It’s not often that an academic survives the type of smear campaign that Chagnon suffered. It’s time we all heard his story. Living Ethnography, 13 February 2013 Noble Savages – Interview with Napoleon Chagnon, Serena Golden Napoleon Chagnon may well be the most famous and most infamous anthropologist alive. Famous for the years he spent conducting fieldwork among the Yanomamö, a large and isolated native tribe in Venezuela and Brazil, and his extensive writings on their kinship structures, marriages, warfare, and more (most notably his 1968 work Yanomamö: The Fierce People, which sold close to a million copies in numerous editions and which for decades was routinely assigned in introductory anthropology courses). Inside Higher Ed, 18 February 2013 An Anthropologist, Once Accused of Genocide, Tells His Story at Last, Tom Bartlett Mr. Chagnon is, in other words, not easily cowed. He offers multiple examples of this fortitude in his new book, Noble Savages: My Life Among Two Dangerous Tribes—the Yanomamö and the Anthropologists (Simon & Schuster), including when a tiger leans over his hammock and when a leopard stalks him silently on a long hike. He does not run screaming from the jungle to the anaconda-free comforts of civilization. He toughs it out. It’s not until Page 452 that he really shows weakness, admitting that he tried and failed for years to write his life story. Those early drafts were too depressing, he admits, and he was too emotional. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 12 February 2013

decasia: critique of academic culture: Gratitude absolved of responsibility

$
0
0
Lately I’ve gotten interested in reading Clyde Barrow‘s Universities and the Capitalist State: Corporate liberalism and the reconstruction of higher education, 1894-1928. It’s out of print, but I found it used and had it delivered. When I cracked the cover open after a couple of weeks, I was interested to find this note on the inside cover, written in a nice cursive script in what looks like blue ballpoint: To Kent, Thanks for all of your help. I won’t hold you responsible for its content, but it couldn’t have been written without your assistance many years ago. Clyde W Barrow It’s always curious to encounter the traces of strangers’ personal relationships to each other. One gets the sense that these two people didn’t know each other all that well, that they had encountered each other “years ago” when Barrow was working on his dissertation, and that when the book finally appeared in print, the author, still then near the start of his career, was delighted to finally be able to show people what he had produced. There’s a nice sense of self injected into the professionally cordial tone of this note; while the author signs his full name instead of just his first name, he signals that the project was dependent on this other person, that it “couldn’t have been written without your help.” I’m interested in the particular mixture of gratitude and absolution from responsibility that we see here, in the combination of “thanks for all your help” and “I won’t hold you responsible for its content.” This mixed message is one I’ve seen a lot in scholarly texts, but I never entirely understand what’s driving it. In this case it appears in the second person, but often it’s more impersonal, a sort of announcement to the reader: Thanks to X Y and Z, who are in no way responsible for the remaining errors in the argument, something like that. But does anyone really imagine that people named in the acknowledgements are responsible for someone else’s texts? Does association imply endorsement? It’s as if it was assumed to. Why, more generally, is it that we scholars feel obliged to mix gratitude with an obligatory insistence that we don’t take responsibility for anyone else’s work? Is it a reminder that we live in a regime of private intellectual property, as if the tacit message here was actually “X Y and Y shouldn’t get the formal credit here; these ideas are officially mine.” Or is it just a matter of rote imitation? As if young generations of scholars just stick in this phrase because they’ve seen it elsewhere and feel like it must be normal? Or perhaps it’s more practical than I give it credit for; perhaps enough people have been burned by having their names associated with other people’s bad academic claims that they started this as a mechanism for limiting intellectual liability. I note that the identity of the Kent in question remains mysterious. No Kents are mentioned in the Acknowledgements, but Barrow does repeatedly mention the existence of unnamed collaborators. At one point he thanks “some still anonymous individuals at the Chicago Historical Society, Nevada Historical Society, and Kansas State University Archives”; later, he’ll finish the acknowledgements by saying, “There are of course many friends and colleagues who have contributed in their own way.” Perhaps one of them was Kent. As a matter of fact, Barrow starts out his book by commenting on its place in the university system — fittingly, since it is a book that aspires to analyze that system. Here’s what he says: The industrial character of contemporary university work is never more readily apparent than when one acknowledges the many people who have contributed their labor to the production of those commodities we call books. The intellectual labor process is now a socialized and genuinely collective effort that takes place on a national and even global scale. It requires many kinds of labor, occupational skills, clerical support, and administrative services by persons who are often invisible to the university professor. Many anonymous people should therefore be recognized at the outset as an integral component of the production process which resulted in this book. One wonders, though, if Barrow’s book really is so similar to mass-produced industrial commodities. The letter to Kent doesn’t seem very commodified. Would someone who work on an assembly line making thousands of identical automobiles, grapefruits or iPads really write a letter saying “I won’t hold you responsible for the content of this grapefruit, this iPad, this automobile”?

