Conflict In America Research Articles

Review of Fighting Better: Constructive Conflicts in America

Review of Fighting Better: Constructive Conflicts in America

Learning One's Native Tongue: Citizenship, Contestation, and Conflict in America

Learning One's Native Tongue: Citizenship, Contestation, and Conflict in America

Learning One’s Native Tongue: Citizenship, Contestation, and Conflict in America

Learning One’s Native Tongue: Citizenship, Contestation, and Conflict in America

The development of acurrent events and dialogue forum at alarge U.S. academic medical center.

The Vanderbilt Community Circle (VC2) was designed to provide all faculty, staff, and students within the entire Vanderbilt University Medical Center community adedicated venue to discuss current events and ongoing societal issues. During the 2017-18 academic year, four VC2 events were held on: "Race, identity, and conflict in America," "Gun violence in America," "Gender in the workplace," and "Immigration in America." Facilitators guided participants to share their views and perspectives on these matters with pre-developed open-ended questions. Attendees started discussions in small groups and then eventually combined into alarge one. Pre- and post-event surveys were administered to measure the program's effectiveness. One-hundred and twenty-four participants were included, 75 of whom completed both the pre- and post-event surveys. Sixty-four of the 75 (85%) agreed or strongly agreed that "multiple perspectives and opinions were represented" and 73% felt that their "own perspective was broadened on the issue." Most (89%) believed that the format and setting of the event was conducive to dialogue and discussion, and almost all (91%) reported that they would attend asimilar event in the future. Groningen Reflection Ability Scale scores were high before (94 [25th-75th: 88-99]) and remained high after the events (93 [25th-75th: 88-93.3], p > 0.05). We successfully implemented amedical center-wide, recurring current events and dialogue forum in hopes of increasing reflection, unity, and understanding across our own community.

Tracy B. Strong: Learning One's Native Tongue: Citizenship, Contestation, and Conflict in America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019. Pp. xii, 329.)

Tracy B. Strong: Learning One's Native Tongue: Citizenship, Contestation, and Conflict in America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019. Pp. xii, 329.)

Progress and Protest in Late Nineteenth- and Early Twentieth-Century Presbyterianism

This Article Surveys The Presbyterian Conflict In America At The Turn Of The Twentieth Century, Which Was Marked By A Drive For Progress And A Reaction Of Protest. After Setting Up The Historical Context, It Looks At “progress” In Action, Theology, Preaching, And Presidents. It Then Focuses On The Protest Of J. Gresham Machen, Who Was Engaged In Church Debates And Publications (e.g., Christianity And Liberalism) And Who, In Response To Progressive Theology, Founded Westminster Theological Seminary, An Independent Mission Board, And A New Denomination. It Concludes With Observations About The Continuing Witness Of Westminster Seminary. KEYWORDS: Social Gospel, Progressive Theology, Presbyterian Conflict, Woodrow Wilson, Auburn Affirmation, J. Gresham Machen, Westminster Theological Seminary, Theological Education, Mission, Westminster Confession Of Faith

Racism in Harper Lee’s To Kill A Mockingbird

This article presents Harper Lee’s concern on racism reflected in the novel To Kill A Mockingbird. This research aims to scrutinize the view point of the main character – Scout – about racism. There are two problems to discuss: first, the society’s influence to the development of racism, and second, the social relation between Whites and Blacks. The discussion is begun with the description of the social conflict in America in 1930s at a glance using habitus theory and symbolic violence by Pierre Bourdieu. Habitus theory is used to analyze the influence of society to the emergence of racism, and the symbolic violence is used to highlight the social relation of whites and blacks. The analysis is conducted by applying library research method to collect information and data related to the discussion. After finishing the research, the writers find that the social condition in 1930s supported the growth of racism in Southern part of the USA. The great depression in economic field also made racism grew faster. Consequently, the blacks became the victims of white prejudice and discrimination.

