Podcasts about Thom Brooks

The Life in the UK Test is the ultimate barrier to becoming a British citizen. But is it working – and how could we change it? Since its launch in 2001 the test has been criticised for failing to achieve its goal of integration, and making it harder for people to become citizens. Thom Brooks, author of Reforming the UK's Citizenship Test: Building Bridges, Not Barriers, joins Yasmeen Serhan in the Bunker to ask: is it time for a new approach? “It's not so much about building bridges, it's about creating barriers on the arbitrary basis of a memory test.” “Other countries do not require a knowledge test like this to be a resident of a country.” “Americans and Australians - mostly native English speakers - have a pass rate of 97%. When it comes to Turkey, Iraq you see pass rates of less than 50%. There's a big difference in different nationalities.” Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/bunkercast Written and presented by Yasmeen Serhan. Producer: Jet Gerbertson. Assistant producer: Kasia Tomasiewicz. Lead producer: Jacob Jarvis. Bunker music by Kenny Dickinson. Audio production by Jade Bailey. Artwork by James Parrett. Group editor: Andrew Harrison.  THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Why do we punish people? What are the goals of punishment and the legal system? At some point in time, we stopped asking ourselves these questions and it led to a legal system that is disjointed, inconsistent, and unnecessarily cruel.   Today, Hunter spoke with Kaelen Perrochet, a Law Student at UCLA Law School, to dig through some of the philosophical underpinnings of any criminal legal system.     For many, people will say that we punish people because it is what they deserve, but what should our legal system look like if that were the actual justification for punishment? For others, we punish people to deter others from committing crimes, but does punishment deter anyone? Rehabilitation and restoration sound good, but can they functionally create a consistent system that people are willing to accept as being legitimate?   All these questions and more will be explored in this awesome episode about the purposes of punishment!     Guest: Kaelen Perrochet, Law Student, UCLA Law School Key Topics: Why study the Philosophy of Law and Punishment [5:30] What changed through studying these topics [8:30] Retribution theory [11:05] Deterrence Theory [16:00] Rehabilitation Theory [20:00] Restorative Theory [23:00] Issues with Prosecutors under various theories [26:45] Where has restorative and rehabilitative models been used? [29:35] Is punishment necessary? [33:00] Does incarceration make us safer? [38:00] Other theories [41:46] Felon Disenfranchisement and its impacts [45:45] What do each of these theories look like when taken to their logical conclusions? [54:30] Resources: Punishment and Inclusion by Andrew Dilts https://www.amazon.com/Punishment-Inclusion-Membership-American-Liberalism/dp/0823262421 Punishment by Thom Brooks https://www.amazon.com/Punishment-Thom-Brooks/dp/0415431824 Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) by Raymond Wacks https://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Law-Short-Introduction-Introductions/dp/0199687005   Contact Hunter Parnell:   hwparnell@publicdefenseless.com   Instagram @PublicDefenselessPodcast Twitter @PDefenselessPod www.publicdefenseless.com  

In this episode of the podcast Will is joined by Thom Brooks, Professor of Law and Government at Durham University Law School and a member of the Fabian Society Board to discuss Thom's new pamphlet for the Fabians Society "New Arrivals: A Fair Immigration Plan for Labour" - they discuss some of the policies in the pamphlet including a UK Day Bank Holiday, a Hate Crime Register and region linked visas. 

After a long hiatus... WE ARE BACK! This week's episode is an interview with Thom Brooks. Thom is an award-winning author, columnist, policy advisor, and political philosopher who is President of the Society of Legal Scholars and a member of the Fabian Society executive committee.He was joined by John Morgan, Chair of the Young Fabians Law Network, to discuss his work on migration policy and criminal justice as well as his involvement within the Labour Party and Fabian Society.Check out the Labour Academic Network!Speakers:John Morgan -  https://twitter.com/jorgmorgThom Brooks - https://twitter.com/thom_brooksTo all our listeners: we want you in our podcast, so if you're passionate about a topic just get in touch with us at podcast@youngfabians.org.ukFollow us on social media:https://www.facebook.com/PodcastYFhttps://twitter.com/PodcastYfDonate to the Young Fabians https://bit.ly/326RrJYThe intro music is by ‘One in a Googolplex' and used under Creative Commons. Find out more about them here:https://oneinagoogolplex.bandcamp.com/

This week on the Legally Speaking Podcast, our host Robert Hanna speaks to Thom Brooks.  Thom is an award-winning author, columnist, policy advisor, academic and public speaker. He currently serves as Dean of Durham Law School, one of the UK's most prestigious undergraduate law departments. At Durham, he's led the biggest expansion in the schools's 50 year history, doubling the academic staff count from 42 to 75. Using data-driven US-style management techniques, he's shaken up the department to give it a more internationalist outlook and a research remit which aims to be more relevant to wider society.Alongside his demanding role, he frequently writes in the press, including for the likes of the Daily Telegraph, Guardian, Independent, Times and more. Originally from the United States, his background as a top legal academic and recent migrant has ensured he remains a popular source for public commentary in the fiery UK immigration debate.  He is also President of the Society of Legal Scholars and an Academic Bencher of the Inner Temple. Topics discussed include: Thom's career journey prior to becoming Dean of the Durham Law SchoolHow he's shaken up the department with a data-driven & internationalist mindsetHis work on making the school's research more relevant to policymaking & societyThe stark differences between UK and US law schoolsHis expert on the notorious SQEOut now on the Legally Speaking Podcast website and all major audio platforms.Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/legallyspeakingpodcast)