Erkan in the Army now...: Harlem Shake. Nearly All Turkish versions (!) #HarlemShake

$
0
0
Harlem Shake – Utopic Farm Harlem Shake – Youtholding Turkish Office Harlem Shake Turkish by Netfork Office Harlem Shake METU version Harlem Shake METU (ODTÜ) HARLEM SHAKE METU DORM Middle East Technical University foreign students Harlem Shake – Turkey (Ankara) Harlem Shake türkiye-harlem shake turkish version Trendyol Harlem Shake Harlem Shake Turkiye The Harlem Shake Türkiye (Yeşilçam) Harlem Shake (Yesilcam Edition) Harlem Shake – New Turkish – Aras Karafil Edition! Harlem Shake Turkey Edition Harlem Shake – Turkish Gari de Gari Version Harlem Shake Turkish Version…Harlem shake türk versiyonu… Harlem Shake V2020 – Türkiye Şerifali Edition Harlem Shake – Terzide seksi kızlar Harlem Shake ( Turkish Soldiers) Harlem Shake Turkey istanbul Kaleseramik Mansion XXI Harlem Shake (Longboard Istanbul Edition) Harlem Shake: Turkish Style [Original] Harlem Shake: Turkish Style [ORIGINAL] Harlem Shake – GittiGidiyor Harlem Shake – Sepet Edition Harlem Shake // EticaretMag Harlem Shake Turkey (Sakarya University) Harlem Shake – Yeter Artık Harlem Shake – Türk Düğünü Versiyonu Harlem Shake Türkiye (Life Guard Fitness Center) Harlem Shake – The Panparellas Harlem Shake Turkish Harlem Shake Turkish Version Istanbul Harlem Shake       Related posts: R.I.P. Turkish academia lost a scholar: Prof. Ünal Nalbantoğlu. EFD Rights Watch: His Majesty’s rectors vs. Academicians. Turkish universities feel the authoritarian pressure- again. Introducing Turkish Cybersphere (3)- Turkish online news sites and more Turkish cybersphere roundup: More hacking activities while Turkish officials continue to attack internet…(news in Turkish & English) Introducing Turkish Cybersphere (4)

hawgblawg: and the greatest rapper of all time is...

$
0
0
 Rakim, of course. So sez Charles Mudede (who I used to see reading at poetry slams, back in the day, in early nineties Seattle).(And don't forget that Rakim is a God.)

Discard Studies: Call for Practitioners for the Workshop “Experiments Monitoring the Everyday: Art, Design, and DIY Methods for Environmental Health Research in STS”

$
0
0
4S Conference October 9 – 12, 2013 San Diego, California Exploring the question of how to make environmental health hazards perceptible, we invite participation in an interdisciplinary hands-on, half-day workshop on emerging methods for environmental monitoring in science and technology studies. In particular we highlight methods that engage with critical making through art, design, and … Continue reading »

Discard Studies: CFP: Making Environmental Harm Manifest

$
0
0
4S Conference October 9 – 12, 2013 San Diego, California Some of the challenges of twenty-first century pollutants are 1) their imperceptibility to dominant scientific formations, 2) their ability to do harm in trace quantities, 3) the subtle forms of intergenerational harm they can produce, and 4) the ubiquity of exposure throughout everyday spaces across … Continue reading »

Erkan in the Army now...: Yeni Anayasa Gündemi: İsmet Berkan: Yeni anayasa çıkmaza mı giriyor?

