Friday, December 28, 2012
Monday, December 24, 2012
Rampage: The Social Roots of School Shootings
A team of sociologists studied a number of cases of mass shootings. Here is a brief synopsis of their findings in a recent issue of The Nation
Rampage: The Social Roots of School Shootings
Rampage: The Social Roots of School Shootings
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Arundhati Roy on Rape in India
A week ago, a woman while riding a public bus with her friend in New Delhi, was brutally gang-raped, beaten up and thrown out of the running bus. As she battles for her life in a New Delhi hospital, waves of protests and demonstrations all over the country have been held. In New Delhi today, police used tear gas to break up a massive protest march outside Rashtrapati Bhavan.
Anti-Rape demonstrators gassed in New Delhi
Finally, an issue that has been rampant but more often than not, ignored, might actually be addressed, not just by the so-called authorities, but more importantly by society at large. All too often, as is common in many other countries, the victims of rape have been blamed for their predicament. Arundhati Roy puts the horror of rape in India in its historical and contextual perspective.
Arundhati Roy on rape in India
Anti-Rape demonstrators gassed in New Delhi
Finally, an issue that has been rampant but more often than not, ignored, might actually be addressed, not just by the so-called authorities, but more importantly by society at large. All too often, as is common in many other countries, the victims of rape have been blamed for their predicament. Arundhati Roy puts the horror of rape in India in its historical and contextual perspective.
Arundhati Roy on rape in India
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Indeed....
Quite predictable indeed....
predictable indeed
On his part, the White House spokesperson Jay Carney continued with his platitudes:
"Gun violence such as the Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting is a "complex problem," and "no single piece of legislation, no single action will fully address" it, White House spokesman Jay Carney says."
Amazingly enough, "In Newtown right now, you can shoot any gun at anytime on your property," said town police commission member Joel Faxon (CNN)
Meanwhile, the National Rifle Association has yet to respond to the Connecticut massacre. It's website features a story from late November - touting, not unexpectedly, the same predictable message:
"The point is, gun owners and the NRA have been right all along. It's the criminals, not the law-abiding gun owners, who are the issue. More guns, less crime isn't just "quite possible," it's a fact."
predictable indeed
On his part, the White House spokesperson Jay Carney continued with his platitudes:
"Gun violence such as the Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting is a "complex problem," and "no single piece of legislation, no single action will fully address" it, White House spokesman Jay Carney says."
Few thinking people deny that such massacres occur due to "complex problems" - the state of the economy, the rates of unemployment and the stress and strain induced by these larger structural issues. However, no thinking person really believes that regulating guns will actually escalate the problems. Gun control is merely the first step in the right direction.
Amazingly enough, "In Newtown right now, you can shoot any gun at anytime on your property," said town police commission member Joel Faxon (CNN)
Meanwhile, the National Rifle Association has yet to respond to the Connecticut massacre. It's website features a story from late November - touting, not unexpectedly, the same predictable message:
"The point is, gun owners and the NRA have been right all along. It's the criminals, not the law-abiding gun owners, who are the issue. More guns, less crime isn't just "quite possible," it's a fact."