Reconsidering Palmer v Thompson

Reconsidering Palmer <scp>v</scp> Thompson

LAS EMOCIONES EN EL PROCESO DE PAZ COLOMBIANO

El conflicto armado colombiano es el conflicto más prolongado de América. En Septiembre de 2016 se firmó el primer Acuerdo de Paz entre el Gobierno de Juan Manuel Santos y las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC). Con la finalidad de refrendar el Acuerdo de Paz por todos los colombianos, el Presidente Santos convocó un Plebiscito el pasado 02 de Octubre de 2016. El acuerdo no fue avalado por el 50,22% de los colombianos, pero el gran ganador de la jornada fue la abstención que alcanzó el 62%. En la actualidad, no existe consenso sobre las causas del conflicto armado, ni tampoco sobre los posibles caminos para la paz, razón por la cual el país está dividido sobre las posibilidades del dialogo. La falta de consensos alrededor del proceso de paz, unido al desconocimiento y a la incertidumbre que provocaron los diálogos con las FARC, generó que la discusión política se caracterizara por falta de argumentos o explicaciones claras sobre los puntos a favor y en contra del proceso, lo que fue evidente en las pasadas elecciones presidenciales de 2014 y en el plebiscito por la paz, en donde las campañas se concentraron más en los sentimientos de esperanza y miedo que genera el tema de la paz, sin realizar mayores discusiones sobre los principales temas del proceso. En medio de campañas políticas que priorizan las emociones antes que los argumentos racionales, ¿Cómo podemos construir caminos de paz que ayuden a la reconciliación entre los diversos actores del conflicto?

Sources of Conflict in a Divided America

The Sixties and early Seventies were a time of great conflict in America, including the assassinations of JFK, MLK, and RFK; the civil rights movement; the Vietnam War and our invasion of Cambodia; and Watergate and Nixon’s forced resignation. Today we seem to be in another period of great conflict, including nationally about the 2016 presidential campaigns and election, and locally about our state’s efforts to control federal public lands. This blog post discusses sources of current conflict in a divided America.

Upper Class Bias and Class Conflict in America

AbstractCompared to other affluent democracies, class conflict has not been very intense nor as much of an organizing principle in American politics. However, as wages stagnate for the working class and economic inequality grows, class conflict is becoming increasingly salient. Yet, reviewing recent political science studies, I argue that rather than politics becoming a clearer class “war” between the upper and lower classes, the growing class bias in political mobilization and participation, and the resulting overrepresentation of upper class actors, has prevented a clear articulation of lower class interests

At the nexus of big data and dispute resolution

This paper presents findings from an ongoing project that has analysed over 225 million annual online conflict-related search queries to better understand the scope and scale of conflict in America. The frequency, location, sentimentality and timing of 52,203 unique conflict search terms were monitored for every US county. Analysis has revealed the public’s collective interests and conflict intensities within 225 distinct conflict contexts, many of which have cyclical trends that can inform resource development and deployment efforts. It has allowed for the creation of maps detailing where conflict arrests or avoids local populations. Finally, it has revealed new insights into how the public prioritises frames for their conflicts and their preferred resolutions. Creative integration of traditional and previously unaligned data, such as presented here, will change the dispute resolution field with regard to its understanding of the dispute resolution marketplace, the surfacing of opportunities to satisfy that market, and the ability to monitor the resulting impact of interventions from the personal to broad societal levels.

The Press Can Make a Difference

With the recent observation of the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day (a national holiday) and on the eve of Black History Month 2014, it is important note that Dr. King, the major Civil rights leader of his era, once termed the racial conflict in America as struggle between the forces of good and evil. It is also important note that said conflict was (at least in part) addressed and challenged by the press in America. During the movement, many black and white Americans spoke out against racial injustice and rallied erase the evils of racism and segregation. Harry Golden, a journalist and author, was one such person. As a northern Jew transplanted the South, Golden witnessed the suffering and cruelty inflicted upon blacks by southern whites and empathized with the embattled blacks. Golden, a champion of civil rights, urged the deliverance of black Americans from the evil of racism and the wrong of segregation. His advocacy of civil rights exemplified the zeal with which some segments of the press not only covered but facilitated the civil rights movement. Golden's experience with race relations in Charlotte, North Carolina led him believe that southern whites put all their efforts into denying humanity Negroes, depriving and dehumanizing them because of their color. As a result of his insight into southern race relations, he foresaw a revolution which he believed the major southern daily newspapers, all owned by whites, would downplay because to report this story meant describing the lot of the Negro. To forestall this eventuality, during the 1950s and 1960s Golden editorialized in his newspaper, the Carolina Israelite. He also wrote books, wrote articles for other newspapers and magazines, and made personal and television appearances. He utilized these outlets foster better understanding and relations between black and white Americans. With the tools of his outspoken views and satiric humor, Golden wrote about the struggle for black civil rights by vividly illustrating the absurdity of racism and the ludicrous nature of segregationist traditions and policies.

