scholarly journals The Brexit Vote and The Trump Vote: A comparative study of the common trends and factors that led to a populist radical right vote in Britain and the United States

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laëtitia Langlois
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
The United States ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Common Trends ◽  
Populist Radical Right ◽  
The Common

scholarly journals 8.I. Workshop: Populist radical right and health: National policies and global trends

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
The United States ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Health Policies ◽  
National Policies ◽  
Global Trends ◽  
Populist Radical Right ◽  
The Welfare State

Abstract Populist radical right (PRR) parties have been steadily expanding, not only in the number of supporters they gain and the seats they win in governments, but more importantly they have been increasingly elected into governmental coalitions as well as presidential offices. With the prominence of these authoritarian, nationalistic and populist parties, it is often difficult to discern what kind of policies they actually stand for. Particularly with regards to the welfare state and public health, it is not always clear what these parties stand for. At times they call for a reduction of health-related welfare provision, despite the fact that this goes against the will of the “ordinary people”, their core supporters; they often promote radical reductions of welfare benefits among socially excluded groups - usually immigrants, whom are most in need of such services; and finally they often mobilize against evidence-based policies. The purpose of this workshop is to present the PRRs actual involvement in health care and health policies across various countries. As PRR parties increase and develop within but also outside of the European continent it is necessary to keep track of their impact, particularly with regards to health and social policies. Although research surrounding PRR parties has significantly expanded over the last years, their impact on the welfare state and more specifically health policies still remains sparse. This workshop will present findings from the first comprehensive book connecting populist radical right parties with actual health and social policy effects in Europe (Eastern and Western) as well as in the United States. This workshop presents five country cases (Austria, Poland, the Netherlands, the United States) from the book Populist Radical Right and Health: National Policies and Global Trends. All five presentations will address PRR parties or leaders and their influence on health, asking the questions “How influential are PRR parties or leaders when it comes to health policy?” “Do the PRR actually have an impact on policy outcomes?” and “What is the actual impact of the health policies implemented by PRR parties or leaders?” After these five presentations, the participants of the workshop will be engaged in an interactive discussion. Key messages As the number of PRR parties increase worldwide and their involvement in national governments become inevitable, new light must be shed on the impact these political parties have on public health. Politics needs to become better integrated into public health research. The rise of PRR parties in Europe might have serious consequences for public health and needs to be further explored.

Benjamin Henry Latrobe and the nomenclature of two North American fishes

1987 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-88
Author(s):  
CHARLOTTE M PORTER
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
North American ◽  
The United States ◽  
American Shad ◽  
New Name ◽  
The Common ◽  
Fish Louse

A curious error affects the names of three North American clupeids—the Alewife, American Shad, and Menhaden. The Alewife was first described by the British-born American architect, Benjamin Henry Latrobe in 1799, just two years after what is generally acknowledged as the earliest description of any ichthyological species published in the United States. Latrobe also described the ‘fish louse’, the common isopod parasite of the Alewife, with the new name, Oniscus praegustator. Expressing an enthusiasm for American independence typical of his generation, Latrobe humorously proposed the name Clupea tyrannus for the Alewife because the fish, like all tyrants, had parasites or hangers-on.

Rediscovering Blackstone: wpływ Williama Blackstone’a na rozwój amerykańskiej nauki prawa w recepcji Alberta W. Alschulera

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-185
Author(s):  
Edyta Sokalska
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Large Measure ◽  
American Colonies ◽  
Late 18Th Century ◽  
American Law ◽  
The Common

The reception of common law in the United States was stimulated by a very popular and influential treatise Commentaries on the Laws of England by Sir William Blackstone, published in the late 18th century. The work of Blackstone strengthened the continued reception of the common law from the American colonies into the constituent states. Because of the large measure of sovereignty of the states, common law had not exactly developed in the same way in every state. Despite the fact that a single common law was originally exported from England to America, a great variety of factors had led to the development of different common law rules in different states. Albert W. Alschuler from University of Chicago Law School is one of the contemporary American professors of law. The part of his works can be assumed as academic historical-legal narrations, especially those concerning Blackstone: Rediscovering Blackstone and Sir William Blackstone and the Shaping of American Law. Alschuler argues that Blackstone’s Commentaries inspired the evolution of American and British law. He introduces not only the profile of William Blackstone, but also examines to which extent the concepts of Blackstone have become the basis for the development of the American legal thought.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document