Democracy

Description With the emergence of social and (potentially) participatory media 2.0 in a period of continued and increasing corporate control of the institutions and instruments of media comes a need to re-evaluate existing paradigms for teaching and learning about the impact and potential of media for democratic processes. The mainstream, corporate-controlled media undoubtedly continue to exert a powerful influence upon the thinking, agenda and actions of students and educators today; what we know, how we know it, and how we understand our identities, power, agency, change and society is (still) shaped or influenced, to varying degrees, by the powerful hegemonic machinations of the mass media. These media are undergoing ruptured transitions of their own, in particular consolidating and downsizing the " fourth estate " of " objective " journalistic news-gathering. At the same time, production-oriented pedagogies in contemporary participatory media 2.0 offer emancipatory opportunities to provide individuals and communities the tools to speak back to power through alternative and social media forms. Democracy requires a functioning, engaged and literate populace, one that can participate and shape, in meaningful and critical ways, the discourses and forms of the society in which it exists. Education for democracy, therefore, requires not only political literacy but also media literacy, given the immersive ubiquity of media and their prolific consumption and use by students and citizens of all ages today. Thus, the focus of this book is to develop frameworks that locate the old and new media in relation to education and democracy, and, particularly, education for democracy. The theoretical core of this volume crosses the fences between Media Studies and Education, both of which cover interdisciplinary and epistemologically diverse spaces and traditions. Media Studies examines a range of issues, concerns, methods, and concepts related to the history, political economy, production, textual properties, reception, influence, and impact of old and new media. The role of Education is fundamental in relation to frameworks of media literacy that support both how we teach and learn about the media and how we produce and disseminate it. Moreover, with, in, through and in conjunction with Education, especially in relation to Education for democracy, formal Education can play an important role in preparing students as citizens and potentially activists to engage with media in a critical way. Thus, this book aims to bring together, in a critical manner, the media, education and democracy, and offers educators, students, researchers, scholars, and others in the media, the government, the non-governmental and other sectors an interwoven and dynamic collection of texts that present both a scholarly and practical resource that will fill the gap in the literature related to the salience of the media as a force for building a more vibrant, inclusive, participatory and counter-hegemonic democracy. Statement of Aims It is virtually impossible to imagine a society or world that is not always already represented through media forms. The popular imaginary is already inhabited by prepackaged soundbites of common sense wisdom derived from hegemonic sources and the mainstream corporate media has long skilfully demonstrated its ability to incorporate and sublimate yesterday's radical or alternative ideas into today's slogans and products. Nonetheless, we have witnessed over the last decade a profound transformation in how and who shapes the media. The emergence and consolidation of Web 2.0 has irrevocably transformed a number of media functions, particularly in relation to news reporting, advertising and music production, and it has opened spaces where anyone with a video camera, a computer and Internet access can become a global changemaker. Activist media in the era of participation have flourished, sometimes resulting in profound new alliances and social change though

This volume analyses the genesis and evolution of movement parties  during the Great Recession. Bridging social science literature on social movements and political parties, it empirically analyses cases such as Podemos, Syriza and the Five Star Movement

A destituição (ou impeachment) da Presidente do Brasil, Dilma Rousseff, foi resultado de um longo e polêmico processo. Por quase dois anos, partidários da Presidente e seus adversários saíram às ruas e foram às mídias sociais para tentar influenciar o processo. Nestas últimas, o ativismo digital de múltiplos atores gerou redes políticas de hashtags contra e a favor da Presidente. Este artigo analisa essas redes a partir de uma base de dados de retuítes que mencionavam hashtags pró e anti-impeachment nos dias 13 e 18 de março de 2016. Os resultados evidenciam o caráter hierárquico das redes, centralizadas em um restrito número de perfis. Estas redes, porém, fazem parte de um complexo conjunto de vínculos virtuais e presenciais, de indivíduos a grupos transnacionais que disputaram os significados do impeachment de Rousseff a partir de diferentes estratégias digitais. Palavras-chave: ativismo digital; Brasil; história política; mobilização política; redes sociais.