Political conflict in America

Political conflict in America

Reflections on Leadership

Last year I read Partners in Command, a book by Mark Perry. It is an account of the unique relationship between General Dwight D. Eisenhower and General George Marshall, and how they played a significant role in the American victory in World War II and laid the foundations for future success in the earliest years of the Cold War. Eisenhower and Marshall are, of course, icons, legends etched in granite. Their portraits hang in my office. One of the things I found compelling in Partners in Command is how they were both influenced by another senior Army officer who is not nearly as well-known and in fact, as a reader of history, I had never heard of. His name is General Fox Conner, a tutor and mentor to both Eisenhower and Marshall. Conner and Marshall first became friends when they served together on the staff of General Black Jack Pershing during World War I. In the 1920s, Eisenhower served as staff assistant under Brigadier General Conner in the Panama Canal Zone. Three Axioms From Conner, Marshall and Eisenhower learned much about leadership and the conduct of war. Conner had three principles of war for a democracy that he imparted to Eisenhower and Marshall. They were: * fight unless you have * fight alone. * And never fight for long. All things being equal, these principles are pretty straightforward and strategically sound. We have heard variants of them in the decades since, captured perhaps most recently in the Powell Doctrine. Of course, all things are not equal, particularly considering the range and complexity of the threats facing America today, from the wars we are currently in to the conflicts we are most likely to fight. So I would like to suggest how we should think about applying Fox Conner's three axioms to the security challenges of the twenty-first century. Never fight unless you have to. That one should only go to war as a last resort has long been a principle of civilized people. We know its horrors and costs. War is, by its nature, unpredictable and uncontrollable. Winston Churchill wrote in January 1942: Let us learn our lessons. Never, never believe that any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter.... Once the signal is given, the statesman is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events. In a dictatorship, the government can force the population to fall in behind the war effort, at least for a time. The nature of democracy, however, limits a country's ability to wage war, and that is not necessarily a bad thing. Indeed with perhaps the exception of World War II, every conflict in America's history has been divisive and controversial here at home. Contrary to what General George Patton said in his pep talks, most real Americans do not like to fight. Consider the conflicts today. Afghanistan is widely viewed as a war of necessity--striking back at the staging ground of the perpetrators of the September 11th attack. The Iraq campaign, while justified in my view, is viewed differently by many people. In testimony in front of the Congress on the Iraq war, I observed that we were attacked at home in 2001 from Afghanistan. We are at war in Afghanistan today, in no small measure, because we mistakenly turned our backs on Afghanistan after the Soviet forces left in the late 1980s. We made a strategic mistake in the end game of that war. If we get the end game wrong in Iraq, I told the Congress, the consequences will be far worse. Truth to tell, it is a hard sell to say we must sustain the fight in Iraq right now and continue to absorb the high financial and human cost of the struggle, in order to avoid an even uglier fight or even greater danger to our country in the future. We have Afghanistan to remind us that these are not just hypothetical risks. …

