New Books in African American Studies show

New Books in African American Studies

Summary: Discussions with Scholars of African Americans about their New Books

Join Now to Subscribe to this Podcast
  • Visit Website
  • RSS
  • Artist: New Books Network
  • Copyright: Copyright © New Books Network 2011

Podcasts:

 Charis Thompson, "Good Science: The Ethical Choreography of Stem Cell Research" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 1:12:35

Charis ThompsonView on AmazonCharis Thompson's Good Science: The Ethical Choreography of Stem Cell Research (MIT Press, 2013) is an important book. Good Science explores the "ethical choreography" of the consolidation of human embryonic stem cell research in the first decade of the twenty-first century, drawing important implications for the possible futures of stem cell research by looking carefully at its past and developing an approach to what Thompson calls "good science." The book compellingly argues that "a high level of political attention to the ethics of the life sciences and biomedicine…is a good thing for science and democracy," especially as we have now reached "the end of the beginning of human pluripotent stem cell research." Part I of the book (Stem Cell Biopolitics) explores early attention to the embryo debate. Ch. 2 looks at stem cell research as it's widely understood to engage ethical concerns, describing the "pro-curial frame" of stem cell research in the period under scrutiny, when promoting stem cell innovation involved aspirations to be pro-cure and there was an ethical focus on the procurement of stem cells and cell lines for research. Pt. II of the book (Stem Cell Geopolitics) looks at what happened domestically as the debate over stem cells moved from the federal to the state levels and back in the US, and then turns to consider transnational circuits that were crucial to those practices and conversations. Ch. 3 looks at three phases that made up the beginning of human pluripotent stem cell research in the US: the time around President Bush's 2001 policy, the period when states "seceded" from that policy (exemplified by California's Proposition 71), and the period around Obama's 2009 policy. Ch. 4 looks at the transnational geopolitics of stem cell research in an era when stem cell research became increasingly international and research advocates were deeply concerned with international competition and "brain drain." Thompson takes readers into laboratory environments in South Korea and Singapore in order to undermine a popular rhetorical binary of East/West that contrasted an "East" that had a pro-science spirit and lack of concern with the moral status of the embryo, and a "West" that had been taken over by anti-science religious fanatics and technophobes. Pt. III of the book (Thinking of Other Lives) looks carefully at questions of research subjecthood. Ch. 7 focuses on human-human relationships and practices of donation at a time when a number of norms came under renewed scrutiny – including altruism, anonymity, and the alienation of tissue from donors – and this led to the conclusion that the old model for donation wasn't working. In this context, there were increasing demands for reciprocity in various forms, and Thompson considers various models in California that rethought the relationships between donor/recipient and biomaterial/bioinformation. Ch. 6 focuses on the logic of using animals as substitutive research subjects for human-focused research, and calling for a move away from using animals as research subjects and toward using in vitro systems instead. To do all of this, Thompson develops a methodology she calls "triage" which we talk about early in the interview. Good Science is a wonderful and critical book, and well worth reading and teaching widely!

 Kevin M. Schultz, "Buckley and Mailer: The Difficult Friendship that Shaped the Sixties" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 1:07:44

Kevin M. SchultzView on AmazonIn Buckley and Mailer: The Difficult Friendship that Shaped the Sixties (W.W. Norton, 2015), Kevin M. Schultz has given us a lively and colorful narrative history that captures the character of two complex men and the times in which they lived. Juxtaposing a conservative William F. Buckley Jr. and the radical Norman Mailer against a liberal establishment brings into sharp relief what the men shared and the source of their conflict. Both men agreed that there was something amiss of about American society and sought to build a movement against the entrenchment of liberal bureaucratic control and the threat of totalitarianism. With clashing visions for a new national politic, they were both surprised by the constituency that they each attracted and grew more alike as they responded to the movements they had fomented. Through their writings, public and private encounters, and an overlapping network of friends and political acquaintances we get a glimpse in the elite power dynamics that shaped the sixties. By attending to a flurry of lectures, debates, parties, letters, and the striking personalities of these two men, Schultz shows us was right and wrong with America at mid-century and the transition from a rules based to a rights based society. The relationship of Buckley and Mailer not only reflected the nation's struggles in the sixties, but also captures the continual conflict over the future of America. Kevin M. Shultz is an associated professor of history at University of Illinois at Chicago.