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Robert Biernacki on the measurement of meaning
At about the same time when C. Wright Mills tried to chart a course between what he called "this statistical stuff and heavy duty theoretical bullshit" by publishing The Sociological Imagination, the British philosopher Peter Winch also declared war on the pretensions of physics envy based on a caricature of physics. In The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy (1958) Winch did not mince words:
"That the social sciences are in their infancy has come to be a platitude amongst writers of textbooks on the subject. They will argue that this is because the social sciences have been slow to emulate the natural sciences and emancipate themselves from the dead hand of philosophy; that there was a time when there was no clear distinction between philosophy and natural science; but that owing to the transformation of affairs round about the seventeenth century natural science has made great bounds ever since. But, we are told, this revolution has not yet taken place in the social sciences, or at least it is only now in process of taking place. Perhaps social science has not yet found its Newton but the conditions are being created in which such a genius could arise. But above all, it is urged, we must follow the methods of natural science if we are to make any significant progress....I propose, in this monograph, to attack such a conception of the relation between the social studies, philosophy, and the natural sciences. [...] It will consist of a war on two fronts: first, a criticism of some prevalent contemporary ideas about the nature of philosophy: second, a criticism of some prevalent contemporary ideas about the nature of the social studies. The main tactics will be a pincer movement: the same point will be reached by arguing from opposite directions. To complete the military analogy before it gets out of hand, my main war aim will be to demonstrate that the two apparently diverse fronts on which the war is being waged are not in reality diverse at all; that to be clear about the nature of philosophy and to be clear about the nature of the social studies amount to the same thing. For any worthwhile study of society must be philosophical in character and any worthwhile philosophy must be concerned with the nature of human society."
Under different guises and names, overtly and covertly, positivism continues to thrive even in areas where one would least expect it. This year, a new book by Robert Biernacki titled Reinventing Evidence in Social Inquiry: Decoding Facts and Variables (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012) provides a trenchant critique of the attempt by some sociologists to codify, quantify and measure culture and meaning.
The book has also been selected by sociologist (and colleague of Biernacki at UCSD) Andrew Scull as one of the Times Literary Supplement's "book of the year.
"
"That the social sciences are in their infancy has come to be a platitude amongst writers of textbooks on the subject. They will argue that this is because the social sciences have been slow to emulate the natural sciences and emancipate themselves from the dead hand of philosophy; that there was a time when there was no clear distinction between philosophy and natural science; but that owing to the transformation of affairs round about the seventeenth century natural science has made great bounds ever since. But, we are told, this revolution has not yet taken place in the social sciences, or at least it is only now in process of taking place. Perhaps social science has not yet found its Newton but the conditions are being created in which such a genius could arise. But above all, it is urged, we must follow the methods of natural science if we are to make any significant progress....I propose, in this monograph, to attack such a conception of the relation between the social studies, philosophy, and the natural sciences. [...] It will consist of a war on two fronts: first, a criticism of some prevalent contemporary ideas about the nature of philosophy: second, a criticism of some prevalent contemporary ideas about the nature of the social studies. The main tactics will be a pincer movement: the same point will be reached by arguing from opposite directions. To complete the military analogy before it gets out of hand, my main war aim will be to demonstrate that the two apparently diverse fronts on which the war is being waged are not in reality diverse at all; that to be clear about the nature of philosophy and to be clear about the nature of the social studies amount to the same thing. For any worthwhile study of society must be philosophical in character and any worthwhile philosophy must be concerned with the nature of human society."
Under different guises and names, overtly and covertly, positivism continues to thrive even in areas where one would least expect it. This year, a new book by Robert Biernacki titled Reinventing Evidence in Social Inquiry: Decoding Facts and Variables (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012) provides a trenchant critique of the attempt by some sociologists to codify, quantify and measure culture and meaning.
The premise of coding is that meanings are entities about which there can be facts. But we all know that novel questions and contexts elicit fresh meanings from sources, which is enough to intimate that meaning is neither an encapsulated thing to be found nor a constructed fact of the matter. It is categorically absurd to treat a coding datum as a discrete observation of meaning in an object-text. My preference is to think of “meaning” as the puzzle we try to grasp when our honed concepts of what is going on collide with the words and usages of the agents we study. Describing meaning effectively requires us to exhibit that fraught interchange between cultures in its original: the primary sources displayed in contrast to the researcher’s typifying of them (p.131)
This volume has shown that humanist inquiry on its own better satisfies the “hard” science criteria of transparency, of retesting the validity of interpretations, of extrapolating from mechanisms, of appraising the scope of interpretations, of recognizing destabilizing anomalies, of displaying how we decide to “take” a case as meaning something, of forcing revision in interpretive decisions, of acknowledging the dilemmas of sampling, and of separating the evidence from the effects of instrumentation (p.151)
The book has also been selected by sociologist (and colleague of Biernacki at UCSD) Andrew Scull as one of the Times Literary Supplement's "book of the year.
