Transformations in French Anti-Semitism?

The increase in the number of anti-Semitic acts since the start of the Second Intifada has sparked off a broad debate on the return of anti-Semitism in France. This article focuses on the question whether this anti-Semitism is still based on the alleged superiority of the Aryan race as in the time of Nazism, or if it represents the birth of a “new Judeophobia” that is more based on anti-Zionism and the polemical mixing of “Jews,” “Israelis,” and “Zionists.” One supposed effect of this transformation is that anti-Semitism is in the process of changing camps and migrating from the extreme right to the extreme left of the political arena, to the “altermondialistes,” the communists, and the “neo-Trotskyists.” The article provides answers to the following questions: Are anti-Jewish views on the increase in France today? Do these opinions correlate with negative opinions of other minorities, notably Maghrebians and Muslims? Do they tend to develop among voters and sympathizers with the extreme right or on the extreme left of the political spectrum? And how are they related to opinions concerning Zionism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? My evaluation of the transformations in French anti-Semitism relies on two types of data. The first is police and gendarmerie statistics published by the National Consultative Committee on Human Rights (CNCDH), which is charged with presenting the prime minister with an annual report on the struggle against racism and xenophobia in France. The other is data from surveys, notably surveys commissioned by CNCDH for its annual report and surveys conducted at the Center for Political Research (CEVIPOF) at Sciences Po (Paris Institute for Political Research). The data show that anti-Semitic opinions follow a different logic from acts, that the social, cultural, and political profile of anti-Semites remains very close to that of other types of racists, and that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism do not overlap exactly.

Practice Literate Research: Turning the Tables

Researchers complain how difficult it is to get practitioners and policymakers to use research. In contrast, this paper looks at the issues from the perspective of practice, and argues that it is the researcher’s job to become more practice-literate, so that research begins with practice concerns and develops practice-based solutions. The paper explores the relationship between research and practice and suggests that research has insufficiently engaged with the nature of practice and practice knowledge. Using the Salisbury Statement on practice research (Salisbury Statement 2010) the paper offers a definition of practice research and analyses what would be required for an agenda for practice research. Finally the paper proposes five functions for practice research.

The Car Resequencing Problem with Pull-Off Tables

The car sequencing problem determines sequences of different car models launched down a mixed-model assembly line. To avoid work overloads of workforce, car sequencing restricts the maximum occurrence of labor-intensive options, e.g., a sunroof, by applying sequencing rules. We consider this problem in a resequencing context, where a given number of buffers (denoted as pull-off tables) is available for rearranging a stirred sequence. The problem is formalized and suited solution procedures are developed. A lower bound and a dominance rule are introduced which both reduce the running time of our graph approach. Finally, a real-world resequencing setting is investigated.