Journals Of Opinion Research Articles

LAP at 25

In spring 1970, the Latin American Studies Association approved (367 to 174, with 17 abstentions) a resolution recognizing the need for a journal of opinion in which scholars could analyze contemporary issues in Latin from a variety of viewpoints. During October, the LASA Executive Council approached me about editing a journal of issues on Latin America. My prospectus, dated November 3, 1970, called for a modestly funded journal of Latin American issues with the aim of encouraging Latin Americanists to participate meaningfully and stimulating debate about the place of their professions in society. journal was to be open to questions of pedagogy and to present alternative views and engage in reasoned polemics. Ultimately, the Executive Council declined to fund the new journal on financial grounds, although substantial resources were available for its newsletter and its primary journal, the Latin American Research Review. Next, in an assessment of Latin American studies titled The Latin American Challenge to U.S. Scholarship in Latin America in the newsletter of the Union for Radical Latin Americanists (3[April-May 1973]: 1-4, reprinted in LASA Newsletter 4[June 1973]: 30-34) and in an article with Martin Legassick appraising the African Studies Association titled The Africanist Challenge to American Scholarship in (Africa Today 18 [January 1971]: 4-11), I criticized these organizations for ignoring progressive scholars and intellectuals in Africa and Latin America. LASA had failed to involve Latin Americans in its leadership, and I reported that a group of Latin Americanists on the West Coast had concluded that only a new journal, to be called the Journal of Radical Latin America, would satisfy LASA's radical constituency. Its first issue, it was suggested, might reassess dependency theory, analyze the impact of multinational corporations, or critically review the first years of the Allende government in Chile. These ideas had emanated from a meeting held in early 1973 at my home to review and debate a manuscript critical of dependency and written by Rauil Fernandez and Jose

‘Priestesses’,Playboy, and the Prehistory of Feminist Scholarship inChristianity and CrisisMagazine, 1945–1965

This is a case study of how feminist discourse emerged in a key part of the U.S. Protestant academy. It analyzes howChristianity and Crisis, a leading Protestant journal of opinion, addressed gender and sexuality from the 1940s to the mid-1960s. It relates this discussion toC&C’s larger transformation from a voice of Cold War liberalism in the 1940s to a forum for feminism and various liberation theologies beginning in the 1960s. Before 1965 the main ways thatC&C’s all-male leadership addressed gender were masculinist rhetoric, mild support for women’s ordination; defense of the bourgeois family against perceived challenges, and controversies about sexual representation in the media. AlthoughC&C’s overt attention to gender and its sympathy with feminism were limited, its self-image was based on supporting underdogs against unjust forms of power. AsC&Cembraced ‘contextual’ approaches in the 1960s and debated sexual ethics, it began to conceptualize ‘contexts’ partly in terms of gender systems. All this was pre-feminist, but was in the background when feminism began to force itself onC&Cduring the late 1960s from inside and outside its core constituencies. It meant thatC&Cwas relatively well prepared (compared with most journals of its kind) to incorporate female personnel, define ‘contexts’ from the standpoint of previously neglected female underdogs, and begin rethinking gender and sexuality.

Political periodicals in policy formation

This is an ethnographic report on a conference entitled “The Politics of Publishing” which featured editors and writers from leading magazines and journals of political opinion. The aim of the conference was to articulate the intellectual ground on which each publication is predicated. A further goal of these observations was to seek out a common ground, a consensual series of assumptions, that permits such journals and their leading participants to flourish amidst conflict and opposing viewpoints. The article is less a study of the relationship of knowledge and policy, as such, as much as it is a study of the weaker forms of these terms, namely, information and ideology. These remarks are thus intended as a contribution to the elite impact on mass public opinion at one level, and the cornucopia of political ideas at a somewhat more abstract level.

