Podcasts about social origins

Purchase the Climate Finance Course at www.climatefinancecourse.com Robert G. Eccles is a leading ESG integration academic focusing on sustainable corporate and investment strategies. His work focuses on how capital markets can contribute to ensuring a sustainable society for generations to come. Dr. Eccles is a Visiting Professor of Management Practice at the Said Business School, University of Oxford. He was a Tenured Professor at Harvard Business School. Eccles has also been a Visiting Lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management, and a Berkeley Social Impact Fellow at the Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley. He was the founding chairman of the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) and one of the founders of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC). He is also the first Chair of KKR's “Sustainability Expert Advisory Council” and was an Eminent Academic Advisor to the Boston Consulting Group on Global ESG Integration and Reporting. He is notably a prolific commentator on Forbes, having published over 150 articles. Dr. Eccles received an S.B. in Mathematics and an S.B. in Humanities and Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an A.M. and Ph.D. in Sociology from Harvard University. Topics discussed: Dr. Eccles's early intellectual evolution was from studying mathematics and humanities at MIT to doing a Ph.D. in sociology focusing on the construction industry. How writing books on Transfer Pricing and Investment Banking Dealmaking earned Dr. Eccles tenureship at Harvard Business School. Transition from Academia to Consulting in Disclosure and Performance in the 1990s 1991: The Performance Measurement Manifesto 1992: Creating a Comprehensive System to Measure Performance 1993: Consulting: Has the Solution Become Part of the Problem? 1995: Improving the Corporate Disclosure Process Book Publications on Value & Integrated Reporting in the 2000s: 2001: The Value Reporting Revolution: Moving beyond the earnings game 2002: Building Public Trust: the Future of Corporate Reporting 2010: One Report: Integrated Reporting for a Sustainable Strategy Founding Leadership Journey with IIRC (International Integrated Reporting Council) and SASB (Sustainability Accounting Standards Board). Post-SASB Book Publication: The Integrated Reporting Movement: Meaning, Momentum, Motives, and Materiality (2014). Importance of Materiality: Materiality in Corporate Governance: The Statement of Significant Audiences and Materiality (2016). A Preliminary Analysis of SASB Reporting: Disclosure Topics, Financial Relevance, and the Financial Intensity of ESG Materiality (2020). How material is a material issue? Stock returns and the financial relevance and financial intensity of ESG materiality (2020). Thoughts on IIRC & SASB Consolidations to ISSB-IFRS A Debate At The Oxford Union: Should FASB And IASB Set Standards For Nonfinancial Information? (2018 - Forbes; SSRN).  The International Sustainability Standards Board As An Ideological Rorschach Test (2021 - Forbes). Historical Origins of ESG and Sustainability Reporting Exploring social origins in the construction of ESG measures (2018). The Social Origins of ESG: An Analysis of Innovest and KLD (2020) From “Who Cares Wins” To Pernicious Progressivism: 18 Years Of ESG (2022) Political Backlash and Regulation on ESG: Some Constructive Feedback To 23 Red States On Their Anti-ESG Campaigns (August 2023). A Color Spectrum Analysis Of The Redness Of 23 Red States (July 2023). Written Statement for the House Financial Services Committee June 12, 2023 Hearing entitled "Protecting Investor Interests: Examining Environmental and Social Policy in Financial Regulation" Anti-ESG Fund Analysis: Drilling Into DRLL's Top 10 Holdings: A Woke Analysis (2022) Global SDG Funding Gap: How to close the $2.5 trillion annual funding gap (Jan 2018).  $2.5trn in need is not $2.5trn in opportunities (September 2023). Advice to Future ESG and Sustainable Finance Academics, Practitioners, Financiers, and Investors. Note: This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be considered as investment advice. The interview took place on 26 September 2023.

Noah Smith & Brad DeLong Record the Podcast We, at Least, Would Like to Listen to!; Aspirationally Bi-Weekly (Meaning Every Other Week); Aspirationally an hour...Key Insights:* Someone is wrong on the internet! Specifically Brad… He needs to shape up and scrub his brain… * Back in the 2000s, Brad argued that the U.S. should over the next few generations try to pass the baton of world leadership to a prosperous, democratic, liberal China…* Back in the 2000s, Noah thought that Brad was wrong—he looked at the Chinese Communist Party, and he thought: communist parties do not do “coëxistence”…* Noah understands people with a limitless authoritarian desire for power—people like Trump, Xi, Putin, and in the reverse Abe—and the systems that nurture and promote them…* Why did Brad go wrong? Excessive reliance in the deep structures of his brain on the now 60-year-old Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World.* Why did Brad go wrong? A failure to understand Lenin's party of a new type as a bureaucratic-cultural organization…* Suggestions for what Brad DeLong should earn during his forthcoming stint in the reëducation camp are welcome…* &, as always, Hexapodia…References:* Bear, Greg. 1985. Blood Music. New York: Arbor House. .* Brown, Kerry. 2022. Xi: A Study in Power. London: Icon Books..* Cai, Xia. 2022. "The Weakness of Xi Jinping: How Hubris and Paranoia Threaten China's Future." Foreign Affairs. September/October. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/china/xi-jinping-china-weakness-hubris-paranoia-threaten-future.* DeLong, J. Bradford. 2019. "What to Do About China?" Project Syndicate, June 5. .* DeLong, J. Bradford. 2019. "America's Superpower Panic". Project Syndicate, August 14. .* DeLong, J. Bradford. 2023. "Theses on China, the US, Political-Economic Systems, Global Value Chains, & the Relationship". Grasping Reality. Accessed June 19. .* Lampton, David M. 2019. Following the Leader: Ruling China, from Deng Xiaoping to Xi Jinping. Berkeley: University of California Press..* Moore, Barrington, Jr. 1966. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord & Peasant in the Making of the Modern World. Boston: Beacon Press. .* Pronin, Ivan, & Mikhail Stepichev. 1969. Leninist Standards of Party Life. Moscow: Progress Publishers. .* Sandbu, Martin. 2022. “Brad DeLong: ‘The US is now an anti-globalisation outlier'”. Financial Times. November 23. .* Sasaki, Norihiko. 2023. "Functions and Significance of the Central Leading Group for Comprehensively Deepening Reforms and the Central Comprehensively Deepening Reforms Commission." Chinese Journal of Political Science 28 (3): 1-15. Accessed May 14, 2024. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/24761028.2023.2185394.* Shambaugh, David, ed. 2020. China and the World. New York: Oxford University Press. .&* Vinge, Vernor. 1999. A Deepness in the Sky. New York: Tor Books. . Get full access to Brad DeLong's Grasping Reality at braddelong.substack.com/subscribe