$
0
0
Yeni anayasa çıkmaza mı giriyor? – İsmet BERKAN from Hürriyet Yazarlar İLK işareti Başbakan Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Aralık ayının sonunda TRT 1’de katıldığı Enine Boyuna programında verdi. Tüm partiler anayasa sürecine dahil olmalı Haber 10 BDP İstanbul Milletvekili Sebahat Tuncel, Türkiye’de anayasa sürecini çok önemsediklerini belirterek, bu anayasanın halkların anayasası olması ve demokratik bir anayasa olması gerektiğini dile getirdi. Yeni anayasanın, temel hak ve özgürlüklerini Kurtulmuş’tan anayasa referandumu tahmini Internet Haber Yeni Türkiye’nin oluşturulmasında ilk aşamanın, yepyeni, sivil bir anayasa olduğunu söyleyen Kurtulmuş, ”Parlamentoda uzlaşma olmazsa referanduma gideriz, bu halk yeni anayasayı yüzde 58′in üzerinde bir oyla kabul eder” dedi. Aleviler Nasıl Bir Anayasa İstiyor ? Gaziantephaberler.com Aleviler, çağdaş Atatürk ilkelerini öne çıkartan bir anayasa istiyor. ‘Türk milleti aşure gibidir, tüm tatlar bir arada. Türk Milleti kavramını zihinlerden ve kanunlardan çıkartılmasını kabul etmeyiz’ TÜRKİYE siyasetinin her döneminde Alevi kitlesinin Yeni Anayasa’nın merkezi ‘insan’ Sabah Meclis Anayasa Uzlaşma Komisyonu, bugüne kadar 31 maddede mutabakat sağladı.Anayasa, “İnsan onur ve haysiyeti dokunulmaz, insan haklarının ve anayasal düzenin temelidir” vurgusuyla başlayacak. Anayasa Uzlaşma Komisyonu, 2012′nin mayıs Tanrıkulu: Başbakan sağlıklı bir anayasa için takvim belirlemekten vazgeçsin Bugün Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi(CHP) Genel Başkan Yardımcısı Sezgin Tanrıkulu, Türkiye’nin yeni bir sürece girdiğini, tarihinde ilk defa seçilmiş bir meclis tarafından bir masa etrafında biranayasa yapmayı denediğini söyledi. Başbakan’ın anayasa yapımında Tanrıkulu’dan Anayasa Eleştirisi Haberler Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi(CHP) Genel Başkan Yardımcısı Sezgin Tanrıkulu, Türkiye’nin yeni bir sürece girdiğini, tarihinde ilk defa seçilmiş bir meclis tarafından bir masa etrafında biranayasa yapmayı denediğini söyledi. Başbakan’ın anayasa yapımında AKP, Anayasa çalışmalarını kendi vekillerinden saklıyor Haber Ekspres CHP İzmir Milletvekili ve Parti Meclisi Üyesi Birgül Ayman Güler, Milas’ta gerçekleştirdiği ziyaretlerde Yeni Anayasa çalışmaları ile yapılmak istenen değişiklikleri anlattı. Güler, “Anayasa değişikliği ile ilgili herhalde hiç bir ülkede böyle bir şey Venedik Komisyonu, Anayasa Uzlaşma Komisyon’na destek için başvurdu T24 Ülkelerin anayasa yapımında yararlandıkları Venedik Komisyonu’nun, anayasa çalışmalarına destek için TBMM Başkanlığı’na girişimde bulunduğu anlaşıldı. Komisyonun CHP’li üyesi Atilla Kart, Venedik Komisyonu’nun Anayasa yapım sürecine dahil olmak Kilit maddelerde henüz uzlaşı yok Sabah Anayasa Uzlaşma Komisyonu’ndaki tartışmalar 4 konu etrafında döndü: 1- AK Parti’nin başkanlık sistemi önerisi 2- Vatandaşlık 3- Din ve vicdan özgürlüğü 4-Anadilde eğitim. Komisyonun tartıştığı 4 kilit düzenleme toplumun yeni anayasa ile çözülmesini . Ya yeni anayasa ya başkanlık’ Dünya Bülteni Bu dönem anayasa yapmamız lazım. Başbakan’ın söylediği şu: Üç dönemdir anayasa vaat ediyoruz, dolayısıyla buna asılıyoruz. Eğer Uzlaşma