Extending the Three‐ and Four‐Headed Eagles: The Foreign Policy Orientations of American Elites During the 80s and 90s

With the breakdown of the foreign policy consensus of the Cold War years, there has been a resurgence in examining the beliefs of the public and their role in U.S. foreign policy. The most extensive of these studies has been conducted by Holsti and Rosenau who have found first three and then four competing schools of thought. Our purpose is to build off Holsti and Rosenau's analyses and extend their argument. Research based on the content analysis of foreign policy and national opinion journals from 1980 to 1989 demonstrates that there is more diversity and complexity in the range and content of beliefs held by American leaders than Holsti and Rosenau have yet been able to capture through their “three‐” and “four‐headed eagles.” Although the three‐headed eagle serves as a useful scheme for categorizing the broad foreign policy perspectives of American leaders, it de‐emphasizes important differences in beliefs and ignores at least two foreign policy orientations that exist within their general categories. This is not a mere academic exercise, for it sheds light on the level of diversity and complexity of elite beliefs, which enriches an understanding of the politics of U.S. foreign policy since Vietnam. A preliminary examination of foreign policy and national opinion journals from 1990 to 1994 indicates that American elites are changing and adapting while at the same time, they are absorbing profound global changes into their prevailing belief systems, as predicted by the political psychological literature. This suggests that the diversity and complexity present in the 80s is likely to persist and grow throughout the 90s. Our research also suggests the importance of developing alternative methods to complement reliance on survey research in order to capture more fully the diversity and complexity of the foreign policy beliefs of Americans.

Algae Burgers for a Hungry World? The Rise and Fall of Chlorella Cuisine

Algae Burgers for a Hungry World? The Rise and Fall of Chlorella Cuisine WARREN BELASCO Looking back from an age when “natural” and “traditional” are far more appetizing food adjectives than “synthetic” and “artifi­ cial,” it is hard to understand how anyone could ever have been intrigued by a future where air-conditioned, fully automated “sky­ scraper farms” would raise algae on raw sewage in enclosed ponds and then pipe the protein-rich green “scum” to factories synthesiz­ ing cheap hamburgers and pasta.1 Barely imaginable today, such a prospect seemed quite plausible a few decades ago—and notjust in Popular Mechanics and the science fiction pulps. In fact, for about a decade after World War II the food policy establishment was quite taken with algae. With half the people of the world hungry, global population apparently on a pace to double and then double again in the next hundred years, and farmers already struggling to grow enough food, significant doubts began to emerge about the ability of conventional agriculture to stave off catastrophe. Scientists be­ lieved that they would have to develop radically unorthodox food sources to feed a much more crowded world. Particularly exciting was new research concerning algae—specifically Chlorella pyrenoidosa , a high protein algae that grows rapidly using inexhaustible sunlight and carbon dioxide.2 Dr. Belasc.o teaches American studies at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. He is the author of Appetite for Change: How the Counterculture Took On the Food Industry (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1993). 'Lester Velie, “Food Pumped from Pipelines,” Collier’s, December 1948, pp. 914 ; Arthur James Larsen, “More Food from Sunlight,” Science Digest, September 1952, pp. 39-41. 2Roughly defined as the collective voice of mainstream or “moderate” opinion, the “food policy establishment” of the immediate postwar period consisted mainly of white, upper- and upper-middle-class European-American men who worked at elite universities, think tanks, research-oriented foundations, government agencies, international nonprofit organizations, and the most respected journals of opinion. Few women, nonwhites, or people from what were then called “developing nations” were represented in the trade books, scholarly volumes andjournals, national news-© 1997 by the Society for the History of Technology. All rights reserved. 0040-165X/97/3803-0003$02.00 608 The Rise and Fall of Chlorella Cuisine 609 Algae surfaced as a possible antidote to Malthusian catastrophe in the late 1940s, and through the 1950s it made the short list of “promising” high-tech solutions to the world food crisis. Ambitious pilot projects were sponsored by major research institutions, such as the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the University of California at Berkeley, the Atomic Energy Commission, and Stanford University. Reputable pe­ riodicals such as Scientific American, Scientific Monthly, and Science re­ ported preliminary results, while Nobel laureates and highly re­ garded leaders of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard University, the University of Wisconsin, the Food and Agri­ culture Organization (FAO), the American Chemical Society, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) cheered the researchers from the sidelines and urged Manhattan Project-scale funding.* I * 3 Enthusiasm flagged in the late 1950s, however, when analysts raised doubts about the economic viability of a mass-marketed chlo­ rella cuisine. In the 1960s interest revived, driven by two high-cost markets that had little to do with feeding a hungry world: the space program and the health food industry. In the 1970s space funding declined too, leaving chlorella mainly in the hands of health food marketers selling pricey nutritional supplements to an affluent sub­ culture. What happened? How could so many well-regarded experts be­ come so enthusiastic about so improbable a solution to a crucial global problem? How could they be so wrong? Was the rise and fall of chlorella cuisine a mere historical oddity, or does it remain today papers and magazines, conference proceedings, white papers, agency reports, and yearbooks that aired the discourse of this establishment and that are the primary sources for this article. These sources are now accessible through the major periodi­ cal and newspaper guides, as well as the catalog of the Library of Congress, where I did all the...

