Search results

This chapter focuses on the US Civil War of 1861–1864, the application of the laws of war to a civil war, and gives great attention to US Army General Order 100 (aka The Lieber Code), the first set of laws to direct and constrain the behavior of troops in the field.

In this study, I use currere to examine excessive entitlement in my own high school education. By “excessive entitlement,” I emphasize teachers' actions and systemic conditions related to an excessive educational mindset justifying (and manifesting) self-infallibility. Teachers displaying excessive entitlement might take for granted, for example, the correctness of their actions, closing self-awareness, and more equitable relations with others (especially students). On a structural level, it includes, for example, societal norms, school policies, educational traditions, and often laws. Specifically, I present findings examining three levels of curriculum – the formal or explicit, the implicit or hidden, and the null or present/absent. I offer my own story as a case study of how schools and teachers may silence and erase student identity and culture as well as how more inclusive and dialogic teaching approaches (and methods of inquiry) can counteract and offer alternatives to such oppressive forces. My framework includes professional ethics, moral ethics, and social justice ethics. Looking back at my history as a gay high school student, I discovered that my school's explicit curriculum provided teachers with a safe haven for bigotry and hostility toward LGBTQ students (as well as female students and students of color), and its hidden curriculum projected messages that privileged such a curriculum (and denigrated epistemologies more on the margin). It was only in the null curriculum that I began to experience a sense of liberation and inclusion and an awareness of the multiplicity of epistemology and ontology.

Even though extant research highlights the crucial role some stakeholders play in helping corporations understand, manage and mitigate the occurrence of modern slavery in their supply chains and operations, there is a fundamental lack of understanding of all the relevant stakeholder groups and the specific roles they play. By adopting a stakeholder theory approach, this study aims to identify all the key stakeholders and their associated roles towards supporting corporations’ modern slavery monitoring, detection and disclosure activities.

A systematic literature review was conducted by following the PRISMA guidelines. Relevant literature included scholarly work focusing on the identification of key stakeholders and the roles they play in enabling corporations’ modern slavery monitoring, detection and disclosure activities.

Nine stakeholder groups and their roles were identified, such as governments, workers, IGOs, NGOs and suppliers. Examples of performed activities include conducting audits, providing training, monitoring occurrences of modern slavery, enforcing regulations, reporting on labour issues and evaluating corporations’ modern slavery reports.

A comprehensive understanding of key stakeholders and their roles enables better collaboration towards achieving transparency within corporations’ supply chains and operations. Other stakeholders can leverage these findings to enhance modern slavery reporting activities.

Clarity regarding key stakeholders and their roles may improve quality and quantity of reported modern slavery information, enhancing corporations’ public accountability.

This study adopts a stakeholder theory approach to provide a comprehensive understanding of key stakeholders and their roles in enhancing corporations’ modern slavery reporting activities.

In this chapter, we review the historical development of elite theory, and then we propose a way forward beyond it. Elite theory emerged as a critique of democracy in the late 19th century. Although it used historical materials illustratively, it tended to be ahistorical theoretically because its primary aim was to demonstrate the perdurance of elites even in conditions of mass suffrage. Lachmann was the first scholar to develop elite theory as a truly historical and explanatory framework by combining it with elements of Marxism. Even Lachmann's theory, however, remained inadequate because it did not rest on a fully articulated theory of power. In this introduction, we suggest a “relational power theory” as a remedy to this situation, and we use it to formulate a general heuristic for the study of elites, nonelites, and their interrelationships. To illustrate its utility, we show how it can illuminate the chapters in this volume (though they were not necessarily written for these purposes).

This chapter provides a brief overview of the history of the laws of war up to the mid-1800s CE. It discusses the interconnection between social and historical forces, armies, and the laws that govern them.

Drawing connections between Indigenous boarding schools in North America and the expansion of colonial schooling worldwide, this chapter conceptualizes methods of re-engagement with the topic of reparations for communities who have been subjected to the consequences of colonial schooling. Models of colonial schooling instill education practices aimed at enforcing the assimilation of populations into dominant cultures while reinforcing globalized racializing hierarchies. The epistemic violence central to the conceptualization of the colonial school is a key component of this colonial technology and is reproduced within modern education systems throughout the Global South. Moving toward the interconnected articulation of reparative material and epistemic justice in education for American Indian and African American communities in the United States and post-colonial communities worldwide, the chapter aims to create openings in comparative and international education for addressing the colonial residues within modern education on local and global levels, recentering the foundational terms by which schools function and the solidarities necessary for repair.

This chapter examines the explosion in International Humanitarian Law between the US Civil War and World War I. The primary foci are the Hague Conventions on land warfare and the Geneva Conventions for the sick and wounded. This body of treaties is the foundation of IHL and the modern laws of war. Most of central issues in the international laws of war emerge in this period.

Regulated differently in modern constitutions, emergency rule is a case of awkward, and dilemmatic, legal fine-tuning of an ambivalent political move that leads the executive of a democratic regime to the verge of the constitutional system. For that reason, as an utmost situation, emergency rule becomes a testing field for the resilience of the constitutional order. It affects its own foundations, the basic rights, and thus the constitutional capability to make possible their fulfilment. It also serves to appraise the workings of democratic regimes and, accordingly, the type of legitimacy derived from their institutional performance. Furthermore, it provides a vantage point to watch the reactions of both their representatives and their publics. Focussed on the COVID-19 pandemic, this chapter compares the cases of Germany and Spain through their legal regulations of emergency rule and their governments’ responses. Having rather analogous emergency legislations, from 2020 through 2022, there have been significant differences in their decision-making patterns.

In the context of an analysis of stopgap and reactionary presidential library and records act, the purpose of this paper is to consider how the separation of the Obama Presidential Library from the Obama Presidential Center illuminates fundamental flaws in the public-private model that demand a more comprehensive legislative solution.

Drawing upon government, academic and public sources, this paper examines the legislation of presidential records and libraries to gain perspective on the presidential library system and the Obama Presidential Center, the first post-Presidential Records Act institution to operate independently of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

This paper traces the evolution of presidential library statutes and standards to reveal how the genesis of an independent Obama Presidential Center strained an already stressed system, creating significant questions about its future.

This paper offers an original treatment of the statutes governing NARA’s administration of presidential libraries, framing a cycle of calls and responses, with the acts of individual presidents eliciting acts of Congress. Also original, and timely, is the treatment in this paper of how these laws created the conditions for an independent Obama Presidential Center.