scholarly journals Editor’s Corner

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
Laura Sare
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Government Information ◽  
Government Documents ◽  
The Government

Howdy everyone! My name is Laura Sare and I am the Government Information Librarian at Texas A&M University and your new DttP editor. I am looking forward to working with everyone to provide great articles about government information.A little background about me, I have been working in the government information field for nineteen years now. I fell in love with government documents while working on my History thesis, which is when I discovered the State Department’s Foreign Relations of the United States—this is still my favorite federal publication.

Current Neutrality Problems—Some Precedents, an Appraisal, and a Draft Statute

1935 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 1022-1041
Author(s):  
Phillips Bradley
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
State Department ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Senate Committee ◽  
Draft Statute ◽  
The Government ◽  
First Session

The first session of the Seventy-fourth Congress saw the introduction of at least half a dozen measures dealing with the policy of the government toward belligerents in a war in which the United States is not a party. The President announced his interest in the problem, and the State Department was concerned with drafting legislation which was discussed with the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. The question will undoubtedly again be before the Congress at its next session.

scholarly journals Warlords, the United States, and the state of anarchy in Afghanistan

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Shah Azami
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Building ◽  
The State ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Illegal Mining ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Impact

As part of its “War on Terror”, the United States (US) provided immense sums of money and advanced equipment to Afghan warlords in order to defeat and dismantle the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Nearly two decades after the 2001 US-led intervention in Afghanistan that toppled the Taliban regime, the US continues supporting the warlords in various ways. As the intervention was also aimed at establishing a functioning state and reconstruction of the war-torn country, the US needed the support of local warlords to achieve its goals. However, over time, warlords and warlordism became a major challenge to the postTaliban state-building project and in many ways undermined the overall security and the state monopoly on violence. These warlords, who had been mostly expelled and defeated by the Taliban regime, returned under the aegis of the B52 bombers, recaptured parts of the country and reestablished their fiefdoms with US support and resources. They not only resist giving up the power and prestige they have accumulated over the past few years, but also hamper the effort to improve governance and enact necessary reforms in the country. In addition, many of them run their private militias and have been accused of serious human rights abuses as well as drug trafficking, arms smuggling, illegal mining and extortion in the areas under their control or influence. In many ways, they challenge the government authority and have become a major hurdle to the country’s emerging from lawlessness and anarchy. This paper explores the emergence and reemergence of warlords in Afghanistan as well as the evolution of chaos and anarchy in the country, especially after the US-led intervention of late 2001. It also analyzes the impact of the post-9/11 US support to Afghan warlords and its negative consequences for the overall stability and the US-led state-building process in Afghanistan.

The Final Stage of the Minority Revolution in the United States. Upward Mobility of Minorities to the Corridors of Power

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2-1) ◽  
pp. 62-91
Author(s):  
Irina Zhezhko-Braun ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social Institutions ◽  
Electoral System ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Elite ◽  
The Political ◽  
Protest Movements ◽  
Electoral Laws ◽  
The Government

This article is the third and final in a series dealing with the birth of a new political elite in the United States, the minority elite. In previous articles, the mechanism of its appearance was analyzed, as well as its ideology, goals, program and values. The black movement, as the most co-organized of all protest movements, is entering the final phase of its development, being engaged in the placement of its representatives in state and federal governments, political parties and other social institutions. The women’s movement has recently been taken over by ethnic movements, primarily blacks, and has become their vanguard. This article describes new social elevators for the promotion of minority representatives into the corridors of power. The logic of promoting people of their own race, gender and nationality to the highest branches of power began to prevail over other criteria for recruiting personnel. During the 2020 election campaign, a new mechanism for promoting minorities in all branches of government was formed. It is based on numerous violations of local and federal electoral legislation. The mechanism of pressure on the US electoral system is analyzed using the example of the state of Georgia and the activities of politician Stacey Abrams. The article describes Abrams’ strategy to create a network of NGOs that are focused on one mission - to arrange for the political shift of the state in the elections. These organizations circumvented existing laws, making the state of Georgia the record holder for electoral irregularities and lawsuits. The article shows that Abrams’ struggle with the electoral laws of her state is based on the political myth of the voter suppression of minorities. The author identifies a number of common characteristics of the new elite. The minority elite does not show any interest in social reconciliation and overcoming racial conflict, but rather makes efforts to incite the latter, to attract the government to its side and increase its role in establishing “social justice” through racial quotas and infringement of the rights of those social strata that it has appointed bearers of systematic racism in society. As the colored elite increases and the government’s role in resolving racial conflicts grows, the minority movement is gradually condemned, it ceases to be a true grassroots movement and turns into astroturfing.