Komisyonu’ndan çıkmazsa alternatif aramamız normaldir, biz de ararız. Tabii ki Meclis’in içinde bir parti olacak Türk vatandaşlığını Anayasa’dan çıkaracak Milliyet Ak Parti’nin Anayasa’dan Türk vatandaşlığını silme hazırlıkları içerisinde olduğunu öne süren Güler, şöyle devam etti: “Siz Anayasa’dan Türk vatandaşlığını ve Türk Ulusu’nu çıkarıyorsunuz. Oysa hep beraber büyük Türk milleti önünde namus ve şeref sözü Didim Mhp, Anayasa Çalışmalarını Değerlendirdi medya73.com Atas, MHP’nin yeni anayasa çalışmaları kapsamında duruşunun net olduğunu bir kez daha hatırlatarak “Son günlerde ülke gündemimizi fazlasıyla meşgul eden konulardan biri de yeni ve sivil bir Anayasa oluşturma çalışmalarıdır. Milliyetçi Hareket Partis Yeni Anayasa büyük uzlaşma temelinde çıkmalı Milliyet Meclis Anayasa Uzlaşma Komisyonu, bugüne kadar 31 madde üzerinde mutabakat sağlamış. Sabah gazetesinin aşağıda çok güzel bir şekilde özetlediği gibi mutabakat sağlanan bu maddeler şu şekildeymiş. İNSAN ONUR VE HAYSİYETİ: Parti temsilcileri Mehmet Ali Şahin’den yeni anayasa açıklaması Rotahaber.com AK Parti Genel Başkan Yardımcısı ve Anayasa Uzlaşma Komisyonu üyesi Mehmet Ali Şahin, yeni anayasa çalışmalarına ilişkin ”Bir an önce Mart sonu gelsin diğer planlarımızı uygulayalım beklentisinde değiliz. Önceliğimiz haftanın her günü ve zamanını Yeni Anayasa mesaisi uzadı Internet Haber Yeni anayasa yazımını sürdüren TBMM Anayasa Uzlaşma Komisyonu, çalışmaları hafta için her gün 10.00-19.00 saatleri arasında sürdürme kararı aldı. TBMM Başkanı Cemil Çiçek başkanlığındaki komisyon, yaklaşık 2 saat süren bir toplantı yaptı. Komisyon ‘Başkanlık yeni anayasa sürecini tıkayamaz’ Haber7.com Bozdağ, “Eğer uzlaşma komisyonu, uzlaşma ile milletin önüne bir anayasa kor da ‘başkanlık sistemi hariç biz anayasanın bütün hükümleri üzerinde anlaştık’ derlerse, o zaman biz başkanlık sistemi önerimizin yeni anayasanın önünü tıkamasına izin vermeyiz İş dünyasından sivil anayasa beklentisi Star Gazete TBMM Anayasa Komisyonu Üyesi Ak Parti İzmir Milletvekili Ali Aşlık ile bir araya gelen Bucalı işadamları ‘Sivil Anayasa’ile ilgili beklentilerini iletip ,merak ettikleri konularda çeşitli sorular sordu. Sohbet havasında geçen programda başkanlık Yeni anayasa laiklik karşıtı! Ulusal Kanal (Blog) Oysa mevcut anayasanın 136. maddesine göre Diyanetin faaliyetleri laiklik ilkesine aykırı olamaz. Dahası Diyanet faaliyetlerini laiklik ilkesi doğrultusunda gerçekleştirmek zorunda. AKP’nin laiklik ilkesine yer vermediği öneriyse anayasa taslak metnine Öcalan Yeni Anayasa‘yı kimin yazmasını istiyor? Gazeteciler Osman Can, Abdullah Öcalan’ın “yeni anayasanın kritik maddelerini Osman Can yazsın” sözlerinin hatırlatılması üzerine ise; anayasa yazımında profesyonel süreç gerçekleştiğini. Bunun dışarıdan a ya da b şahsı şu şöyle yapsın dedi diye değişecek bir   Related posts: Yeni Anayasa Gündemi. “Millete gitme planları… Yeni Anayasa Gündemi: “Anayasa Yazım Komisyonu çalışmalarına tekrar başlıyor Yeni Anayasa gündemi. TESEV Anayasa İzleme Komitesi ve diğer haberler… TESEV’den Anayasa İzleme sitesi: ANALİZ …. yeni anayasa gündemi haberleri.. Yeni Anayasa Gündemi: “Anayasa’da 4.5 ayda 11 maddede uzlaşılabildi