Turquia encara um cenário ‘não tão complexo' quanto a Síria em relação à ajuda humanitária internacional https://cbn.globoradio.globo.com/media/audio/399821/turquia-encara-um-cenario-nao-tao-complexo-quanto-.htm Erdogan falhou na prevenção a terremotos na Turquia e deve enfrentar custo político; leia análise https://www.estadao.com.br/internacional/erdogan-falhou-na-prevencao-a-terremotos-na-turquia-e-deve-enfrentar-custo-politico-leia-analise/ 1755 Lisbon earthquake https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1755_Lisbon_earthquake Michael Tomasello on The Social Origins of Cognition and Agency https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2023/01/30/225-michael-tomasello-on-the-social-origins-of-cognition-and-agency/ The Race to Cooperation with David Sloan ... Read more

Human beings have developed wondrous capacities to take in information about the world, mull it over, think about a suite of future implications, and decide on a course of action based on those deliberations. These abilities developed over evolutionary history for a variety of reasons and under a number of different pressures. But one crucially important aspect of their development is their social function. According to Michael Tomasello, we developed agency and cognition and even morality in order to better communicate and cooperate with our fellow humans. Support Mindscape on Patreon.Michael Tomasello received a Ph.D. in experimental psychology from the University of Georgia. He is currently the James Bonk Professor of Psychology & Neuroscience and Director of the Developmental Psychology Program at Duke University. He is a fellow of the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Among his awards are the Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award from the American Psychological Association, the Wiley Prize in Psychology, and the Heineken Prize for Cognitive Science. His newest book is The Evolution of Agency: Behavioral Organization from Lizards to Humans.Web siteDuke web pageGoogle Scholar publicationsWikipediaAmazon author page See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

How social networks shaped the imperial Chinese state China was the world's leading superpower for almost two millennia, falling behind only in the last two centuries and now rising to dominance again. What factors led to imperial China's decline?  The Rise and Fall of Imperial China: The Social Origins of State Development (Princeton UP, 2022) offers a systematic look at the Chinese state from the seventh century through to the twentieth. Focusing on how short-lived emperors often ruled a strong state while long-lasting emperors governed a weak one, Yuhua Wang shows why lessons from China's history can help us better understand state building. Wang argues that Chinese rulers faced a fundamental trade-off that he calls the sovereign's dilemma: a coherent elite that could collectively strengthen the state could also overthrow the ruler. This dilemma emerged because strengthening state capacity and keeping rulers in power for longer required different social networks in which central elites were embedded. Wang examines how these social networks shaped the Chinese state, and vice versa, and he looks at how the ruler's pursuit of power by fragmenting the elites became the final culprit for China's fall. Drawing on more than a thousand years of Chinese history, The Rise and Fall of Imperial China highlights the role of elite social relations in influencing the trajectories of state development. Javier Mejia is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Political Science Department at Stanford University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

How social networks shaped the imperial Chinese state China was the world's leading superpower for almost two millennia, falling behind only in the last two centuries and now rising to dominance again. What factors led to imperial China's decline?  The Rise and Fall of Imperial China: The Social Origins of State Development (Princeton UP, 2022) offers a systematic look at the Chinese state from the seventh century through to the twentieth. Focusing on how short-lived emperors often ruled a strong state while long-lasting emperors governed a weak one, Yuhua Wang shows why lessons from China's history can help us better understand state building. Wang argues that Chinese rulers faced a fundamental trade-off that he calls the sovereign's dilemma: a coherent elite that could collectively strengthen the state could also overthrow the ruler. This dilemma emerged because strengthening state capacity and keeping rulers in power for longer required different social networks in which central elites were embedded. Wang examines how these social networks shaped the Chinese state, and vice versa, and he looks at how the ruler's pursuit of power by fragmenting the elites became the final culprit for China's fall. Drawing on more than a thousand years of Chinese history, The Rise and Fall of Imperial China highlights the role of elite social relations in influencing the trajectories of state development. Javier Mejia is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Political Science Department at Stanford University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

How social networks shaped the imperial Chinese state China was the world's leading superpower for almost two millennia, falling behind only in the last two centuries and now rising to dominance again. What factors led to imperial China's decline?  The Rise and Fall of Imperial China: The Social Origins of State Development (Princeton UP, 2022) offers a systematic look at the Chinese state from the seventh century through to the twentieth. Focusing on how short-lived emperors often ruled a strong state while long-lasting emperors governed a weak one, Yuhua Wang shows why lessons from China's history can help us better understand state building. Wang argues that Chinese rulers faced a fundamental trade-off that he calls the sovereign's dilemma: a coherent elite that could collectively strengthen the state could also overthrow the ruler. This dilemma emerged because strengthening state capacity and keeping rulers in power for longer required different social networks in which central elites were embedded. Wang examines how these social networks shaped the Chinese state, and vice versa, and he looks at how the ruler's pursuit of power by fragmenting the elites became the final culprit for China's fall. Drawing on more than a thousand years of Chinese history, The Rise and Fall of Imperial China highlights the role of elite social relations in influencing the trajectories of state development. Javier Mejia is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Political Science Department at Stanford University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/east-asian-studies

How social networks shaped the imperial Chinese state China was the world's leading superpower for almost two millennia, falling behind only in the last two centuries and now rising to dominance again. What factors led to imperial China's decline?  The Rise and Fall of Imperial China: The Social Origins of State Development (Princeton UP, 2022) offers a systematic look at the Chinese state from the seventh century through to the twentieth. Focusing on how short-lived emperors often ruled a strong state while long-lasting emperors governed a weak one, Yuhua Wang shows why lessons from China's history can help us better understand state building. Wang argues that Chinese rulers faced a fundamental trade-off that he calls the sovereign's dilemma: a coherent elite that could collectively strengthen the state could also overthrow the ruler. This dilemma emerged because strengthening state capacity and keeping rulers in power for longer required different social networks in which central elites were embedded. Wang examines how these social networks shaped the Chinese state, and vice versa, and he looks at how the ruler's pursuit of power by fragmenting the elites became the final culprit for China's fall. Drawing on more than a thousand years of Chinese history, The Rise and Fall of Imperial China highlights the role of elite social relations in influencing the trajectories of state development. Javier Mejia is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Political Science Department at Stanford University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How social networks shaped the imperial Chinese state China was the world's leading superpower for almost two millennia, falling behind only in the last two centuries and now rising to dominance again. What factors led to imperial China's decline?  The Rise and Fall of Imperial China: The Social Origins of State Development (Princeton UP, 2022) offers a systematic look at the Chinese state from the seventh century through to the twentieth. Focusing on how short-lived emperors often ruled a strong state while long-lasting emperors governed a weak one, Yuhua Wang shows why lessons from China's history can help us better understand state building. Wang argues that Chinese rulers faced a fundamental trade-off that he calls the sovereign's dilemma: a coherent elite that could collectively strengthen the state could also overthrow the ruler. This dilemma emerged because strengthening state capacity and keeping rulers in power for longer required different social networks in which central elites were embedded. Wang examines how these social networks shaped the Chinese state, and vice versa, and he looks at how the ruler's pursuit of power by fragmenting the elites became the final culprit for China's fall. Drawing on more than a thousand years of Chinese history, The Rise and Fall of Imperial China highlights the role of elite social relations in influencing the trajectories of state development. Javier Mejia is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Political Science Department at Stanford University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/chinese-studies