The NGOization of Refugee Resettlement

2020 ◽  
pp. 57-91
Author(s):  
Jennifer Erickson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nonprofit Organizations ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Refugee Resettlement ◽  
Master Narrative ◽  
Everyday Practices ◽  
The Government ◽  
And Migration

This chapter explains the policies, politics, and everyday practices of the New American Services. It highlights the tensions surrounding citizenship and the role that nongovernmental (or nonprofit) organizations play in Fargo under neoliberalism by analyzing these practices in terms of the “NGOization” of refugee resettlement. The chapter defines NGOization as the proliferation of NGOs under neoliberalism as extensions, or new faces, of the state. It views NGOs from a feminist's lens, and challenges the master narrative that refugee resettlement was purely humanitarian or simply unaccountable. The chapter provides an overview of everyday resettlement practices and beliefs about resettlement staff, and how their work can be interpreted in regard to the larger social issues laid out in this book: race, citizenship, and diversity. It also talks about the Cooperative Agreement between the Government of the United States (the State Department and the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration) and VOLAGS or voluntary agencies.

Music and the American Radio

Tempo ◽  
1947 ◽  
pp. 10-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. W. Heinsheimer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Communications Commission ◽  
The State ◽  
Radio Stations ◽  
For Profit ◽  
The Government ◽  
Privately Owned

Broadcasting in the United States is a business—and a very big one. Radio stations are privately owned and are operated for profit. Broadcasting is just as much a business as is running a theatre on Br adway or making a picture in Hollywood. The state and the government have nothing to do with it. To be sure, the Federal Communications Commission in Washington lays down certain rules of operations, and controls and allots wavelengths to the various networks and stations. But after the F.C.C. has given you a licence and a wavelength, and as long as you comply with their rules and conduct yourself accordingly, you can buy a piece of ground to-morrow, build a station and go into the radio business. And it is a good business to be in.

American Democracy Reconsidered: Part I

1973 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. J. Sharpe
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Government ◽  
The State ◽  
City Government ◽  
State Governments ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government ◽  
The One

In his celebrated study of American democracy written in 1888, Lord Bryce reserved his most condemnatory reflections for city government and in a muchquoted passage asserted: ‘There is no denying that the government of cities is the one conspicuous failure of the United States. The deficiencies of the National government tell but little for evil on the welfare of the people. The faults of the State governments are insignificant compared with the extravagance, corruption and mismanagement which mark the administration of most of the great cities'sangeetha.

Popular Culture and US Foreign Relations

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Falk
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Popular Culture ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Consumer Products ◽  
Information Campaigns ◽  
The World ◽  
American Foreign Relations ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Third World

Americans in and out of government have relied on media and popular culture to construct the national identity, frame debates on military interventions, communicate core values abroad, and motivate citizens around the world to act in prescribed ways. During the late 19th century, as the United States emerged as a world power and expanded overseas, Americans adopted an ethos of worldliness in their everyday lives, even as some expressed worry about the nation’s position on war and peace. During the interwar period of the 1920s and 1930s, though America failed to join the League of Nations and retreated from foreign engagements, the nation also increased cultural interactions with the rest of the world through the export of motion pictures, music, consumer products, food, fashion, and sports. The policies and character of the Second World War were in part shaped by propaganda that evolved from earlier information campaigns. As the United States confronted communism during the Cold War, the government sanitized its cultural weapons to win the hearts and minds of Americans, allies, enemies, and nonaligned nations. But some cultural producers dissented from America’s “containment policy,” refashioned popular media for global audiences, and sparked a change in Washington’s cultural-diplomacy programs. An examination of popular culture also shows how people in the “Third World” deftly used the media to encourage superpower action. In the 21st century, activists and revolutionaries can be considered the inheritors of this tradition because they use social media to promote their political agendas. In short, understanding the roles popular culture played as America engaged the world greatly expands our understanding of modern American foreign relations.