Christianity, Literature, and Cultural Conflict in America

The purpose of my paper is to raise and to address this question: What can Americans learn from Christianity and literature about encountering differing cultures and, if something can be learned, how seriously should it be taken? I shall begin by turning attention to an ancient short story, one that has few rivals in terms of the narrative craft it displays, that found its permanent textual home among the many stories that make up the book of Genesis: namely, the story of Joseph. I need not rehearse the story; indeed, one reason for turning to it is that I can count on your acquaintance with it. It is part of American culture. I want to point out a couple of things in it that are relevant to our question and its answer. First, no greater cultural differences could be drawn than those between the sons of Jacob who come to Egypt and the culture that they encounter there. The culture of Jacob and his sons is, among other things, pastoral, migratory, tribal; the culture of Egypt is agricultural, urban, and cosmopolitan. On top of that, of course, are the religious differences between the two cultures, worship of what historians of religion call a sky god and worship of deities associated in Egypt with monarchy and with the cycles of fertility. The spatial contrast that structures the story derives content from these cultural / religious differences. The configuration of the story's events and actions, its plot, gives us the rise of Joseph from captive and slave to a person of prestige and power. What may go unrecognized, in the face of this gripping plot, elaborated as it is by the arrival of Joseph's brothers into Egypt and encountering there a Joseph they do not recognize, is how the story handles the difference, even conflict, between the two cultures that structure the story spatially, namely, the culture of the children of Abraham and the culture of Egypt. There are two responses to cultural conflicts that the story rejects by way of affirming a third response. One rejected option is to have had Joseph respond to his new cultural environment with revulsion and disdain. Recognizing his own culture and religious identity as different from that of his captors, he could have removed himself, if only psychologically, from his environment, identifying himself by means of opposition. The second rejected option would be to have Joseph conclude that life in Egypt offers benefits that make everything back home look grim. These contrary responses are alike in that both solve the problem of difference by rejecting one side or the other, and the story implies that both answers should be avoided. It would, by the way, be a simpler, clearer story if Joseph had chosen one or the other of these options, a rejection of Egyptian culture or a rejection of the religion and culture of his family. The third option is not chosen, then, because it is an easier or clearer answer than the other two. Indeed, it is the most complex and elusive of the three. In his difficult position between two very different cultures, Joseph becomes a good citizen of Egypt. He takes an interest in people he meets, promotes the well-being of the society, and rises within Egypt's political structure to a prestigious office. Indeed, he does this so well and becomes so fully implicated in his cultural, political, and economic context, that he loses much of his identity; his brothers, even in conversation with him, have no clue about who he is. However--and this is just as important--he never forgets, despite his success and the injuries he suffered in his family of origin, that he is a full member of the family. His actions, upon the appearance of his brothers in Egypt, are designed above all to create conditions that allow for reintegration with his family. Joseph thereby becomes what the sociologist Everett Stonequist refers to as a marginal person, a person, that is, who has an identity that combines differing cultures. Fully related to neither culture, Joseph is a product of both. …

American Religion: Will it Heal or Divide the Nation?

During the first two-thirds of the twentieth century, most American sociologists ignored religion. All this changed in the late 1970s with the cultural and political (though per haps not numeric) rise of conservative Amer ican religion. As religion reappeared on the radar screens of American sociologists, two somewhat contradictory lines of inquiry emerged, one wary and one hopeful. The wary perspective sees religion, espe cially certain types of religion, and differ ences between religious groups, as a re emerging source of conflict and potential vi olence in America. Will newly strident and more demanding religious groups increasing ly come into conflict with the nation's demo cratic ideals, especially if some of these groups find government the people less compelling than doing God's will as they un derstand it? Framing the issues somewhat dif ferently, Hunter (1991) argues that America is experiencing a new culture war between orthodox and progressive factions with peo ple on both sides motivated by strong reli gious, or at least moral, convictions. Divi sions between religious groups have long been a source of conflict in America, espe cially conflicts between Protestants, Catho lics, and Jews, but as Herberg (1960) notes, these groups seemed to have reached a de tente in the late 1950s. Since then, however, the religious landscape has changed. Large numbers of Muslims, Hindus, and other non Christian immigrants have come to America, many from non-Western nations. For a brief time following 9/11, some Americans wor ried that a few of these new immigrants might be religious fundamentalists of the type that carried out the attacks. Although these concerns seem to have subsided some what, Americans' suspicions and general lack of knowledge about the new immigrants' be liefs and values could be a recipe for misun derstanding and violence. A second, more hopeful, strand in recent sociological thinking about American religion emerged in the last part of the twentieth cen tury. This line of thought goes back at least Congregations in America, by Mark Chaves. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004. 291 pp. $29.95 cloth. ISBN: 0674012844.