Both “populism” and “populist” have long been considered ill-defined terms, and therefore are regularly misapplied in both scholarly and popular discourses.1 This definitional difficulty is exacerbated by the Babelian confusion of voices on populism, where the term’s meaning differs within and between global regions (e.g. Latin America versus Western Europe); time periods (e.g. 1930s versus the present), and classifications (e.g. left/ right, authoritarian/libertarian, pluralist/antipluralist, as well as strains that muddy these distinctions such as homonationalism, xenophobic feminism and multicultural neonationalism). While useful efforts have been made to navigate the vast and heterogeneous conceptual terrain of populism,2 they rarely engage with each other. The result is a dizzying proliferation of different definitions unaccompanied by an understanding as to how they might speak to each other. And this conceptual fragmentation reinforces, and is reinforced by, diverging assessments of populism which tend to cast it as either “good” or “bad” for democracy (e.g. Dzur and Hendriks 2018; Müller 2015).

A VERY SENSIBLE ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY NOW WITH A 200 PAGES BOOK ON THE SUBJECT
BLOOMBERG OPINION, 2019 HARRIS ( K O N S T A N T I N O S ) NOTTAS

It took 70 years to build the interagency process that brought structure and discipline to U.S. leadership. It took less than three years for one man to shred it. Donald Trump's presidency represents a real-time experiment in the durability of the U.S.-led international order-the norms, alliances and other arrangements put into place since World War II that have made this an age of unprecedented global growth and stability. It is equally a test of the national security decision-making process. That system was created in the wake of World War II, as a means of bringing structure and discipline to U.S. policy. It has had its ups and downs over the decades, but has rarely been challenged as severely as during the Trump presidency. So far, Trump's two longest-serving national security advisers-H.R. McMaster and John Bolton-have pursued very different approaches to decision-making under a decidedly undisciplined president. Their experiences show that American presidents ultimately get the decision-making system they want-but not necessarily the one they, and the country, need.
THE BOOK  see separate post
ADVANCE PRAISE FOR HENRY GIROUX’S
AMERICAN NIGHTMARE FACING THE CHALLENGE OF FASCISM
“In frightening times like these, what is desperately needed is an informed and
wise voice that speaks clearly and with conviction about the situation we are in,
and what can be done. Henry Giroux is one of the great public intellectuals of
our times, and American Nightmare is exactly the book for people grappling
with how to understand the Trump era and how to proceed. This is precisely the
book that needs to be shared with friends and acquaintances. It will provoke hard
thinking, bring clarity, and stimulate much-needed conversation and action.”
—Robert W. McChesney, co-author of People Get Ready:
The Fight Against a Jobless Economy and a
Citizenless Democracy
“At a moment when the news cycle presents the dangers of Trumpian
authoritarianism through disjointed and discrete hottakes, Giroux’s wide reaching analysis accounts for our current American nightmare with necessary
historical context, and in so doing creates an aperture for resistance more
meaningful than a hashtag.”
—Natasha Lennard, contributing writer for The Intercept,
co-editor of Violence: Humans in Dark Times
“We have no greater chronicler of these dystopian times. Giroux’s critique cuts
to the crux of today’s authoritarian crisis, yet his voice remains one of hope that
the people may collectively regain control. Even while living though systemic
efforts to privatize hope, Giroux’s critique enacts the sort of shared resistance
that can effectively challenge authoritarianism. American Nightmare
demonstrates how we can resist the normalization of hate, authoritarianism and
alienation in Trump’s America. He shows us that not only are we not alone, but
we are among a majority who oppose the cruelties of American social policies.”
—David H. Price, author of Cold War Anthropology:
The CIA and the Growth of Dual Use Anthropology
“In this passionately argued volume, Henry Giroux, long known for his critical
commentaries on the de-democratization of the U.S.A., on its rising inequ(al)ity
and neoliberal excesses, reflects very thoughtfully on the specter of Trump’s
America: on its violence, cruelty, and incivility, its burgeoning authoritarianism,
its inexorable edging toward a Grave Neo World: in short, a rising specter that
demands to be countered at all cost if the U.S. is to be rescued from itself.”
—John Comaroff, Professor of African and
African American Studies and of Anthropology,
Harvard University