How social networks shaped the imperial Chinese state China was the world's leading superpower for almost two millennia, falling behind only in the last two centuries and now rising to dominance again. What factors led to imperial China's decline?  The Rise and Fall of Imperial China: The Social Origins of State Development (Princeton UP, 2022) offers a systematic look at the Chinese state from the seventh century through to the twentieth. Focusing on how short-lived emperors often ruled a strong state while long-lasting emperors governed a weak one, Yuhua Wang shows why lessons from China's history can help us better understand state building. Wang argues that Chinese rulers faced a fundamental trade-off that he calls the sovereign's dilemma: a coherent elite that could collectively strengthen the state could also overthrow the ruler. This dilemma emerged because strengthening state capacity and keeping rulers in power for longer required different social networks in which central elites were embedded. Wang examines how these social networks shaped the Chinese state, and vice versa, and he looks at how the ruler's pursuit of power by fragmenting the elites became the final culprit for China's fall. Drawing on more than a thousand years of Chinese history, The Rise and Fall of Imperial China highlights the role of elite social relations in influencing the trajectories of state development. Javier Mejia is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Political Science Department at Stanford University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

How social networks shaped the imperial Chinese state China was the world's leading superpower for almost two millennia, falling behind only in the last two centuries and now rising to dominance again. What factors led to imperial China's decline?  The Rise and Fall of Imperial China: The Social Origins of State Development (Princeton UP, 2022) offers a systematic look at the Chinese state from the seventh century through to the twentieth. Focusing on how short-lived emperors often ruled a strong state while long-lasting emperors governed a weak one, Yuhua Wang shows why lessons from China's history can help us better understand state building. Wang argues that Chinese rulers faced a fundamental trade-off that he calls the sovereign's dilemma: a coherent elite that could collectively strengthen the state could also overthrow the ruler. This dilemma emerged because strengthening state capacity and keeping rulers in power for longer required different social networks in which central elites were embedded. Wang examines how these social networks shaped the Chinese state, and vice versa, and he looks at how the ruler's pursuit of power by fragmenting the elites became the final culprit for China's fall. Drawing on more than a thousand years of Chinese history, The Rise and Fall of Imperial China highlights the role of elite social relations in influencing the trajectories of state development. Javier Mejia is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Political Science Department at Stanford University.

How social networks shaped the imperial Chinese state China was the world's leading superpower for almost two millennia, falling behind only in the last two centuries and now rising to dominance again. What factors led to imperial China's decline?  The Rise and Fall of Imperial China: The Social Origins of State Development (Princeton UP, 2022) offers a systematic look at the Chinese state from the seventh century through to the twentieth. Focusing on how short-lived emperors often ruled a strong state while long-lasting emperors governed a weak one, Yuhua Wang shows why lessons from China's history can help us better understand state building. Wang argues that Chinese rulers faced a fundamental trade-off that he calls the sovereign's dilemma: a coherent elite that could collectively strengthen the state could also overthrow the ruler. This dilemma emerged because strengthening state capacity and keeping rulers in power for longer required different social networks in which central elites were embedded. Wang examines how these social networks shaped the Chinese state, and vice versa, and he looks at how the ruler's pursuit of power by fragmenting the elites became the final culprit for China's fall. Drawing on more than a thousand years of Chinese history, The Rise and Fall of Imperial China highlights the role of elite social relations in influencing the trajectories of state development. Javier Mejia is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Political Science Department at Stanford University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How social networks shaped the imperial Chinese state China was the world's leading superpower for almost two millennia, falling behind only in the last two centuries and now rising to dominance again. What factors led to imperial China's decline?  The Rise and Fall of Imperial China: The Social Origins of State Development (Princeton UP, 2022) offers a systematic look at the Chinese state from the seventh century through to the twentieth. Focusing on how short-lived emperors often ruled a strong state while long-lasting emperors governed a weak one, Yuhua Wang shows why lessons from China's history can help us better understand state building. Wang argues that Chinese rulers faced a fundamental trade-off that he calls the sovereign's dilemma: a coherent elite that could collectively strengthen the state could also overthrow the ruler. This dilemma emerged because strengthening state capacity and keeping rulers in power for longer required different social networks in which central elites were embedded. Wang examines how these social networks shaped the Chinese state, and vice versa, and he looks at how the ruler's pursuit of power by fragmenting the elites became the final culprit for China's fall. Drawing on more than a thousand years of Chinese history, The Rise and Fall of Imperial China highlights the role of elite social relations in influencing the trajectories of state development. Javier Mejia is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Political Science Department at Stanford University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week we discuss the industrialization of migration across the southern border of the United States. But first, I recently spoke with Niccolò Armandola of the University of Zurich about his recent paper titled “Rebel without a Cause: The Effects of Social Origins and Disposable Income on Rule Violations.” The paper is to be published in the European Sociological Review, and is co-authored by Alexander Ehlert and Heiko Rauhut. Segment 1 -- Niccolò Armandola on “Rebel without a Cause: The Effects of Social Origins and Disposable Income on Rule Violations.” Segment 2 – The Industrialization of Illegal Immigration: From Cottage Industry to Drug Cartel Monopoly?