The Pacific campaign in World War II: from Pearl Harbor to Guadalcanal

This is a fascinating new account of how diplomacy and politics gave way to military strategy and warfare in the Pacific. Presenting previously unpublished photographs, interviews with veterans, newly commissioned maps and new translations of Japanese sources, this book freshly examines the key events in the fight for the Pacific. Detailing the background to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor it shows how the decision-makers in Washington, following consultation with the leaders of Britain, Australia and New Zealand, moved to stop Japan from its drive toward Australia by initiating a counterthrust in the Solomon Islands. It also shows how qualities and character of leadership are crucial to winning wars, detailing how Admiral Ernest J. King managed to commit the Marine Corps to ground action in the South Pacific six months earlier than originally planned, by ignoring the Roosevelt’s commitment to defeat Germany prior to fighting Japan, and by outmaneuvering Gen. Douglas MacArthur for leadership. It also explains how Marines under Maj. Gen. A.A. Vandegrift, despite inadequate logistical support, managed to prevail in the Americans’ first ground campaign of World War II, making Japan’s ultimate defeat inevitable. In addition to recounting these key events, it traces how censorship and patriotism influenced the reporting of the conflict in America, how Hollywood films further shaped public opinion by portraying the significant events in particular ways, and how certain crucial decisions such as the early bombing raid of Tokyo, and giving Douglas MacArthur command of the war effort in Australia, were political rather than strategic, and were made to foster morale rather than to gain any military advantage. This book will be of great interest to all students and scholars of Military History, and to all readers with a general interest in World War II, particularly in the conflicts of the Pacific, Pearl Harbor and Guadalcanal.

Contesting Tradition: The Deep Play and Protest of Pigeon Shoots

Abstract Pigeon shoots are examples of "contested traditions" that invite comparison with other controversial spectacles of killing animals, such as cockfights and dogfights. In the United States during the late twentieth century, mass protests of America’s largest public pigeon shoot occurred in Hegins, Pennsylvania. This article offers a folkloristic perspective on the contested tradition by analyzing how the protest rhetorically served to present tradition as a "problem" in the ethical modernization of society. The clash between animal rights protestors and supporters of the shoot became a moral drama based on a clash of rural and cosmopolitan values in modern America that derives from fundamentally different views of human dominion over the land and its creatures. The interpretation of the event hinges on a semiotic layering that takes into ethnographic consideration the different meanings of symbols for various participants in the event. Compromise became impossible in controversies over pigeon shoots because the sides perceived symbols so differently. For protestors, the shooters represented predatory, phallocentric rapists who promoted violence for its own sake, whereas, for supporters, they symbolized a pioneer and biblical heritage based on human dominion over the bountiful land. For protestors, the process of the ritualized shoot perpetuated cycles of abuse and patriarchy; for protestors, it acted to regenerate the land, confirming the wholesomeness of agrarianism. The pigeons could be symbolized as profane, dirty pests or sacred doves of peace. The widely publicized controversy implied larger questions, and fundamental conflicts in America, about the role of tradition in modernity.

Contesting Tradition: The Deep Play and Protest of Pigeon Shoots

Pigeon shoots are examples of "contested traditions" that invite comparison with other controversial spectacles of killing animals, such as cockfights and dogfights. In the United States during the late twentieth century, mass protests of America's largest public pigeon shoot occurred in Hegins, Pennsylvania. This article offers a folkloristic perspective on the contested tradition by analyzing how the protest rhetorically served to present tradition as a "problem" in the ethical modernization of society. The clash between animal rights protestors and supporters of the shoot became a moral drama based on a clash of rural and cosmopolitan values in modern America that derives from fundamentally different views of human dominion over the land and its creatures. The interpretation of the event hinges on a semiotic layering that takes into ethnographic consideration the different meanings of symbols for various participants in the event. Compromise became impossible in controversies over pigeon shoots because the sides perceived symbols so differently. For protestors, the shooters represented predatory, phallocentric rapists who promoted violence for its own sake, whereas, for supporters, they symbolized a pioneer and biblical heritage based on human dominion over the bountiful land. For protestors, the process of the ritualized shoot perpetuated cycles of abuse and patriarchy; for protestors, it acted to regenerate the land, confirming the wholesomeness of agrarianism. The pigeons could be symbolized as profane, dirty pests or sacred doves of peace. The widely publicized controversy implied larger questions, and fundamental conflicts in America, about the role of tradition in modernity.