"
The Connecticut Massacre and "meaningful action"
Entirely predictable:
"President Barack Obama urged Americans on Saturday to join in solidarity as they mourned the victims, saying the hearts of parents across the country were "heavy with hurt".
He called for "meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this", but stopped short of specifically calling for tighter gun-control laws in his weekly radio and Internet speech." (Reuters)
Meanwhile, at a press conference with the White House spokesperson:
"Q: The President made a campaign promise to work to renew the assault weapons ban. Why won’t you stand up here today and say that that remains a commitment of his?
CARNEY: It does remain a commitment of his. What I said is, today is not the day, I believe as a father, a day to engage in the usual Washington policy debates. I think that that they will come, but today is not that day, especially as we are awaiting more information about the situation in Connecticut."
Responding directly to the White House Press secretary's claim that "today is not the day" to discuss gun control, Jerrold Nader, D-New York said:
" We cannot simply accept this as a routine product of modern American life. If now is not the time to have a serious discussion about gun control and the epidemic of gun violence plaguing our society, I don’t know when is. How many more Columbines and Newtowns must we live through? I am challenging President Obama, the Congress, and the American public to act on our outrage and, finally, do something about this.”
On its part, "The National Rifle Association, which advocates for gun rights, said in a statement it would not have any comment on the Connecticut shooting "until the facts are thoroughly known." (CNN)
Outdoing everyone else, the ex-governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee weighed in too:
"We don't have a crime problem, a gun problem or even a violence problem. What we have is a sin problem," Huckabee said on Fox News. "And since we've ordered God out of our schools, and communities, the military and public conversations, you know we really shouldn't act so surprised ... when all hell breaks loose."
There are of course many other factors - structural, historical, ideological, social psychological - all seamlessly connected - that contribute to these endlessly recurring massacres. Michael Moore pinpointed many of these factors in his _Bowling for Columbine_ documentary. So while gun control in and of by itself will not be the proverbial magic bullet for preventing any further mass shootings, there is little doubt that it is a good first step that is actually within the realm of immediate action. If the political will is there - a big caveat for sure.
Friday, December 14, 2012
Massacre in Connecticut - unlikely to ignite debate on gun control
Tragically, it is unlikely that the horrendous mass killing in Connecticut, just a few days after a shooting in a mall in Oregon, will ignite any meaningful debate on gun control in the United States. Each such heart rending tragedy is amazingly enough always followed by its twin tragedy - the near complete absence of any real move to really regulate the ownership of guns. Any move in the right direction is almost always labeled as an attempt to "politicize" the issue. Sadly, some commentators on news-blogs will even use this occasion to promote more gun ownership - using the "logic" that such incidents could be prevented by arming everyone.
"The House I Live In" - on the American war on Drugs
Here is a powerful documentary on the tragic consequences of the American "war on drugs"
The House I Live In
The House I Live In
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
The new University of California logo and the slickfication of everything
The furor over the new University of California logo signals both the profound transformation in the "business" of higher education as well as the unease with the increasing pattern of rationalization that results in "institutional isomorphism" (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983) - or the situation where different organizations with very distinctive goals, practices and histories acquire formal similarities. As the "image consultants" laugh all the way to the bank and plan to be back in a few years for more, the venerable UC logo that used to feature an open book, with a light shining on it accompanied by the words "let there be light" is now a deep blue U and a barely decipherable bright yellow C. The staple of all university logos - a motto expressing some overall value, is missing. Not even a slick, marketing slogan. During these cash-strapped times for public universities, perhaps the C stands for the not so implicit "let there be cash"?
The new UC logo
a sad sign for higher education
DiMaggio, Paul J. and Walter W. Powell. 1983. "The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields." American Sociological Review 48:147-160.