Content warning: today's episode discusses domestic violence. We also appreciate your patience with this episode as we know it is a few weeks behind our usual schedule! Thank you all for your support. Short SMOA listener story: bit.ly/smoasurvey In this episode, Anna Mullany discusses the interrelationship between domestic abuse, capitalism and political economy, patriarchy, and the teaching of social medicine. She discusses the history of the anti-domestic violence movement, the violence of the state, the rise of the carceral state, and the 'social problem apparatus.' She also shares stories from students learning about structural violence and social medicine in the classroom. In combining the micro and macro, she points a way towards emancipation for all. Anna Mullany is a 4th year doctoral student at the School of Public Health and Health Sciences at the University of MA Amherst. The focus of her doctoral work is on rural intimate partner violence and social services. Taking a political economic perspective, she looks at how the structural determinants of health determine people's wellbeing and daily lives within capitalism. She is committed to investigating how we create a truly equitable world in which health for all is a reality. She teaches courses on "Health Communication" and "Population Health and Imperialism" to undergraduates in the Public Health Department at UMass Amherst. Additionally, she is on faculty with the Spark Teacher Education Institute in Brattleboro, VT. Prior to her doctoral studies she worked for 6 years at the Women's Freedom Center in Brattleboro, VT – a crisis center responding to intimate partner violence. Anna also serves as a one of the hosts of Indigo Radio, a weekly radio show on the Brattleboro Community Radio Station WVEW, broadcasts of which focus on connecting local and global issues. Recommended Resources: Harvey M. How Do We Explain the Social, Political, and Economic Determinants of Health? A Call for the Inclusion of Social Theories of Health Inequality Within U.S.-Based Public Health Pedagogy. Pedagogy in Health Promotion. 2020;6(4):246-252. bit.ly/3iNgzNX Gimenez, M. Capitalism and the Oppression of Women: Marx Revisited. Science & Society, 2005;69(1), 11-32. bit.ly/3kTxbGA Waitzkin, H. "The Social Origins of Illness: A Neglected History" in The Second Sickness: Contradictions of Capitalist Health Care (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2000). bit.ly/3eUsJU5 Brown TM, Fee E. Rudolf Carl Virchow: medical scientist, social reformer, role model. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(12):2104-5. bit.ly/3x5cObK Indigo Radio, bit.ly/3kU4iu3 Spark Teacher Education, bit.ly/3BBRcr7

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Barrington Moore famously claimed, “No bourgeoisie. No democracy.” Many scholars before and after Moore have argued the middle class is necessary for successful democratization. But Moore had a specific image of the middle class. The bourgeoisie were not simply white-collar professionals. They were entrepreneurs who were independent of the landed aristocracy.Bryn Rosenfeld recognizes a new source for the growth of the middle class. Many authoritarian regimes have established a state dependent middle class. A professional class who relies on the state bureaucracy for employment and think differently about their relationship to the regime than the bourgeoisie Barrington Moore portrayed.Scholars have long recognized the heterogeneity of the middle class even while they described them as a homogenous group. The diverse interests and perspectives are part of what leads the middle class to demand democracy. But Bryn Rosenfeld finds there is also an autocratic middle class who rely on the state for their status and position. They view the process of democratization as a labyrinth of risk and uncertainty.Bryn Rosenfeld is an assistant professor in the department of government at Cornell University. She is the author of The Autocratic Middle Class: How State Dependency Reduces the Demand for Democracy. Bryn is part of a new generation of comparative political scientists who blend field research with rigorous quantitative research designs to produce new insights into political behavior.I have read my share of books on democracy published in 2020. Some are well-written. Others offer deep insights. So far, this is the most consequential book on democracy I have come across from last year. I do not doubt scholars will refer to its conclusions for years to come. It astonishes me this is Bryn’s first book. I expect to come across her name again in the future.Related ContentPaul Robinson on Russian ConservatismErica Chenoweth on Civil ResistanceThoughts on Barrington Moore's Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy

The American conservative movement was founded by people who were largely socially outside the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) establishment of America at the time. William F. Buckely's book God and Man and Yale and the reaction to it cannot be understood without looking at this social dimension. He was an Irish Catholic criticizing the citadel of the Protestant Establishment that had graciously allowed him in the door.  At the same time, the conservative movement was also unrepresentative of its current voting base of Evangelicals.The Christian side of conservative intellectualism has always been heavily Catholic dominated, from William F. Buckley at its founding to people like Ross Douthat today. The large number of people within conservative intellectual circles that are Catholic converts (both historically and today) attests to the normative status of Catholicism within the conservative movement. Evangelicals, while constituting perhaps the largest and most loyal voting block within conservatism, have never played a material role in its leadership, particularly at the intellectual level. When Evangelical leaders or voters have asserted themselves (as in the person of Pat Robertson in the 1980s or by supporting Trump today), the incumbent conservative establishment has frequently been appalled. Conservatism's social origins and continued existence on the social margins helps explain its lack of cultural success in the country. And the social difference between the Catholic dominated intellectual leadership class and the Protestant dominated voting base with different preferences is a key fault line that enabled Trump's victory. The fact that the conservative elite are a leadership group without a natural constituency in the country is a big challenge for them in a post-Trump world.  For Evangelicals, their lack of input at the leadership level of conservative intellectualism is a key reason they need to rewrite their relationship with the conservative movement and Republican Party.Links:First Things on  Samuel Francis: https://www.firstthings.com/article/2019/10/the-outsider Michael Lind's "resignation letter" from conservatism: http://www.dissentmagazine.org/pdfs/lind.pdfHow the WASPs betrayed the country to communism: https://www.nytimes.com/1998/10/18/weekinreview/witching-hour-rethinking-mccarthyism-if-not-mccarthy.html

Join Naomi Ellemers, author of the Current Directions in Psychological Science article "Neuroscience and the Social Origins of Moral Behavior: How Neural Underpinnings of Social Categorization and Conformity Affect Everyday Moral and Immoral Behavior," for a discussion with the editor.

Interview with Naomi Ellemers, Distinguished University Professor at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands. Interviewed on November 25, 2020

At 11:00 minutes, there is a break in the recording. At this point in the seminar, Bruce Rogers-Vaughn showed this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuBe93FMiJc