Editorship of ISSUE: A Journal of Opinion

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Editorship of ISSUE: A Journal of Opinion

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

The composition course and public discourse: The case of Adams Sherman Hill, popular culture, and cultural inoculation

American intellectuals and educators are dismayed by crisis in public discourse. With Jurgen Habermas and others, they worry over of public sphere and a degeneration in rational-critical debate. Cultural critics often contrast contemporary public discourse with what seems to be America's golden age of public discussion: nineteenth-century America, before culture industry or late capitalism, before professionalism, before TV, before mass media or multimedia.1 The usual suspect is modern communications technologies, specifically TV. According to Neil Postman, we should deeply lament the decline of Age of Typography and ascendancy of Age of Television (8). Televisual media, he argues, has eroded public's span and shriveled its capacity for rational thought. Looking to Lincoln-Douglas debates, he maintains that Americans' verbal facility and attention span would obviously have been extraordinary by current standards (45). The citizenry has declined, he argues, because citizens watch TV and no longer read: almost every scholar . . . has concluded that process [of reading] encourages rationality, while televisual logic short-circuits rational thought in favor of slogans, images, mere stories-in short, entertainment.2 The late Christopher Lasch, in The Revolt of Elites, blames not only television for making argument a lost art but also undemocratic leanings of intellectuals and academics. How far we have fallen, he argues, from Golden Years of nineteenth century, when serious public argument was practiced by both citizenry and media. In those days newspapers (Lasch singles out Horace Greeley's New York Tribune) were journals of opinion in which reader expected to find a definite point of view, together with unrelenting criticism of opposing points of view (163). The beginning of decline (the nadir of which he hopes we are presently experiencing) began in progressive era, when intellectual leaders preached 'scientific management' of public affairs.... They forged links between government and university so as to assure a steady supply of experts and expert knowledge. But they had little use for public debate (167). Academics and

Morality and the State, Law and Legalism

tutional candidates has been left to the law to fill. The churches are either too sectarian or too morally bland, the universities too caught up in professionalism or culture wars, the journals of opinion tiresomely focussed on the religious right (the left) or assaulting politically correct liberals (the right), and political life reduced during this campaign year to nasty negative attacks on anything and everyone. That leaves the law. It is relatively free of scandal, still generally respected, national and relatively uniform in its scope, and ready to take on ethics if that is what gets served up to it for the making of decisions. It may be the best institution we have, but it is a poor substitute for moral consensus and public debate on ethics. U

The Left and the Right

Ohio libraries are examined for ownership of liberal-leftist, conservative-rightist, and alternative journals of opinion. In addition, samples were drawn from Magazines for Libraries and Standard Periodical Directory to compare holding patterns of all varieties of serials with the political samples. Both OCLC searches and examination of periodical lists from fifty-two public libraries found no evidence of political bias among these institutions, but that such materials appear in limited numbers among Ohio libraries. This article is a follow-up to an earlier piece appearing in Collection Management, 14(112) 1991.

Locked in Conversation:

No abstract available for this article.

