Search results

This study uses Tilly's concept of repertoires of contention as a lens to examine the utilization of eight distinct contentious tactics, ranging from nonviolent demonstrations to rebellion. Using an original dataset on Latin America, I develop a measure of tactical fractionalization of 62 contentious campaigns in Latin America, and I find that, consistent with theory, the range of tactics within campaigns is limited, compared to the range of tactics found in the country or region as a whole. Second, an examination of the sample shows that the eight contentious tactics tend to coincide into three separate repertoires of contention: protest, strikes, and rebellion. Finally, I analyze two conflicting theories on the selection of contentious tactics: Tilly's regime theory and Lichbach's substitution model. The prevalence of the three repertoires depends a great deal on the regime type in place, the level of primary school enrollment (measuring state capacity), and the generalized level of repression. These variables were all suggested by Tilly's regime theory. Contentious challengers show no sign of shifting tactics in response to repression of that tactic in the past, which contradicts the substitution model.

Tina Askanius is a lecturer and researcher in the Department of Communication and Media at Lund University, Sweden. Her research concerns social movement media practices with a particular focus on contemporary forms of video activism in online environments. Her recent work within this area has been published in international journals such as Journal of E-politics, Journal of Electronic Governance, and Interface: a journal for and about social movements.

Max Weber called the maxim “Time is Money” the surest, simplest expression of the spirit of capitalism. Coined in 1748 by Benjamin Franklin, this modern proverb now has a life of its own. In this paper, I examine the worldwide diffusion and sociocultural history of this paradigmatic expression. The intent is to explore the ways in which ideas of time and money appear in sedimented form in popular sayings.

My approach is sociological in orientation and multidisciplinary in method. Drawing upon the works of Max Weber, Antonio Gramsci, Wolfgang Mieder, and Dean Wolfe Manders, I explore the global spread of Ben Franklin’s famed adage in three ways: (1) via evidence from the field of “paremiology” – that is, the study of proverbs; (2) via online searches for the phrase “Time is Money” in 30-plus languages; and (3) via evidence from sociological and historical research.

The conviction that “Time is Money” has won global assent on an ever-expanding basis for more than 250 years now. In recent years, this phrase has reverberated to the far corners of the world in literally dozens of languages – above all, in the languages of Eastern Europe and East Asia.

Methodologically, this study unites several different ways of exploring the globalization of the capitalist spirit. The main substantive implication is that, as capitalism goes global, so too does the capitalist spirit. Evidence from popular sayings gives us a new foothold for insight into questions of this kind.

The British North American colonies were the first western economies to rely on legislature-issued paper monies as an important internal media of exchange. This system arose piecemeal. In the absence of banks and treasuries that exchanged paper monies at face value for specie monies on demand, colonial governments experimented with other ways to anchor their paper monies to real values in the economy. These mechanisms included tax-redemption, land-backed loans, sinking funds, interest-bearing notes, and legal tender laws. I assess and explain the structure and performance of these mechanisms. This was monetary experimentation on a grand scale.

Robert Franklin Hoxie was of the first generation of University of Chicago economists, a figure of significance in his own time. He is often heralded as the first of the Institutional economists and the impetus behind the field of labor economics. Yet today, his contributions appear as mere footnotes in the history of economic thought, when mentioned at all, despite the fact that in his professional and popular writings he tackled some of the most pressing problems of the day. The topics upon which he focused included bimetallism, price theory, methodology, the economics profession, socialism, syndicalism, scientific management, and trade unionism, the last being the field with which he is most closely associated. His work attracted the notice of some of the most famous economists of his time, including Frank Fetter, J. Laurence Laughlin, Thorstein Veblen, and John R. Commons. For all the promise, his suicide at the age of 48 ended what could have been a storied career. This paper is an attempt to resurrect Hoxie through a review of his life and work, placing him within the social and intellectual milieux of his time.

This chapter traces the history of diversity and inclusion efforts at the College of Information Studies at the University of Maryland as an example of an institution that has made diversity and inclusion central to its activities.

By exploring the successes and failures of a program that identifies itself as activist in terms of diversity and inclusion, this chapter offers a portrait of the evolution of cutting edge diversity and inclusion efforts in the field.

Widespread changes to the diversity and inclusiveness of library and information science education, professions, and institutions depend on all parts of the field committing to these issues, sharing ideas and best practices, and becoming activists for equity.