This newsletter is really a weekly public policy thought-letter. While excellent newsletters on specific themes within public policy already exist, this thought-letter is about frameworks, mental models, and key ideas that will hopefully help you think about any public policy problem in imaginative ways. It seeks to answer just one question: how do I think about a particular public policy problem/solution?PS: If you enjoy listening instead of reading, we have this edition available as an audio narration courtesy the good folks at Ad-Auris. If you have any feedback, please send it to us.A Framework a Week: Internet + PoliticsTools for thinking public policy— Pranay KotasthaneMany predictions about the internet transforming politics have fallen flat. So, how about a framework that can help us understand the many facets of this interaction? I came across one such framework from 2013 — Six Models for the Internet + Politics by Archon Fung et al. The paper first presents a stylised political model:(Source: Six Models for the Internet + Politics by Archon Fung et al.) The authors describe this model as follows:“The model is a simple conveyor belt image of politics. The belt begins with citizens who have interests and views about politics, policies, and politicians. Citizens form into interest groups and social movement organizations—sometimes called pressure groups—that advocate for specific interests and policies. Once born, these groups reciprocally recruit and mobilize citizens to advocate more powerfully. At the same time, citizens form and express their views in the public sphere in which they discuss public concerns with one another in coffee shops, op-ed pages, water coolers, and town squares (and of course increasingly on the Internet). These traditional organizations and the public sphere are located outside of government. In a democratic society, however, they determine the personnel and content of government. Through the mechanisms of elections, lobbying, and communicative pressure (of which the pressure of public opinion is one kind), they exert pressures that determine which politicians hold office. Between elections, traditional organizations, and public opinion also exert pressures on the public agencies that compose government. Government action is at the end of this conveyor belt. Government acts in one of two ways: by passing laws and policies, and by acting directly in the world through agency actions.”Now by introducing the internet in six different points in this model, the authors develop six pathways in which the internet changes politics.Pathway 1: The Muscular Public Sphere(Six Models for the Internet + Politics by Archon Fung et al.)In this model, the internet strengthens the link between citizens and the public sphere, and between the public sphere and the politicians. Twitter outrage campaigns demanding attention and action from the government are examples of this pathway. Pathway 2: Here Comes Everybody(Six Models for the Internet + Politics by Archon Fung et al.)This pathway is focused on direct action. Here the citizens are able to mobilise public action bypassing pressure groups, politicians, and the state. Internet-mobilised drives to fix street potholes or to clear up garbage spots are examples of this pathway.Pathway 3: Direct Digital Democracy(Six Models for the Internet + Politics by Archon Fung et al.)In this pathway, citizens are able to reach the policymaking elite directly. Expat Indians reaching out to India’s former External Affairs Minister on Twitter for getting their visa/passport issues resolved is an example of this pathway.Pathway 4: Truth-based Advocacy(Six Models for the Internet + Politics by Archon Fung et al.)Quite inaccurately named, in this model, the authors propose that the internet can become a platform “by which organised advocacy groups bring salient, often surprising, facts to light in credible ways that tilt public opinion.” The Panama Papers is an example of this pathway. What gets missed is that this pathway can also be used for malicious purposes by traditional pressure groups to malign individuals and groups, which is the more common use case today. Pathway 5: Constituent Mobilisation(Six Models for the Internet + Politics by Archon Fung et al.)In this pathway, the role of the internet is to:“thicken the connection between political organizations and their members. Lowering the costs of communications allows political organizations to communicate more information to more members at a fixed cost. Conversely, digitalization lowers search costs and allows individuals to find the organizations that advance their interests and perspectives. Finally, digitalization dramatically lowers the transaction costs of some kinds of political action such as donating money to organizations and signing letters and petitions.”This is the pathway that has been used by political parties (some have been more successful than others) to form strong bonds with their constituents, effectively turning even a marginal voter into an unapologetic partisan supporter.Pathway 6: Social Monitoring(Six Models for the Internet + Politics by Archon Fung et al.)In this pathway:“public agencies (and/or civic organizations) deploy digital tools to enlist the eyes and ears of citizens to better spot public problems and so bring those problems to the attention of the government and the broader public.”An example of this pathway is traffic police apps and websites that allow citizens to report traffic violations.So this is a non-exhaustive set of interactions between the internet and politics. I have refrained from making value judgments in this post. An underlying assumption in these six models is that social media improves governance and strengthens democracies. Seven years since this paper was published, we know that this assumption doesn’t always hold true. Nevertheless, this typology is a useful starting point for people trying to decipher the connections between the internet and politics. One can even use this framework to imagine newer pathways for explaining how social media has vitiated our polity. India Policy Watch: Agrarian to Industrial Society: Barrington Moore On India’s Trajectory Insights on burning policy issues in India— RSJLet’s for a moment assume the optimistic case of farm reforms comes true. The market mechanism works, farmers are freed up from the monopoly of the state and agriculture booms. Instead of accounting for 16 per cent of our GDP while supporting about 60 per cent of our population as it does today, in 2050, it will account for 6-7 per cent of our GDP and support about 20 per cent of our population. That would make us a solid middle-income country in 2050.Moore’s Study Of Comparative Histories The question I had was how would this transition from agriculture dominant society to a post-agriculture society happen in the next 30 years? What will be our path and what will it mean for our society?While looking for answers to this question, I stumbled upon a classic: Barrington Moore’s 1966 book ‘Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World)’. While I didn’t find a clear answer to the question that led me to it, the book itself is a rigorous academic work that details the trajectories six countries took to transition from agrarian societies into modern industrial ones.  As Moore writes in the preface of the book:“This book endeavours to explain the varied political roles played by the landed upper classes and the peasantry in the transformation from agrarian societies (defined simply as states where a large majority of the population lives off the land) to modern industrial ones. Somewhat more specifically, it is an attempt to discover the range of historical conditions under which either or both of these rural groups have become important forces behind the emergence of Western parliamentary versions of democracy. and dictatorships. of the right and the left, that is, fascist and communist regimes.”Part 1 of the book titled ‘Revolutionary Origin of Capitalist Democracy’ compares the histories England, France and America from the late 17th century till their emergence as capitalist democracies in the early 20th century. In Part 2, titled ‘Three Routes to the Modern World in Asia’, Moore traces the rise of communism in China, fascism in Japan and the peaceful adoption of democracy in India as they attempted to make this transition. Part 3 titled ‘Theoretical Implications and Projections’ detail Moore’s conclusions on the three trajectories to make the transition from agrarian to industrial society.It is a fascinating book that uses a neo-marxist lens to understand the society through social classes and the coalitions among them. The chapter on India is interesting with Moore wondering why Indian peasants didn’t revolt like those of China while providing a strong thesis in answer to the question. Moore believes Gandhi’s ideas of swadeshi, trusteeship and his suspicion of both the state and the markets created a society where abject misery of the peasants co-existed with their co-option into the state. It has this line from Gandhi that came as a surprise to me:“Pressed further with the question why did he (Gandhi) not therefore advocate state ownership in the place of private property, he answered that, although it was better than private ownership, it was objectionable on the grounds of violence. "It is my firm conviction," he added, "that if the state suppressed capitalism by violence it will be caught in the evils of violence itself and fail to develop nonviolence at anytime."There’s a very insightful passage about the continuing stagnation and halting progress of agriculture 20 years after independence:“The proximate cause seems quite clearly to be the relative failure of a market economy to penetrate very far into the countryside and put the peasants into a new situation to which they seem quite capable of responding with a sharp rise in output. The structure of village society is only a secondary obstacle one that changes in response to external circumstances. …Behind the weak push of the market lies the failure to channel into industrial construction the resources that agriculture does generate. One further step, taken with a glance at other countries, shows that the course of historical development in India was such that no class grew up with any very strong interest in rechanneling the agricultural surplus in such a way as to get the process of industrial growth started.” Anyway, my view is India confounds Moore too. In his analysis, India stands as an outlier that follows none of the three trajectories he derives for transition to a modern industrial state – the capitalist-democratic route (England, France and US), the capitalist-reactionary route (Germany and Japan) and the communist route (China and Russia). There is a good description of these three routes here.India’s Route: Moore’s HypothesisMoore ends the chapter on India wondering what route it would take for its transition from an agrarian state to an industrial one. The three routes he had devised didn’t seem to fit India, so, Moore suggests an alternative that has a strong element of coercion. I was amazed by Moore’s understanding of the history of Indian farming under colonial rule, his foresight about how it was to pan out and the analytical rigour he uses to conclude about the only option available to India. I have reproduced the last few passages from that chapter. Remember he published this in 1966. Even the Green Revolution hadn’t taken off. He writes:“If the prevailing policy in its essential outlines continues, as far as can be foreseen it would result in a very slow rate of improvement, mainly through the action of the upper stratum of the peasantry continuing to go over to peasant forms of commercial farming. The danger has already been pointed out: the steady swelling of an urban and rural proletariat on an ever larger scale. This policy could in time perhaps generate its own antithesis, though the difficulties of a radical takeover in India are enormous. Much more desirable from a democratic standpoint would be for the government to harness and use these same tendencies for its own purposes. That would mean discarding the Gandhian doctrines, allowing the upper strata in the countryside free rein, but taxing their profits and organizing the market and credit mechanism in such a way as to drive out the moneylender. If the government in this way succeeded in tapping the present surplus generated in agriculture and encouraging the growth of a much bigger one, it could do a great deal more about industry on its own resources. As industry grew, it would sop up much of the surplus labour released in the countryside and spread the market ever more rapidly in a continually accelerating process. The efforts to bring technology and modern resources to the peasant's doorstep would then bear fruit.The third possibility would be to go over to much wider use of compulsion, more or less approaching the communist model. Even if it could be tried in India, it seems highly unlikely that it would work. Under Indian conditions for a long time to come, no political leadership - no matter how intelligent, dedicated, and ruthless ­ could, it seems to me, put through a revolutionary agrarian policy. The country is too diverse and too amorphous still, though that will gradually change. The administrative and political problem of forcing through a collectivization program against the barriers of caste and tradition in fourteen languages seems too formidable to require further discussion. Only one line of policy then seems to offer real hope, which, to repeat, implies no prediction that it will be the one adopted. In any case, a strong element of coercion remains necessary if a change is to be made. …Either masked coercion on a massive scale, as in the capitalist model including even Japan, or more direct coercion approaching the socialist model will remain necessary. The tragic fact of the matter is that the poor bear the heaviest costs of modernization under both socialist and capitalist auspices. The only justification for imposing the costs is that they would become steadily worse off without it. As the situation stands, the dilemma is indeed a cruel one. It is possible to have the greatest sympathy for those responsible for facing it. To deny that it exists is, on the other hand, the acme of both intellectual and political irresponsibility.”Moore in 1966 had concluded that the only option that might work for India is the ‘masked coercion on a massive scale as in the capitalist model’ or the direct coercion of the socialist model. One way to look at the farm bills passed last week is to ask – is this the state biting the bullet and choosing masked coercion that Moore wrote about? I don’t know about this. If anyone has a view on the trajectory this transition will take for India, let us know. Meanwhile, I will recommend Moore’s remarkable book. It is a great work of comparative history and I enjoyed reading it.  Matsyanyaaya: Prediction Markets as a Tool for Intelligence AnalysisBig fish eating small fish = Foreign Policy in action— Pranay Kotasthane(This post first appeared on the Takshashila Blog in Feb 2019)The raison d’être for intelligence analysis is being able to predict near-future events with reasonable accuracy. Based on the little that I have read, there is no mechanism that seeks to improve Indian intelligence analysts’ accuracy over time. This leads to what Philip Tetlock calls ‘outcome-irrelevant learning’.  This is a situation wherein no matter what happens in reality, people are in an excellent position to explain that what happened was consistent with their own view.Outcome-irrelevant learning is quite easy to find in mainstream foreign policy analysis. Many analysts would, for example, argue that talks between India and Pakistan at the highest levels are a necessary policy instrument for managing Pakistan. When presented with the evidence to the contrary, they will still come up with a reason that deflects blame from their policy proposal.The costs of outcome-irrelevant learning become very high if intelligence analysis also falls into this same trap.  It’s all the more necessary in that community to make people remember their previous states of ignorance and make them update their Bayesian priors when things don’t go according to their expectations.This is where a prediction market comes in. In such a market, a group of people speculate on future events. Each individual assigns a probability to a near-future event and these choices get registered. Once the event actually takes place, you get a chance to reflect on why you were wrong (or right). By looking at the track records of analysts over time for several questions, one can wean out the worse analysts from the better ones.The US intelligence community recognised the value of these markets more than ten years ago. This CIA paper from 2006 concludes:The record of prediction markets is impressive. For the US Intelligence Community, prediction markets offer a method by which to improve analytical outcomes and to address some of the deficiencies in analytical processes and organization. In the realm of intelligence analysis, prediction markets can contribute to more accurate estimates of long-term trends and threats and better cost-benefit assessments of ongoing or proposed policies.It’s time that we introduce such prediction markets to the Indian intelligence community as well. To improve prediction skills, the training programme for new recruits can include elements from Tetlock and Gardner’s classic Superforecasting.HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters[Paper] An excellent overview of the Geopolitics of Semiconductors by Paul Triolo and Kevin Allison.[Post] “Economists assume rational frameworks, not rational people.” — Economic Forces debunking a long-standing myth used to denigrate economics. [Article] How democracies can claim back power in the digital world. Marietje Schaake argues for a global alliance for technology standards.[Article] Why do we read Barrington Moore? - on the relevance of Moore’s classic in today’s times. Get on the email list at publicpolicy.substack.com