In this episode we explore the history and future of legal punishment. My guest today will give us an introduction to the debate around judicial sanctions and to the two dialectical forces that have historically driven it ‘retributivism' and ‘consequentialism'. My guest Thom Brooks also lays out a vision for judicial punishment that may be able to resolve these conflicting views and explains how this new hybrid model may help us address some of the current moral short fallings in the American legal system

What if we’re been thinking about climate change the wrong way? What if it’s not a problem that can be solved, but something that can only be managed? What if climate change is here to stay? Thom Brooks is the author of Climate Change Ethics for an Endangered World. He is professor of Law and Government at the University of Durham, and the outgoing Dean of the Durham Law School. He is also a public policy advisor and the founding Director of the Labour Academic Network. This podcast is created in partnership with The Philosopher, the UK’s longest running public philosophy journal.  Register for free for the spring series of talks and events at: https://www.thephilosopher1923.org/events Music by Pataphysical Artwork by Nick Halliday

In this episode Will speaks to Dean of Durham University's Law School, Professor of Law and Government at Durham, member of the Fabian Society Executive, Advisor to the Labour Party and Chair of the Sedgefield Branch of the Sedgefield Constituency Labour Party, Thom Brooks. In the episode they discuss Thom's time advising Ed Miliband, Jeremy Corbyn and Keir Starmer; UK immigration policy; Shamima Begum's case before the Supreme Court; Brexit and this year's US Presidential Election. 

As Brexit negotiations go on, the UK is facing an immigration scandal with the Windrush generation. These are people who moved to Britain from Caribbean countries between 1948 and 1971. Many of the kids arrived on there parents' passports and after decades, are facing issues of being denied services, losing their jobs and even being deported. Host Dan Loney looks at this situation and why Prime Minister Theresa May was forced to apologize with Thom Brooks, Dean of Durham Law School at Durham University, Terri Givens, Provost and Professor of Political Science at Menlo College in California, and Randall Hansen, Interim Director of the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In Becoming British, citizenship expert Thom Brooks explores the big questions rarely answered by the politicians, examining the relationship between immigration and citizenship in order to challenge the popular and political myths that surround this topic. Thom Brooks is Professor of Law and Government at Durham University. He is a dual citizen of the UK and United States. Gulwali Passarlay left his home in Afghanistan when he was twelve years old, enduring a terrifying journey across Europe in the hands of people smugglers. The author of The Lightless Sky, Gulwali has written a piece, especially for Durham Book Festival, about his experiences of arriving and living in the UK as a teenager. Go to http://durhambookfestival.com/commissions to read more.

Thom Brooks is Dean of Durham Law School, Professor of Law and Government, and Associate in the Department of Philosophy in the School of Government and International Affairs at Durham University. His academic work focuses on issues in Ethics, Criminal Law, and Public Policy. But he is widely known as an outspoken critic of the UK Citizenship Test. His most recent book is Becoming British: UK Citizenship Examined (Biteback Publishing 2016). The "Why We Argue" podcast is produced by the Humanities Institute at the University of Connecticut as part of the Humility and Conviction in Public Life project. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Thom Brooks is Dean of Durham Law School, Professor of Law and Government, and Associate in the Department of Philosophy in the School of Government and International Affairs at Durham University. His academic work focuses on issues in Ethics, Criminal Law, and Public Policy. But he is widely known as an outspoken critic of the UK Citizenship Test. His most recent book is Becoming British: UK Citizenship Examined (Biteback Publishing 2016). The "Why We Argue" podcast is produced by the Humanities Institute at the University of Connecticut as part of the Humility and Conviction in Public Life project. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/british-studies

Thom Brooks is Dean of Durham Law School, Professor of Law and Government, and Associate in the Department of Philosophy in the School of Government and International Affairs at Durham University. His academic work focuses on issues in Ethics, Criminal Law, and Public Policy. But he is widely known as an outspoken critic of the UK Citizenship Test. His most recent book is Becoming British: UK Citizenship Examined (Biteback Publishing 2016).

