|
Showing 1 - 4 of
4 matches in All Departments
The Politics of Trash explains how municipal trash collection
solved odorous urban problems using nongovernmental and often
unseemly means. Focusing on the persistent problems of filth and
the frustration of generations of reformers unable to clean their
cities, Patricia Strach and Kathleen S. Sullivan tell a story of
dirty politics and administrative innovation that made rapidly
expanding American cities livable. The solutions that professionals
recommended to rid cities of overflowing waste cans, litter-filled
privies, and animal carcasses were largely ignored by city
governments. When the efforts of sanitarians, engineers, and
reformers failed, public officials turned to the habits and tools
of corruption as well as to gender and racial hierarchies.
Corruption often provided the political will for public officials
to establish garbage collection programs. Effective waste
collection involves translating municipal imperatives into new
habits and arrangements in homes and other private spaces. To
change domestic habits, officials relied on gender hierarchy to
make the women of the white, middle-class households in charge of
sanitation. When public and private trash cans overflowed, racial
and ethnic prejudices were harnessed to single out scavengers,
garbage collectors, and neighborhoods by race. These early informal
efforts were slowly incorporated into formal administrative
processes that created the public-private sanitation systems that
prevail in most American cities today. The Politics of Trash
locates these hidden resources of governments to challenge
presumptions about the formal mechanisms of governing and recovers
the presence of residents at the margins, whose experiences can be
as overlooked as garbage collection itself. This consideration of
municipal garbage collection reveals how political development
often relies on undemocratic means with long-term implications for
further inequality. Focusing on the resources that cleaned American
cities also shows the tenuous connection between political
development and modernization. -- Cornell University Press
Even a casual observer of American politics might notice the
importance of family in political rhetoric like the Republicans'
"family values" and the Democrats' "working families," but we know
surprisingly little about the role of family in American politics.
We typically think of family as "private" and out of the public
realm of politics or we associate family and public policy with
so-called family policies, such as welfare or family leave. The
goal of this book is to clarify the relationship between seemingly
private family life and federal public policies. It asks two
important questions: How do policymakers employ the concept of
family in the policy process? And, what are the consequences of
employing this concept broadly in public policy? All in the Family
is the first empirical study of family in the American policy
process. It shows that, far from being "private" or only a part of
"family policy," family is an important part of American
policymaking even in seemingly "non-family" policies like
immigration, tax, and agriculture. Policymakers rely on family to
determine eligibility, distribute goods, and provide justification
for their positions across a wide range of policies. Ultimately,
this book shows that seemingly private life makes American public
policy possible, and it suggests that the ability of policymakers
to accomplish their goals is intimately tied to the strength and
organization of American families. Yet, it also demonstrates that
relying on a dynamic institution like family can have unintended
consequences, potentially destabilizing policies over time.
Even a casual observer of American politics might notice the
importance of family in political rhetoric like the Republicans'
"family values" and the Democrats' "working families," but we know
surprisingly little about the role of family in American politics.
We typically think of family as "private" and out of the public
realm of politics or we associate family and public policy with
so-called family policies, such as welfare or family leave. The
goal of this book is to clarify the relationship between seemingly
private family life and federal public policies. It asks two
important questions: How do policymakers employ the concept of
family in the policy process? And, what are the consequences of
employing this concept broadly in public policy? All in the Family
is the first empirical study of family in the American policy
process. It shows that, far from being "private" or only a part of
"family policy," family is an important part of American
policymaking even in seemingly "non-family" policies like
immigration, tax, and agriculture. Policymakers rely on family to
determine eligibility, distribute goods, and provide justification
for their positions across a wide range of policies. Ultimately,
this book shows that seemingly private life makes American public
policy possible, and it suggests that the ability of policymakers
to accomplish their goals is intimately tied to the strength and
organization of American families. Yet, it also demonstrates that
relying on a dynamic institution like family can have unintended
consequences, potentially destabilizing policies over time.
As late as the 1980s, breast cancer was a stigmatized disease, so
much so that local reporters avoided using the word "breast" in
their stories and early breast cancer organizations steered clear
of it in their names. But activists with business backgrounds began
to partner with corporations for sponsored runs and cause-marketing
products, from which a portion of the proceeds would benefit breast
cancer research. Branding breast cancer as "pink"-hopeful,
positive, uncontroversial-on the products Americans see every day,
these activists and corporations generated a pervasive
understanding of breast cancer that is widely shared by the public
and embraced by policymakers. Clearly, they have been successful:
today, more Americans know that the pink ribbon is the symbol of
breast cancer than know the name of the vice president. Hiding
Politics in Plain Sight examines the costs of employing market
mechanisms-especially cause marketing-as a strategy for change.
Patricia Strach suggests that market mechanisms do more than raise
awareness of issues or money to support charities: they also affect
politics. She shows that market mechanisms, like
corporate-sponsored walks or cause-marketing, shift issue
definition away from the contentious processes in the political
sphere to the market, where advertising campaigns portray complex
issues along a single dimension with a simple solution: breast
cancer research will find a cure and Americans can participate
easily by purchasing specially-marked products. This market
competition privileges even more specialized actors with
connections to business. As well, cooperative market activism
fundamentally alters the public sphere by importing processes,
values, and biases of market-based action into politics. Market
activism does not just bring social concerns into market
transactions, it also brings market biases into public
policymaking, which is inherently undemocratic. As a result,
industry and key activists work cooperatively rather than
contentiously, and they define issues as consensual rather than
controversial, essentially hiding politics in plain sight.
|
You may like...
Loot
Nadine Gordimer
Paperback
(2)
R398
R330
Discovery Miles 3 300
|