The new UC logo
a sad sign for higher education
DiMaggio, Paul J. and Walter W. Powell. 1983. "The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields." American Sociological Review 48:147-160.
Saturday, December 8, 2012
Harvard University - a giant hedge fund?
And interesting piece characterizing Harvard University as a giant hedge fund with some students and faculty members attached to it. As the writer puts it:
Harvard University - a giant hedge fund?
"Harvard’s Division of Arts and Sciences—the central core of academic activity—contains approximately 450 full professors, whose annual salaries tend to average the highest at any university in America. Each year, these hundreds of great scholars and teachers receive aggregate total pay of around $85 million. But in fiscal 2004, just the five top managers of the Harvard endowment fund shared total compensation of $78 million, an amount which was also roughly 100 times the salary of Harvard’s own president. These figures clearly demonstrate the relative importance accorded to the financial and academic sides of Harvard’s activities.
Unlike universities, the business model of large and aggressive hedge funds is notoriously volatile, and during the 2008 Financial Crisis, Harvard lost $11 billion on its net holdings, teetering on the verge of bankruptcy as its highly illiquid assets could not easily be redeployed to cover hundreds of millions of dollars in ongoing capital commitments to various private equity funds. The desperate hedge fund—ahem, academic institution—was forced to borrow $2.5 billion from the credit markets, lay off hundreds of university employees, and completely halt construction work on a huge expansion project, ultimately surviving and later recovering in much the same way as did Goldman Sachs or Citibank.
Harvard University - a giant hedge fund?
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Satirist Tom Lehrer on Quantification in Sociology
Tom Lehrer on a certain kind of quantification in Sociology - "The Sociology Song"
Tom Lehrer on Sociology
Tom Lehrer on Sociology
"Land Grab" in Africa by Indian companies
"Land grab" in Africa by Indian companies - following in the footsteps of other companies who are already there. the nineteenth century "scramble for africa" is not quite over...
Land Grab in Africa by India
Land Grab in Africa by India
American exceptionalism on the rights of the disabled
"The treaty, already signed by 155 nations and ratified by 126 countries, including Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia, states that nations should strive to assure that the disabled enjoy the same rights and fundamental freedoms as their fellow citizens. Republicans objected to taking up a treaty during the lame-duck session of the Congress and warned that the treaty could pose a threat to U.S. national sovereignty.
"I do not support the cumbersome regulations and potentially overzealous international organizations with anti-American biases that infringe upon American society," said Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla.
He and other opponents were not swayed by support for the treaty from some of the GOP's prominent veterans, including the 89-year-old Dole, who was disabled during World War II; Sen. John McCain, who also suffered disabling injuries in Vietnam; Sen. Dick Lugar, the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee; and former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh. Eight Republicans voted to approve the treaty."
Sunday, December 2, 2012
the presentation of self at seminars
In his memoir The Gatekeeper, Terry Eagleton has a hilarious section where he sketches out portraits of members of the audience who ostensibly seek to contribute to the discussion at seminars and conferences. In the same spirit, with more than a little help from Erving Goffman, here are some of my observations on "The Presentation of Self at Seminars and Conferences"
1. Although many attend seminars to hear and, more importantly, to be heard, there will always be that person who under the guise of asking a question will preface his/her query (if it is ever articulated), by an extensive, well prepared and honed statement about their own research, publications - existing as well as forthcoming. In the company of a really relevant audience (consumers), the temptations of selling oneself and accumulating career capital are hard to resist. A minority of those who cannot help but operate in this mode actually manage to get to a genuine question at the end of their sales pitch.
