Search results

Social movement organizations are concerned and cognizant of their public image and typically need to maintain positive public perception to gain and sustain support. White supremacist organizations believe that they are highly stigmatized, reviled, and surveilled groups and go to great lengths to protect their desired self-representation. Through a qualitative analysis of close to 2 million Discord chat messages from white supremacist organizations, I find that white nationalist groups attempt to cater their public appearances through three primary axes: organizational, activism, and individual/membership. This chapter uses concepts from Goffmanian sociology, such as Stigma, Impression Management, and Frontstage/Backstage, to highlight how political movements discuss, argue, and debate the public image they wish to deploy. Studies on right-wing movements tend to be “externalist” in the sense that they look at publicly available documents which privilege the views of leadership. This chapter uses a dataset which delves into the social movement “backstage,” enabling us to view white supremacists' private conversations, their impression management strategies, and how they wish to appear on the “frontstage.”

Currently, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and several outer space industry multibillionaire entrepreneurs – e.g., Elon Musk (SpaceX), Jeff Bezos (Blue Origin), and Richard Branson (Virgin Galactic), to name a few – are actively engaged in outer space research that reports innovative advances, such as outer space mining, outer space tourism, outer space medicine labs, outer space terraforming of Mars and moon, and altering celestial bodies and terrestrial humans to enhance extraterrestrial survivability. All these advances induce serious ethical concerns of human identity and dignity and destiny, human rights and privileges over earth and her resources, and cosmic sustainability. Further, the current understanding of sustainability development is highly anthropocentric (i.e., the earth and cosmos are meant solely for man's use) and limited in scope as a terrestrial, temporal, economic, and pro-human project. Critical thinking invites sustainability development to include trans-terrestrial, trans-temporal, trans-economic, and transhuman developments. While outer space research certainly offers great hopes of newer living spaces and resources for mankind already strapped by depleted terrestrial habitable spaces, we believe that this capital-intensive “elitist” unregulated outer space research industry may benefit a chosen few at the expense of polarizing mankind in terms of one's undeserved financial capacities to afford extraterrestrial spaces and privileges while endangering Nature by deploying massive terrestrial energy resources for outer space rocket launches causing trailing cosmic debris and planetary pollution. We frame this complex problem into terrestrial humanist issues versus extraterrestrial transhumanist issues, each domain triggered by pro-planetary versus pro-cosmic breakthrough technologies, thus creating a fourfold framework that enables us to explore a distributed ethical strategic understanding and ethical resolution of outer space ethical concerns.

Our aim in this study is to investigate the relative importance of the economic policy uncertainty and of the geopolitical risk on U.S. REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts) returns with a special focus on the different real estate sectors.

We use an augmented Fama-French (1993)’s asset pricing model, including economic policy uncertainty indices (EPU), introduced by Baker et al. (2016), and geopolitical risk indices (GPR) recently developed by Caldara and Iacoviello (2022), to price the potential risk factors for U.S. Nareit indices returns. To obtain robust economic results, we correct for the problems of errors-in-variables in linear asset pricing models; we advocate the use of higher moments estimators as instruments in a generalized method of moments (GMM) framework.

Our results report that economic policy uncertainty (EPU), and geopolitical risk (GPR) are priced for the different Nareit sectors for the last three decades. The GPR index stands as a relevant risk factor. The coefficient estimates are low compared to Fama-French risk factors. They are higher for Shopping Centers, Retail and Region Malls and lower for Health Care and Lodging/Resorts. EPU indices are also priced and less statistically significant. Health Care sector, followed by Shopping Centers and Retail are the most policy-sensitive sectors.

In their “2023–2024 Top Ten Issues Affecting Real Estate” “political unrest and global economic health” is ranked 1 issue by the Counselors of Real Estate. Our results report that economic policy uncertainty and geopolitical risk are priced for the different Nareit sectors. They suggest implications for investors, insurers, bankers, policymakers and other stakeholders. The geopolitical risk index (GPR) stands as a relevant and significant risk factor for REITs returns.

Based on parsimonious robust asset pricing models, the results shed a new light on the relative importance of geopolitical risk and economic policy uncertainty in the real estate sector, with a special focus on the different U.S. REITs sectors. They suggest possible implications for investors, insurers, bankers, policymakers and other stakeholders in a context marked by higher uncertainty shocks and geopolitical risks.