AAA blog: National Humanities Alliance Annual Meeting and Humanities Advocacy Day 2013

$
0
0
Mark your calendars! National Humanities Alliance Annual Meeting and Humanities Advocacy Day March 17-19, 2013 Washington, D.C. Connect with a growing network of humanities leaders Communicate the value of the humanities to Members of Congress Become a year-round advocate for the humanities Sessions and events will be held at the One Washington Circle Hotel, George [...]

Language Log: PP attachment is hard

$
0
0
Alex Williams, "Creating Hipsturbia", NYT 2/15/2013: “When we checked towns out,” Ms. Miziolek recalled, “I saw some moms out in Hastings with their kids with tattoos. A little glimmer of Williamsburg!” Sara Rosenthal et al., "Towards Semi-Automated Annotation for Prepositional Phrase Attachment", LREC 2010; Kailash Nadh and Engineering, "A Neurocomputational Approach to Prepositional Phrase Attachment Ambiguity Resolution", Neural Computation 2012; and so on.

media/anthropology: (Non)violence and the anti-corporate globalisation movements

$
0
0
Brief notes on Juris, J.S. 2008. Networking Futures: the Movements against Corporate Globalization. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press. p. 91 ‘Militant anticapitalists… [adopt] more aggressive direct-action styles and practices [that] embody their militant visions’. They practice ‘”self-defense” and violence against property, including sabotage against bank tellers and corporate storefronts’. By contrast, RCADE, MRG and other [...]

Shenzhen Noted: the shape of space: buji village #1

$
0
0
In the urban villages around the Old Buji Market (布吉墟), alleys and narrow roads wind upward, accomodating dense settlement and inadvertant public spaces. The most notable feature of the space is the proliferation… Read More →

CONNECTED in CAIRO: Whatever Happened to Egypt’s “Popular Committees”?

$
0
0
Remember the popular committees? Those ad-hoc groups of citizens that started as neighborhood watch teams and maintained security and organized neighborhood life when the state stopped services? In “Egypt’s Popular Committees: From Moments of Madness to NGO Dilemmas,” Asya El-Mahy describes how some of them have evolved into social service providers with complex ties to [...]

Keywords: Inconvenient Ideas

$
0
0
Whenever Darwin encountered a “published fact” or “new observation” that contradicted one of his beliefs, he forced himself to “make a memorandum of it without fail and at once.” Why did Darwin do this? Because he had “found by experience that such facts and thoughts” – those inconvenient ideas – “were far more apt to escape from the memory than favorable ones. Whatever you think of Jonah Lehrer’s apology, this is a wonderful little tidbit. I wonder, though, if Darwin really did this “without fail”?
Viewing all 2364 articles
Browse latest View live