The Left and the Right

Ohio libraries are examined for ownership of liberal-leftist, conservative-rightist, and alternative journals of opinion. In addition, samples were drawn from Magazines for Libraries and Standard Periodical Directory to compare holding patterns of all varieties of serials with the political samples. Both OCLC searches and examination of periodical lists from fifty-two public libraries found no evidence of political bias among these institutions, but that such materials appear in limited numbers among Ohio libraries. This article is a follow-up to an earlier piece appearing in Collection Management, 14(112) 1991.

Liberals and conservatives

Ken Inglis (ed.), Nation, the Life of an Independent Journal of Opinion, 1958–1972, Melbourne University Press, Carlton, 1989, $24.95; D.A. Kemp, Foundations for Australian Political Analysis: Politics and Authority, Oxford University Press, Melbourne, 1988, $29.95.

Some Hard Choices to Be Made

Previous articleNext article No AccessSymposium: World Bank Report on Education in Sub-Saharan AfricaSome Hard Choices to Be MadePhilip FosterPhilip Foster Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Comparative Education Review Volume 33, Number 1Feb., 1989Special Issue on Africa Sponsored by the Comparative and International Education Society Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/446816 Views: 4Total views on this site Citations: 4Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1988 The Comparative and International Education SocietyPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:NELLY STROMQUIST Comparative and International Education: A Journey toward Equality and Equity, Harvard Educational Review 75, no.11 (Apr 2005): 89–111.https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.75.1.4842626v0r385j12Jo Arthur Code switching and collusion: Classroom interaction in Botswana primary schools, Linguistics and Education 8, no.11 (Jan 1996): 17–33.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(96)90004-2Jerry Komia Domatob Policy Issues for African Universities, Issue: A Journal of Opinion 24, no.11 (May 2016): 29–34.https://doi.org/10.1017/S1548450500004923Jerry Komia Domatob Policy Issues for African Universities, Issue: A Journal of Opinion 24, no.11 (Aug 2021): 29–35.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047160700502145

Arcana Poli: A Journal of Commentary and Opinion, 1(1), July 1988. A. Cooke (editor).

Arcana Poli: A Journal of Commentary and Opinion, 1(1), July 1988. A. Cooke (editor).

Southern Liberal Journalists and the Issue of Race, 1920-1944.

Before the Civil Rights movement, southern liberal journalists played a crucial role in shaping southern thought on race and racism. John Kneebone presents a richly detailed intellectual history of southern racial liberalism between World War I and World War II by examining the works of five leading southern journalists -- Gerald W. Johnson, Baltimore Evening Sun; George Fort Milton, Chattanooga News; Virginius Dabney, Richmond Times-Dispatch; Hodding Carter, Greenville (Miss.) Delta Democrat-Times; and Ralph McGill, Atlanta Constitution.The South's leading liberal journalists came from varied backgrounds and lived in different regions of the South, but all had one characteristic in common: as public advocates of southern liberalism, each spoke as a southerner with deep roots in the southern past. Yet their editorials were not intended solely for local audiences; they wrote essays for national and regional journals of opinion as well, and each of these men published important books on the South and its history. Through their writings, they gained reputations throughout the country as articulate spokesmen for southern liberalism.Their essays, editorials, books, and letters provide rich and abundant sources for studying the changing patterns of southern liberal thought in the critical years from the 1920s to the 1940s. Moreover, these journalists were members of southern liberal organizations -- Will W. Alexander's Commission on Interracial Cooperation, the Southern Commission on the Study of Lynching, the Southern Policy Committee, the Southern Conference for Human Welfare, and the Southern Regional Council -- and so they helped devise the reform programs that they in turn publicized.While they believed that social and economic change in the modern South required reform of race relations, the journalists felt that these reforms could be accommodated within the framework of racial segregation. The protests of blacks against segregation during World War II challenged that way of thinking and created a crisis for southern liberals. Kneebone analyzes this crisis and the disconnection between the southern liberalism of the 1920s and 1930s and the Civil Rights movement.Originally published in 1985.A UNC Press Enduring Edition -- UNC Press Enduring Editions use the latest in digital technology to make available again books from our distinguished backlist that were previously out of print. These editions are published unaltered from the original, and are presented in affordable paperback formats, bringing readers both historical and cultural value.

