Search results

This paper aims to report findings about how prisoners experience and cope with COVID-19 restrictions, which can contribute to an understanding of how pandemic responses, and specifically the COVID-19 response, affect prisoners.

Data was collected through ethnographic fieldwork involving days of observations (N = 24) and the conduction of semi-structured interviews with prisoners (N = 30) in closed prisons and detentions in Denmark between May and December 2021. The transcribed interviews and field notes were processed and coded by using the software programme NVivo.

The data analysis reveals that the pains of imprisonment have been exacerbated to people incarcerated during the COVID-19 pandemic. To relieve pains of imprisonment, prisoners turn to censoriousness as an informal coping strategy, where they complain about inconsistency and injustice in the prison’s COVID-19 prevention strategy to reveal the prison system itself as a rule-breaking institution. The prisoners criticise the prison management for using COVID-19 as an excuse, treating prisoners unjustly or not upholding the COVID-19 rules and human rights. Furthermore, principles of justice and equality are also alleged by some prisoners who contemplate the difficulty in treating all prisoners the same.

More research will be needed to create a full picture of how prisoners cope with pandemic responses. Further research could include interviews with people working inside prisons.

In a Scandinavian context, to the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to apply an ethnographic approach in exploring prison life during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The purpose of this paper is to challenge Matthew Lorenzon’s contention that the late 1890s outcry demanding Melbourne University music professor G.W.L. Marshall-Hall’s removal from office was precipitated by his praise of war in an 1898 public address. It also disputes Lorenzon’s view that the belligerent, anti-philanthropic content of the address was inspired by Alexander Tille’s Social Darwinist introduction to four works of Friedrich Nietzsche which, Lorenzon says, Marshall-Hall had misread.

The paper analyses the speech and responses to it, comparing its content with that of the book and taking into account Marshall-Hall’s annotations and other relevant remarks. It also considers the broader situational context in which the speech was delivered with a view to identifying additional influences.

Despite superficial resemblances, Tille’s concern is with the physiological capabilities that determine the outcome of a universal struggle for physical survival, other qualities being important insofar as they contribute to such physiological power, whereas Marshall-Hall, driven by situational circumstances, focuses on contests for occupational pre-eminence in which physiology plays little part. While both men denigrate altruism they mean quite different things by it. Moreover, the speech had little to do with the ensuing furore, which stemmed primarily from offence caused by Marshall-Hall’s book of verse, Hymns Ancient and Modern. There is no reason to believe that he had misread Nietzsche.

The paper contributes to Marshall-Hall scholarship by arguing that the controversy was driven by purely local circumstances, not international debates about evolution.

John Locke′s political economy lends itself to conservative, liberal and radical interpretations that frame the conceptual ambiguities that still shape our debates over government′s proper economic functions. Suggests that “masculinity” was a powerful undercurrent in Locke′s thought which linked these ambiguities and makes them explicable. In short, Locke′s political economy was a “gendered” one which juxtaposed Enlightenment hopes that “manly” men could balance freedom and equality, labour and prosperity, and political order, to ancient misogynist fears that “effeminate” men caused chaos when freed from political constraints. Ultimately, Locke′s scepticism resulted in a heavy investment in political prerogative which has been parlayed into twentieth century political hegemony.