I. Organizing the Government for Participation in World Affairs

1944 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 913-930 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter H. C. Laves ◽  
Francis O. Wilcox
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Political Stability ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Modern World ◽  
Public Servants ◽  
Authoritarian State ◽  
The Government ◽  
Post War

Looking at the post-war period, it seems obvious that the government of the United States will give more attention to foreign affairs than it has in any comparable period of American history. How can the machinery for conducting foreign relations best be organized to meet these increasing responsibilities?The conduct of foreign relations in the modern world is no simple matter. Technical experts, intelligence systems, ability to negotiate, national political stability, a large and loyal staff of public servants—these are but some of the national requisites for effective participation in world affairs. The mobilization and organization of the best staff resources in the country, the negotiation of national policies, and then of international agreements, constitute a formidable task under any system of government.The conduct of foreign relations is, of course, easiest in a completely authoritarian state. It is made immeasurably more difficult by any division of authority. In most non-authoritarian governments, some division of authority has been found desirable, even at the expense of occasional awkwardness of procedure, because thereby the dangers of usurpation of power are minimized. The United States has gone farther than any democratic country in dividing responsibility in foreign affairs. Not only is there the usual distinction between legislative and executive authority, but the independence of the two branches has been so far underlined that the achievement of over-all government policies (as distinct from legislative and executive policies) is extremely difficult unless the party relationships are just right between the two ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

scholarly journals Note on a correspondence between Her Majesty's government and the president and council of the royal society regarding meteorological observations to be made by sea and land

1867 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 29-38 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Royal Society ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Uniform System ◽  
Foreign Office ◽  
Foreign Governments ◽  
Meteorological Observations ◽  
The Government

Her Majesty’s Government having been pleased to consult the Royal Society on several occasions in the last few years regarding the proper steps to be taken by this country, under the sanction and authority of its Government, for the prosecution, in cooperation with the Governments of other States in Europe and America, of systematically conducted meteorological observations by Land and Sea, it may be desirable to offer to the Fellows a résumé of the correspondence, and of the suggestions which from time to time have been tendered on the part of the Society to the several departments of the State. The correspondence commenced by a communication from the Foreign Office in March 1852, transmitting, by direction of the Earl of Malmesbury, several documents received from foreign governments in reply to a proposition which had been made to them by Her Majesty’s Government, for their cooperation in establishing a uniform system of recording meteorological observations; and requesting the opinion of the President and Council of the Royal Society in reference to these documents, and more especially in reference to a communication from the Government of the United States of America respecting the manner in which the proposed cooperation might be carried out.

The Logan Act: Paper Tiger or Sleeping Giant?

1966 ◽  
Vol 60 (2) ◽  
pp. 268-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Detlev F. Vagts
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Foreign Government ◽  
Hands On ◽  
Criminal Statute ◽  
The Government

For 167 years the shadow of the Logan Act has fallen upon those Americans who trespass on the Federal monopoly of international negotiations which it creates. In theory, up to three years’ imprisonment and a $5,000 fine await those Americans who, without authority, communicate with a foreign government intending either (a) to influence that government with respect to a controversy with the United States or (b) to defeat the measures of the United States. Though only one indictment and no trial have taken place under the Act, who can tell when a new Administration, thinner skinned or harder pressed than its predecessors, may in its irritation call into play this sleeping giant? Now, at a time when domestic opposition to certain aspects of our foreign policy has reached a pitch unknown for many years, it would be well to reflect upon this curious product of the confluence of criminal law and foreign relations law before we are in fact confronted by a test of its strength. All could be the losers from an unpremeditated encounter—the defendant by finding himself, perhaps to his very great surprise, the first person subjected to the Act’s severe criminal penalties, the Government by finding itself stripped of its long accustomed protection by a ruling that the statute as it now reads is unconstitutionally vague or restrictive of free speech. Despite its long desuetude as a criminal statute, the Act represents a principle which I cannot help but think is, at its core, a salutary one; that America in sensitive dealings with other governments “speaks with one voice.” It embodies the concept of bipartisanship, that quarrels about foreign relations are fought out domestically and not with the adversary. It deters sometimes very ill-advised attempts to take the conduct of foreign affairs into foolish and unauthorized hands. On the other hand, it cuts into freedoms which we regard as having the highest value, and many of the situations in which its use has been suggested clearly involve no danger that would justify such a restraint.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document