Exchange Rates: Government, Moral, or Market Order

Discussions of international asset exchanges and capital flows occur in real world of institutional, political and hence moral settings. International trade and exchange rates are for the people affected quite specific, particular constraints. And the result of the con straints are, in effect, different for different actors. This particularistic view is not usually stressed in policy discussions. A good example is found in recent issue of Challenge (Jan.-Feb. 1986), an influen tial American liberal journal of economic opinion. Robert Trifiin and Lewis E. Lehrman engaged in kind of on the issue of exchange rates. We say a kind of debate because in the articles, Triffin and Lehrman presented their arguments without reference to each other. In reading the two pieces, we were not surprised to see Triffin and Lehrman repeat generalized positions which represent currently held views of other protagonists. Trimn, one of the imposing figures of international economic analysis, repeated his previous calls for government intervention and collusion, or in short government order. Lehrman, better known as conservative politician, attempted to place the contentious issues in setting of almost moral order.1 Yet the particularistic nature of the effectiveness of policy and program, we feel, is an essential ingredient of policy for it is undertaken to influence the course of events, global concept, by influencing individual actors. Both writers, we feel, tend to treat policy as somehow directly affecting classes of economic actors rather than individually situated actors whose reactions to policy create the class reaction. The significance of the particulars of time and place are generally played down in economic analysis and prognosis.

A new journal

Sooner or later, the decisions that determine our survival must be endorsed by the American electorate. In this critical but noisy process, science can play many roles. It can, for all practical purposes, be absent as an effective influence, or it can be reduced to the presentation of technical testimony that trivializes the role of science. It can be muffled, confused, and naive—or, it can make itself heard on the side of sanity and wisdom. Unfortunately, the lesser alternatives are likely to prevail unless science as an institution seizes the initiative in changing its unwritten contract with the rest of us. So writes Daniel Yankelovich in the final paragraph of the lead essay in the first edition of Issues in Science and Technology , a brand new quarterly journal of opinion published by the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. This unwritten contract between science and the public ...

Politics, Markets and Rationalistic Imbroglios

A muddy pool, it is said, can pretend to any depth, an observation applicable to much of the revisionist liberalism now widespread in the academy. Unable for ideological or prudential reasons to accept, say, a conservative, classically liberal, or Marxist critique of modern society, but increasingly uncomfortable with the failure, as it is viewed, of bourgeois democracy, neoliberal system-builders have sought a synthesis of the “best” elements of socialist economics (yielding equality) and market relations (efficiency) within a “genuinely” democratic framework. The publication of Charles E. Lindblom's Politics and Markets is as an important auspice of this trend. Recipient of the American Political Science Association's most prestigious book award and laudatory comment in the journals of opinion, the volume has also sparked reaction in business circles, as in the Mobil Oil advertisement which took issue with Lindblom's analysis of big business' “privileged position” in the governance of the world's polyarchies (i.e., the “crippled” democracies of North America, Western Europe, Japan and related systems).

Nonspatial Candidate Characteristics and Electoral Competition

BASIC TO MODELS of electoral competition is the assumption that candidates adopt positions on policy issues as a means of attracting votes. However, candidates are also judged on the basis of human qualities and other attributes not related to the policies they espouse in a campaign. The spatial theory of electoral competition has, in the past, treated such attributes as part of the policy space over which candidates compete. However, certain difficulties attend such an interpretation. For example, it is difficult to view a candidate's personality as something which can be altered to please the voters. The mistakes that an incumbent has committed in office are not things he can erase to compete more effectively for votes. A candidate's religion cannot be abandoned because it is a political liability. In short, there are nonspatial attributes that affect voter evaluations of each candidate, which are beyond that candidate's immediate control. It is the purpose of this paper to incorporate these nonspatial attributes into the spatial model of electoral competition to show how the policy outcome of two candidate electoral competition is af-