This episode dives into the scandalous origins of the war on drugs. Prior to 1914, drugs were widely available. Yet with each successive step of prohibition this past century, governments have lied to the public about the underlying reason for criminalizing drugs. The true story - one of political oppression, propaganda and disturbing corruption - must be told. Please subscribe, leave a 5-star review, and tell your friends about the show. Thank you!***References:‘Joe Rogan Experience #1250 - Johann Hari’, The Joe Rogan Experience.‘Joe Rogan Experience #142 - Graham Hancock, Duncan Trussell’, The Joe Rogan Experience.‘The Truth About the War on Drugs - Graham Hancock’, London Real.'America’s War on Drugs', Season 1, Talos Films.‘A Brief History Of The War On Drugs’, NPR.‘Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs’, Johann Hari, 2015, Bloomsbury Publishing. Trebach, Arnold. 1982. The Heroin Solution. New Haven, CT: Yale University PressTreating Drug Problems: Volume 2: Commissioned Papers on Historical, Institutional, and Economic Contexts of Drug Treatment. ‘A Century of American Narcotic Policy’, David T. Courtwright, Treating Drug Problems: Volume 2: Commissioned Papers on Historical, Institutional, and Economic Contexts of Drug Treatment.‘The Eleusinian Mysteries: The Rites of Demeter’, Ancient History Encyclopedia, Joshua Mark. ‘The Consumers Union Report on Licit and Illicit Drugs’, by Edward M. Brecher and the Editors of Consumer Reports Magazine, 1972.‘THE HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE LEADING INTERNATIONAL DRUG CONTROL CONVENTIONS’, Jay Sinha, Law and Government Division, 21 February 2001.‘Dynamics of Intervention in the War on Drugs: The Buildup to the Harrison Act of 1914’, Audrey Redford & Benjamin Powell, The Independent Review, 2016.‘ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO, PROHIBITION BEGAN IN EARNEST—AND WE’RE STILL PAYING FOR IT’, Maia Szalavitz, Pacific Standard.‘How the Myth of the ‘Negro Cocaine Fiend’ Helped Shape American Drug Policy’, Dr Carl Hart, The Nation.Galliher, John F., and Allynn Walker. “The Puzzle of the Social Origins of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937.” Social Problems, vol. 24, no. 3, 1977, pp. 367–376. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/800089. Accessed 4 June 2020.‘An excess of democracy', Hilary Wainwright, Open Democracy.‘As Heroin Use Grows in U.S., Poppy Crops Thrive in Afghanistan’, Elizabeth Chuck, NBC.‘How the heroin trade explains the US-UK failure in Afghanistan’, Alfred W McCoy, The Guardian.'Psychedelic Salon #623 - “Timothy Leary Meets Jiminy Glick”', Psychedelic Salon.'Psychedelic Salon #533 - “The Social Virus of Political Correctness”', Psychedelic Salon.***Music: Julian AngelatosArtwork: Nerpa Mate