 Michael Gould-Wartofsky, "The Occupiers: The Making of the 99 Percent Movement" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:18:17

Michael Gould-WartofskyView on AmazonMichael Gould-Wartofsky is the author of The Occupiers: The Making of the 99 Percent Movement (Oxford University Press, 2015). He is a PhD candidate in Sociology at New York University. There has been a lot written about the Occupy Wall Street movement, but little with the sophistication and personal touch of Gould-Wartofsky's new book. What emerged in the fall of 2011 in Lower Manhattan had roots in similar protests going on across Europe, but soon spread to over a thousand US cities. As a participant observer from the very earliest days of the movement, Gould-Wartofsky blends writing styles and perspectives as he deepens what we know about social movements, in general. He maps the various tactics, factions, and motivations that drove the movement, but also what it felt like to be in Zuccotti Park.

 Miriam Pawel, "The Crusades of Cesar Chavez" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 1:11:56

Miriam PawelView on AmazonCesar Chavez founded a labor union. Launched a movement. And inspired a generation. Two Decades after his death, Chavez remains the most significant Latino figure in U.S. history." So reads the inside flap of Miriam Pawel's new biography The Crusades of Cesar Chavez (Bloomsbury Press, 2014). However, while many are acquainted with the iconography of Chavez as the leader of the Farmworker Movement that took on California's powerful grape industry during the mid-to-late 1960s, much less is known about Chavez himself and his personal and organizational background prior to the formation of the National Farm Workers Association (the precursor to the United Farm Workers or UFW) or the internal dynamics and struggles between Chavez and his top brass. With great detail and empathy, Pawel provides a complex portrait of Chavez as a visionary and tireless organizer whose humility, strategic brilliance, and improbable success was matched only by his own arrogance, tactical blunders, and embarrassing defeats. We hope you enjoy listening to our fascinating conversation.

 Beatrix Hoffman, "Health Care for Some: Rights and Rationing in the United States since 1930" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:52:23

Beatrix HoffmanView on AmazonDisputes over the definitions or legality of 'rights' and 'rationing' in their various guises have animated much of the debate around the United States Affordable Care Act. Many legislators and vocal members of their constituency have strong convictions about the state of our current national health care system and where it is going. Far fewer, however, understand how our current state of affairs is the product of a quite recent and contingent history, which is precisely what Beatrix Hoffman's Health Care for Some: Rights and Rationing in the United States since 1930 (University of Chicago, 2012) sets out to explain. While Hoffman's scope is the U.S. as a whole, she draws out the local consequences of sweeping wartime and post-war reform by focusing on various cities, notably Chicago. Using a framework that addresses the reciprocal roles of rights and rationing as articulated by physicians, policymakers, and patients throughout the latter part of the twentieth century, she presents a concise history that speaks to far greater questions. Throughout Health Care for Some, we learn much about the institutional transformations of modern U.S. healthcare: how the expansive yet exclusive county hospital system was not inevitable but fell in line with other infrastructural imperatives, while war-wrecked European nations actually improved primary care coverage through austerity policies; how doctors increasingly struggled with poor state management and strictures that, despite being legally sanctioned, discouraged providing care to the most needy; how Medicare and Medicaid were motivated as much by the civil rights movement as arguments for dignity of old age as a social right. Importantly, the human dimensions of care are never hidden from sight, as Hoffman unravels narratives of entangled structures and subjectivities that evince the personal damage wrought by a system too diffuse to overhaul. Her book is an engaging, informative, and concise read, as capable of becoming a valuable reference as it is of fomenting thought and action.

