Many incidents in recent American politics appear bizarre when analyzed as policy discussions, but become meaningful political acts if interpreted as efforts in brand management. In particular, viewing voter behavior as a form consumer culture provides some explanation for the popular support enjoyed by the Republican party.
With the world more globalized and fields more interconnected than ever before, there is room for a détente between religion and academia. However, in my experience that has not been the case. In the two countries where I have interacted with and been a part of the academy, it is sometimes very clear that most academics, at least in the social sciences and humanities, tend to view religion with suspicion.
While Democrats are banking on the support of women and trying to make sure that women vote, the left has its own issues with gender that it struggles to deal with. Underneath the surface level performative support for #metoo, however, gender based harassment and discrimination is not only a right wing issue.
Khristie’s sustenance of racism hurts not only themselves and the Tiffanys of the world, but also rolls the clock back and provides an incubator for white supremacy that stunts the growth of all communities—more specifically communities of color, the same supportive communities that will “stick with her” through thick and thin.
While many historians have studied the colonial implications of the medically-theorized relationship between tropical diseases, climate, and racialized bodies, Urmi Engineer Willoughby adds a new dimension to this familiar tale: the vital importance of sugar cane cultivation to the epidemiological history of yellow fever.
Several years ago, during a tenure-track search, I asked two questions – two questions which I ask of every scholar applying for a position with our institution. The first is innocent enough: “How important is racial/ethnic diversity in your scholarship and teaching?” Not surprisingly, all enthusiastically answer in the affirmative. Then I ask my second question: “Which scholars and/or books from racial and ethnic minorities do you include on your syllabus and why?” Here is when the squirming begins, revealing the candidate’s lack of academic rigor.