Thom Brooks says that citizenship tests are often absurd

Thom Brooks says that citizenship tests are often absurd

US President Donald Trump is ‘still' waging war against the mainstream media. The issue being contested now is the attendance at Trump's inauguration event. Trump's war on media after taking office is slightly surprising, says Thom Brooks and adds that, “Donald Trump the candidate is very much Donald Trump the President”. After watching Brook's take on Trump vs. media war, viewers would be convinced that Trump's war against media is actually a war against facts. Brooks also shares his view on Brexit Supreme Court ruling due tomorrow. #US, #politics, #media, #Trump, #President, #UK, #Brexit, #macro

On Start the Week Andrew Marr explores the question of citizenship. While immigration issues dominate political debate, little attention is paid to the big increase in the number of people becoming British. The academic Thom Brooks and the Eurosceptic MEP Daniel Hannan look at the relationship between the two and the challenges for modern UK citizenship. Ben Rawlence spent four years reporting the stories of those who are stateless, living in the largest refugee camp in the world, while Frances Stonor Saunders explores the increasing complexity of today's border regimes and the obsession with the verified self. Producer: Katy Hickman.

Social stability and justice requires that we live together according to rules. And this in turn means that the rules must be enforced. Accordingly, we sometimes see fit to punish those who break the rules. Hence society features a broad system of institutions by which we punish. But there is a deep and longstanding philosophical disagreement over what, precisely, punishment is for. The standard views are easy to anticipate. Some say that we punish in order to give offenders what they deserve. Others claim that we punish in order to encourage others to obey the rules. Still others see punishment as a process of rehabilitating offenders. Recent theorists have attempted to combine these views in various ways. The debates go on. In his new book, Punishment (Routledge, 2012), Thom Brooks reviews the leading debates concerning punishment and makes a compelling case for a distinctive theory of punishment called the “unified theory.” Brooks contends that the unified theory can embrace several highly intuitive penal goals while avoiding the philosophical difficulties confronting each of the competing theories. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Social stability and justice requires that we live together according to rules. And this in turn means that the rules must be enforced. Accordingly, we sometimes see fit to punish those who break the rules. Hence society features a broad system of institutions by which we punish. But there is a deep and longstanding philosophical disagreement over what, precisely, punishment is for. The standard views are easy to anticipate. Some say that we punish in order to give offenders what they deserve. Others claim that we punish in order to encourage others to obey the rules. Still others see punishment as a process of rehabilitating offenders. Recent theorists have attempted to combine these views in various ways. The debates go on. In his new book, Punishment (Routledge, 2012), Thom Brooks reviews the leading debates concerning punishment and makes a compelling case for a distinctive theory of punishment called the “unified theory.” Brooks contends that the unified theory can embrace several highly intuitive penal goals while avoiding the philosophical difficulties confronting each of the competing theories. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Social stability and justice requires that we live together according to rules. And this in turn means that the rules must be enforced. Accordingly, we sometimes see fit to punish those who break the rules. Hence society features a broad system of institutions by which we punish. But there is a deep and longstanding philosophical disagreement over what, precisely, punishment is for. The standard views are easy to anticipate. Some say that we punish in order to give offenders what they deserve. Others claim that we punish in order to encourage others to obey the rules. Still others see punishment as a process of rehabilitating offenders. Recent theorists have attempted to combine these views in various ways. The debates go on. In his new book, Punishment (Routledge, 2012), Thom Brooks reviews the leading debates concerning punishment and makes a compelling case for a distinctive theory of punishment called the “unified theory.” Brooks contends that the unified theory can embrace several highly intuitive penal goals while avoiding the philosophical difficulties confronting each of the competing theories. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Social stability and justice requires that we live together according to rules. And this in turn means that the rules must be enforced. Accordingly, we sometimes see fit to punish those who break the rules. Hence society features a broad system of institutions by which we punish. But there is a deep and longstanding philosophical disagreement over what, precisely, punishment is for. The standard views are easy to anticipate. Some say that we punish in order to give offenders what they deserve. Others claim that we punish in order to encourage others to obey the rules. Still others see punishment as a process of rehabilitating offenders. Recent theorists have attempted to combine these views in various ways. The debates go on. In his new book, Punishment (Routledge, 2012), Thom Brooks reviews the leading debates concerning punishment and makes a compelling case for a distinctive theory of punishment called the “unified theory.” Brooks contends that the unified theory can embrace several highly intuitive penal goals while avoiding the philosophical difficulties confronting each of the competing theories. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Fabian Freyenhagen is Reader in Philosophy at the University of Essex, having previously taught at Sheffield and Cambridge. Apart from articles and a forthcoming book on Adorno’s (practical) philosophy, he has also published on Kant and Hegel as well as on contemporary political philosophy. He has co-edited two books (Disputing the Political: Habermas and Rawls, with Gordon Finlayson; and The Legacy of John Rawls, with Thom Brooks). He is Co-Investigator of a major AHRC-funded research initiative, the Essex Autonomy Project (http://autonomy.essex.ac.uk), and has also published in this area. This podcast is an audio recording of Fabian's talk - "Ethical (Self-)Critique" - at the Aristotelian Society on 29 April 2013. The recording was produced by Backdoor Broadcasting Company in conjunction with the Institute of Philosophy, University of London.