We cover chapters one and two — "Members Unlimited" and "Christian Apollyon" — on this week's episode. Rachel Foxley, a professor of history at the University of Reading and author of The Levellers: Radical Political Thought in the English Revolution, joins us to talk about the English Revolution. Secondary Reading: Rachel Foxley, The Levellers (Manchester University Press, 2013). Christopher Hill, The Experience of Defeat (Verso, 2017). Peter Linebaugh and Marcus Rediker, The Many-Headed Hydra (Verso, 2014). CB Macpherson, The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism (Oxford University Press, 2011). Barrington Moore, Jr., Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Beacon Press, 1993). Ellen Meiksins Wood, Democracy Against Capitalism (Cambridge University Press, 1995).

Misagh Parsa is a Professor of Sociology who has taught at Dartmouth since 1989. A specialist on revolutions, he is the author of States, Ideologies, and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of Iran, Nicaragua, and the Philippines, as well as Social Origins of the Iranian Revolution. His most recent book which we discuss here, is called Democracy in Iran: Why it Failed and how it Might Succeed.

The 1996 repeal of Aid to Families with Dependent Children -- the New Deal-era relief program for poor women with children -- was a seminal moment in the modern history of the US welfare state. That the charge was led by a Democratic president makes it even more noteworthy. Join us as we speak with Darren Barany, author of The New Welfare Consensus: Ideological, Political and Social Origins (SUNY Press, 2018), who helps us understand how we got there, and how various strains of conservative anti-welfare thought came to dominate our discourse and our policy. Stephen Pimpare is Senior Lecturer in the Politics & Society Program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. He is the author of The New Victorians (New Press, 2004), A Peoples History of Poverty in America (New Press, 2008), winner of the Michael Harrington Award, and Ghettos, Tramps and Welfare Queens: Down and Out on the Silver Screen (Oxford, 2017). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The 1996 repeal of Aid to Families with Dependent Children -- the New Deal-era relief program for poor women with children -- was a seminal moment in the modern history of the US welfare state. That the charge was led by a Democratic president makes it even more noteworthy. Join us as we speak with Darren Barany, author of The New Welfare Consensus: Ideological, Political and Social Origins (SUNY Press, 2018), who helps us understand how we got there, and how various strains of conservative anti-welfare thought came to dominate our discourse and our policy. Stephen Pimpare is Senior Lecturer in the Politics & Society Program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. He is the author of The New Victorians (New Press, 2004), A Peoples History of Poverty in America (New Press, 2008), winner of the Michael Harrington Award, and Ghettos, Tramps and Welfare Queens: Down and Out on the Silver Screen (Oxford, 2017). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The 1996 repeal of Aid to Families with Dependent Children -- the New Deal-era relief program for poor women with children -- was a seminal moment in the modern history of the US welfare state. That the charge was led by a Democratic president makes it even more noteworthy. Join us as we speak with Darren Barany, author of The New Welfare Consensus: Ideological, Political and Social Origins (SUNY Press, 2018), who helps us understand how we got there, and how various strains of conservative anti-welfare thought came to dominate our discourse and our policy. Stephen Pimpare is Senior Lecturer in the Politics & Society Program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. He is the author of The New Victorians (New Press, 2004), A Peoples History of Poverty in America (New Press, 2008), winner of the Michael Harrington Award, and Ghettos, Tramps and Welfare Queens: Down and Out on the Silver Screen (Oxford, 2017). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The 1996 repeal of Aid to Families with Dependent Children -- the New Deal-era relief program for poor women with children -- was a seminal moment in the modern history of the US welfare state. That the charge was led by a Democratic president makes it even more noteworthy. Join us as we speak with Darren Barany, author of The New Welfare Consensus: Ideological, Political and Social Origins (SUNY Press, 2018), who helps us understand how we got there, and how various strains of conservative anti-welfare thought came to dominate our discourse and our policy. Stephen Pimpare is Senior Lecturer in the Politics & Society Program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. He is the author of The New Victorians (New Press, 2004), A Peoples History of Poverty in America (New Press, 2008), winner of the Michael Harrington Award, and Ghettos, Tramps and Welfare Queens: Down and Out on the Silver Screen (Oxford, 2017). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The 1996 repeal of Aid to Families with Dependent Children -- the New Deal-era relief program for poor women with children -- was a seminal moment in the modern history of the US welfare state. That the charge was led by a Democratic president makes it even more noteworthy. Join us as we speak with Darren Barany, author of The New Welfare Consensus: Ideological, Political and Social Origins (SUNY Press, 2018), who helps us understand how we got there, and how various strains of conservative anti-welfare thought came to dominate our discourse and our policy. Stephen Pimpare is Senior Lecturer in the Politics & Society Program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. He is the author of The New Victorians (New Press, 2004), A Peoples History of Poverty in America (New Press, 2008), winner of the Michael Harrington Award, and Ghettos, Tramps and Welfare Queens: Down and Out on the Silver Screen (Oxford, 2017). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The 1996 repeal of Aid to Families with Dependent Children -- the New Deal-era relief program for poor women with children -- was a seminal moment in the modern history of the US welfare state. That the charge was led by a Democratic president makes it even more noteworthy. Join us as we speak with Darren Barany, author of The New Welfare Consensus: Ideological, Political and Social Origins (SUNY Press, 2018), who helps us understand how we got there, and how various strains of conservative anti-welfare thought came to dominate our discourse and our policy. Stephen Pimpare is Senior Lecturer in the Politics & Society Program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. He is the author of The New Victorians (New Press, 2004), A Peoples History of Poverty in America (New Press, 2008), winner of the Michael Harrington Award, and Ghettos, Tramps and Welfare Queens: Down and Out on the Silver Screen (Oxford, 2017). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The 1996 repeal of Aid to Families with Dependent Children -- the New Deal-era relief program for poor women with children -- was a seminal moment in the modern history of the US welfare state. That the charge was led by a Democratic president makes it even more noteworthy. Join us as we speak with Darren Barany, author of The New Welfare Consensus: Ideological, Political and Social Origins (SUNY Press, 2018), who helps us understand how we got there, and how various strains of conservative anti-welfare thought came to dominate our discourse and our policy. Stephen Pimpare is Senior Lecturer in the Politics & Society Program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. He is the author of The New Victorians (New Press, 2004), A Peoples History of Poverty in America (New Press, 2008), winner of the Michael Harrington Award, and Ghettos, Tramps and Welfare Queens: Down and Out on the Silver Screen (Oxford, 2017). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Author Joshua Tom discusses his article, " Social Origins of Scientific Deviance: Examining Creationism and Global Warming Skepticism." The article is published in the June 2018 issue of Sociological Perspectives.