2. Members of another tribe will begin to vigorously nod in agreement, ostensibly to signal their enthusiastic agreement with the speaker - even before the speaker has made any significant claims. Once in a while I have worried about the more enthusiastic nodders sustaining serious neck injury. Eventually, many of these congenital head shakers, particularly those who make it a point to sit quite close to the speaker, fall asleep. Not sure whether the rhythmic rocking of the head eventually induces sleep, or whether the manic rocking was actually meant to (unsuccessfully) resist a sleep attack. In either case, when they periodically force themselves to wake up, the action can sometimes be camouflaged - with a little tacit support from others who are in the know but do not want to disrupt the performance of the seminar - as a particularly vigorous expression of agreement with the speaker.
3. Then there are those who while not specifically in the business of self-advertizing, when given the chance to comment or ask a question, will ramble on forever. A colleague of mine who once chaired a seminar in which one such rambler really took up about ten minutes, concluded the session by thanking "both the speakers".
4. Then there those who come armed with their Mac Airs. They also shake and nod their heads vigorously as they type away energetically. Some of them are possibly taking notes. One suspects that a few might actually be helping themselves to the ideas presented at the seminars - in an era of "publish and perish", an efficient way to write a paper without too much effort. Some MacAir owners are also busy googling and fact checking. When they finally get a chance to ask a question, they can appear confident and eminently knowledgeable about facts acquired a few minutes earlier.
5. There are others who take special delight in pouncing on, attacking and ridiculing the speaker of the day. A heckler-lite as it were. On one memorable occasion, one such almost heckler lite got more than he expected when the speaker upped the ante in the ridicule register. "Look, I don't come to these seminar series to be insulted!" responded the academic heckler. To which the speaker coolly retorted "Well, why don't you go where you usually go for your weekly dose of insults?"
1. Although many attend seminars to hear and, more importantly, to be heard, there will always be that person who under the guise of asking a question will preface his/her query (if it is ever articulated), by an extensive, well prepared and honed statement about their own research, publications - existing as well as forthcoming. In the company of a really relevant audience (consumers), the temptations of selling oneself and accumulating career capital are hard to resist. A minority of those who cannot help but operate in this mode actually manage to get to a genuine question at the end of their sales pitch.
2. Members of another tribe will begin to vigorously nod in agreement, ostensibly to signal their enthusiastic agreement with the speaker - even before the speaker has made any significant claims. Once in a while I have worried about the more enthusiastic nodders sustaining serious neck injury. Eventually, many of these congenital head shakers, particularly those who make it a point to sit quite close to the speaker, fall asleep. Not sure whether the rhythmic rocking of the head eventually induces sleep, or whether the manic rocking was actually meant to (unsuccessfully) resist a sleep attack. In either case, when they periodically force themselves to wake up, the action can sometimes be camouflaged - with a little tacit support from others who are in the know but do not want to disrupt the performance of the seminar - as a particularly vigorous expression of agreement with the speaker.
3. Then there are those who while not specifically in the business of self-advertizing, when given the chance to comment or ask a question, will ramble on forever. A colleague of mine who once chaired a seminar in which one such rambler really took up about ten minutes, concluded the session by thanking "both the speakers".
4. Then there those who come armed with their Mac Airs. They also shake and nod their heads vigorously as they type away energetically. Some of them are possibly taking notes. One suspects that a few might actually be helping themselves to the ideas presented at the seminars - in an era of "publish and perish", an efficient way to write a paper without too much effort. Some MacAir owners are also busy googling and fact checking. When they finally get a chance to ask a question, they can appear confident and eminently knowledgeable about facts acquired a few minutes earlier.
5. There are others who take special delight in pouncing on, attacking and ridiculing the speaker of the day. A heckler-lite as it were. On one memorable occasion, one such almost heckler lite got more than he expected when the speaker upped the ante in the ridicule register. "Look, I don't come to these seminar series to be insulted!" responded the academic heckler. To which the speaker coolly retorted "Well, why don't you go where you usually go for your weekly dose of insults?"
Christian Parenti's _Tropic of Chaos_
Democracy Now interviews Christian Parenti on his book _Tropic of Chaos_ on climate change
Christian Parenti _Tropic of Chaos_
Christian Parenti _Tropic of Chaos_
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)