152 resultados para Politics of difference and cultural difference
Resumo:
Determination of metal oxidation state under relevant working conditions is crucial to understand catalytic behaviour. The reduction behaviour of Pt and Re was evaluated simultaneously as a function of support and solvent in a pressurized reactor (autoclave). The bimetallic catalysts are used in selective hydrogenation of carboxylic acids and amides. Gas phase reduction reduced the metals more efficiently, in particular Pt.
Resumo:
The everyday lives of many farm workers in eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century England were intricately and often intimately bound with the lives of animals, the ebb and flow of human life being inseparable from that of animal life. Farmyards, fields, folds as well as barns and stables were all spaces where animals transcended being the mere instruments of capital to instead being obvious co-constituents of the rhythms of existence. Living and working in such close proximity meant that the ‘species barrier’ was crossed and intimacies developed in everyday agricultural practices. Still, the relationship was based upon, if not reducible to, the workings of capital: the animal enrolled as a form of embodied capital, the labourer engaged by the farmer to act upon the animal. And in such relationships intimacies are mirrored by violences: the keeping captive, slaughter, and – occasionally – abuse. In this formative period in which the discourses and policies that continue to inform animal welfare were first formulated, the declining economic and material fortunes of farm workers when juxtaposed to farm animals’ fortune as increasingly ‘cosseted capital’ gave a particular charge to these abuses. Farm animals, and especially horses and cattle, so it is shown, were subjected to a series of violences. Many cases of animal maiming parodied tenderness in their brutality, whilst other attacks on the sexual organs of animals represented complex statements about the ways in which agrarian capitalism regulated all culture. Analysing the changing relationship between humans and animals therefore also helps us to better understand how capitalism mediates – and is mediated by – the non-human as well as the human, and how it defines cultural relations.
Resumo:
How did the counter-cultural aims of Radical Psychiatry coincide with those of documentary filmmaking in the 1960s? Where the forms and structures of new approaches to the documentary necessarily complicit in promoting the clinical and anti-clinical practices, and wider political agenda, of Radical Psychiatry? How did the documentary deal with the ethical, aesthetic, and audience-related issues associated with filming personalities and environments associated with Radical Psychiatry? How did Radical Psychiatry and the documentary shape postwar discourses on trauma, especially within conflict and post-conflict (PTSD) contexts? What is the legacy of Radical Pschiatry today, and how has it been explored by contemporary documentray film?
This article addresses these question by examining a range of documentaries dealing with the radical and 'anti-psychiatric' ideas and methods of figures such as R.D.Laing, David Cooper, Jan Bastiaans, Timothy Leary, and Franco Basaglia. Films analysed include Peter Robinson's Asylum (1972) and Psychiatry and Violence (1973); Ah, Sunflower (Klinkert and Sinclair, 1967); Anatomy of Violence (Davis, 1967); Turn On, Tune In, Drop Out (Robin Clarke, 1967), W. R. - Mysteries of the Organism (Makavejev, 1971); Raymond Depardon's San Clemente (1980) and Urgences (1988); and Louis van Gasteren's trilogy Now Do You Get it Why I am Crying (1969), The Price of Survival (2003), and There is No Plane to Zagreb (2012).
The article concludes with a discussion of Nicolas Philibert's Every Little Thing (1997) within the context of the French documentary tradition and the film's more immediate subject - the famous clinic at La Borde established by Jean Oury, and associated with the methods and theories of figures such as Jacques
Lacan, Francesc Tosquelles, Franz Fanon, and Félix Guattari.
Resumo:
Vieten's edited collection brings together papers that were given at the I M Young Memorial Symposium 'Inclusion and Democracy Revisited', held in Amsterdam in 2012. The different chapters presented explore in-depth, Young's models of a 'politics of cultural difference', and a 'politics of positional difference' read in combination with her critique of normalisation. Young regards the latter as decisive to any change for the better when reaching out politically to a fairer and more just democratic society.
With the current political, economic and socio-cultural crisis in mind, the contemporary world of global speed and transformed societies in and beyond Europe needs a refinement of what we understand 'normalisation' and 'difference' to be. How can we connect to each other, and in what ways can Young's 'structural inequality model' be applied to develop alternative outlooks on how to enhance inclusion and democracy in different nation states?
Resumo:
The year 1916 witnessed two events that would profoundly shape both
politics and commemoration in Ireland over the course of the following
century. Although the Easter Rising and the Battle of the Somme were
important historical events in their own right, their significance also lay
in how they came to be understood as iconic moments in the emergence
of Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. Adopting an interdisciplinary
approach drawing on history, politics, anthropology and cultural
studies, this volume explores how the memory of these two foundational
events has been constructed, mythologised and revised over the course
of the past century. The aim is not merely to understand how the Rising
and Somme came to exert a central place in how the past is viewed in
Ireland, but to explore wider questions about the relationship between
history, commemoration and memory.
Resumo:
This paper explores the law of accidental mixtures of goods. It traces the development of the English rules on mixture from the seminal nineteenth century case of Spence v Union Marine Insurance Co to the present day, and compares their responses to those given by the Roman law, which always has been claimed as an influence on our jurisprudence in this area. It is argued that the different answers given by English and Roman law to essentially the same problems of title result from the differing bases of these legal systems. Roman a priori theory is contrasted with the more practical reasoning of the common law, and while both sets of rules are judged to be coherent on their own terms, it is suggested that the difference between them is reflective of a more general philosophical disagreement about the proper functioning of a legal system, and the relative importance of theoretical and pragmatic considerations.