Episode 29: Interview with Max Ajl: The Social Origins of Development and Underdevelopment in Tunisia    Max Ajl is a doctoral student in the Department of Development Sociology at Cornell University, and will graduate in late Spring 2018. His work focuses on and contributes to the study of historical sociology, environmental justice, agrarian change, planning, and heterodox Arab / North African social thought. His research is focused on the MENA region, with a particular focus on Tunisia. His work has been published widely, including in Historical Materialism, Review of African Political Economy, Middle East Report, and popular publications like teleSUR. He is an editor at Jadaliyya and Viewpoint. In this podcast, CEMAT Director, Dr. Laryssa Chomiak, interviews Max Ajl on his dissertation research. His dissertation analyses the social origins of development and underdevelopment in Tunisia by analyzing both the liberation struggle and post-colonial planning using a global history approach. It looks at planning as pivot in order to understand the various local, regional, and national forces at play which led to Tunisia's current state of underdevelopment. It focuses on the agricultural sector and analyses successive development plans from the perspective of the rural world. This podcast is part of the Contemporary Through Series, and was recorded at the Centre d'Études Maghrébines à Tunis (CEMAT), on 6 March 2018, in Tunis, Tunisia.

As one of the leading family studies scholars in the country, Stephanie Coontz has over the years published a wide range of provocative Op-Ed pieces in such publications as The New York Times and the Washington Post. She's also the author of several books, including The Way We Never Were; The Social Origins of Family Life; and How Love Conquered Marriage, which U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy cited twice in the landmark opinion that he wrote this year on same-sex marriage. In this edition of Up Next, Coontz talks about the changing nature of marriage and how well the institution is likely to fare in the decades ahead. Series: "Up Next: Perspectives on the Future of Everything" [Public Affairs] [Humanities] [Show ID: 29841]

As one of the leading family studies scholars in the country, Stephanie Coontz has over the years published a wide range of provocative Op-Ed pieces in such publications as The New York Times and the Washington Post. She's also the author of several books, including The Way We Never Were; The Social Origins of Family Life; and How Love Conquered Marriage, which U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy cited twice in the landmark opinion that he wrote this year on same-sex marriage. In this edition of Up Next, Coontz talks about the changing nature of marriage and how well the institution is likely to fare in the decades ahead. Series: "Up Next: Perspectives on the Future of Everything" [Public Affairs] [Humanities] [Show ID: 29841]

Dr. Sheldon Krimsky is Professor of Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning at Tufts University and adjunct professor in the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health at Tufts University School of Medicine. He's a Fellow at the Hastings Center and author of, "The GMO Deception: What You Need to Know about the Food, Corporations, and Government Agencies Putting Our Families and Our Environment at Risk."   Krimsky discusses the social, political, and ethical implications of genetically modified foods, including who really controls the power structure of food production and why it's so difficult to get genetically modified foods labeled in the U.S. He shares where Ralph Nader stands in this debate. He also discusses how Vermont's new GMO law will affect the food industry.    Sheldon Krimsky is professor of Urban & Environmental Policy & Planning in the School of Arts & Sciences and Adjunct Professor in Public Health and Family Medicine in the School of Medicine at Tufts University. He received his bachelors and masters degrees in physics from Brooklyn College, CUNY and Purdue University respectively, and a masters and doctorate in philosophy at Boston University.     Professor Krimsky's research has focused on the linkages between science/technology, ethics/values and public policy. He is the author of ten books: Genetic Alchemy: The Social History of the Recombinant DNA Controversy (MIT Press) 1982, Biotechnics and Society: The Rise of Industrial Genetics (Praeger) 1991, Hormonal Chaos:The Scientific and Social Origins of the Environmental Endocrine Hypothesis(Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000), Science in the Private Interest: Has the lure of profits corrupted biomedical research? (Rowman & Littlefield Pub.) 2003. He is co-author of Environmental Hazards: Communicating Risks as a Social Process (Auburn House) 1988 and Agricultural Biotechnology and the Environment: Science, Policy and Social Values (University of llinois), 1996, co-editor of a collection of papers titled Social Theories of Risk (Praeger) 1992, and Rights and Liberties in the Biotech Age: Why We Need a Genetic Bill of Rights (Rowman & Littlefield Pub.) 2005.Genetic Justice: DNA Databanking, Criminal Investigations and Civil Liberties, 2011 with Tania Simoncelli, published by Columbia University Press, 2011; Race and the Genetic Revolution with Kathleen Sloan, published by Columbia University Press, 2011. His forthcoming book edited with Jeremy Gruber to be published by Harvard University Press is titled Genetic Explanations: Sense and Nonsesene. Professor Krimsky has published over 180 essays and reviews that have appeared in many books and journals.     Professor Krimsky served on the National Institutes of Health's Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee from 1978-1981. He was a consultant to the Presidential Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research and to the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment. He participated on a special study panel for the American Civil Liberties Union that formulated a policy on civil liberties and scientific research. Professor Krimsky was chairperson of the Committee on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility for the American Association for the Advancement of Science for 1988-1992. Currently he serves on the Board of Directors for the Council for Responsible Genetics, as a Fellow of the Hastings Center on Bioethics and on Committee A of the American Association of University Professors.