 Julian E. Zelizer, "The Fierce Urgency of Now: Lyndon Johnson, Congress, and the Battle for the Great Society" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:53:37

Julian E. ZelizerView on AmazonIn recent decades, as Democrats and Republicans have grown more and more polarized ideologically, and gridlock has becoming increasingly standard in Congress, there has been a noticeable pining for the good old days when bipartisanship was common, and strongmen like Lyndon B. Johnson occupied the White House, ready to twist a few arms or trade a little pork when narrow interests threatened the general welfare. Liberals have perhaps been most vulnerable to this myth of late, with journalists repeatedly calling on Obama to bust through the unprecedented obstruction of the last few years by channeling the spirit of LBJ, who delivered more progressive legislation than anyone, save FDR. But as the eminent political historian Julian E. Zelizer writes in his new book The Fierce Urgency of Now: Lyndon Johnson, Congress, and the Battle for the Great Society (Penguin Press, 2015), this view of the past falls short on a number of counts. When LBJ first took over, he faced the same "do-nothing" Congress that had imprisoned domestic reform under JFK, Eisenhower, Truman, and the late New Deal, too. The South, an increasingly small part of the national population (counting the millions who could not vote), nonetheless dominated the old committee system, thanks to mass incumbency in the one-party region, America's uncommon deference to seniority in the legislature and its local delegation of voter law. Leaguing frequently with the GOP's right wing, Southern chairmen prevented a host of reforms from escaping the drafting stage and reaching a floor vote, even where legislation had popular support. A golden age of bipartisanship. Johnson understood, where many have forgotten, that it was these giants of Congress, not the White House, which held all the power. And these legislators boasted as much, often protected by districts with vanishingly small electorates. What opened the floodgates to the Great Society was not LBJ, "master of the Senate," famed author of "The Treatment," but the liberal supermajority of the "Fabulous eighty-ninth" Congress. When these votes disappeared in the midterm, a standard historical pattern, reform came to a screeching halt. (One reason Johnson urged House terms–the shortest in the democratic world–be extended to four years.) Liberals had major advantages in the 1960s that they have since lost: huge unions with crucial manpower and funding, a massive civil rights groundswell, "modern" Republican allies, brain-trust and whip organizations in Congress that Zelizer here thankfully recovers from obscurity. But one thing that has not changed is America's uniquely divided governmental system. Reformers dream of Great Men and focus on the White House, not Capitol Hill and the built-in features of gridlock, to their peril.

 Lawrence Jacobs, "Who Governs?: Who Governs? Presidents, Public Opinion, and Manipulation" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:22:51

Lawrence JacobsView on AmazonLawrence Jacobs is the author (with James Druckman) of Who Governs? Presidents, Public Opinion, and Manipulation (University of Chicago Press, 2015). Jacobs is the Walter F. and Joan Mondale Chair for Political Studies at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs and the Department of Political Science at the University of Minnesota. Just how responsive is the president to the public? In theory, we all hope very, but increasingly we worry that presidents have grown more distant from the wishes of the public. In Who Governs?, we get an empirical answer to that question that is at once novel and also deeply disturbing. Jacobs and Druckman explore how presidents, since Kennedy, have used public opinion polling to craft public messages and shape public priorities. Polling has grown significantly since the 1960s, both in its utilization, and also its sophistication, and presidents, especially Ronald Reagan, have given increasing attention to their results. But rather than using polls to closely adhere to the average voter, many presidents have catered to narrow segments of the populace, rending polling another tool used to undermine democratic governance.

 Richard Kreitner, ed., "The Almanac: 150 Years of The Nation (3)" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:24:18

View on AmazonThe Nation magazine, a beacon of the cultural and political left, is celebrating 150 years of publishing. As part of its celebration, it's publishing a daily blog called The Almanac that looks at events on each day of the year and how The Nation covered them. In this New Books Network journalism podcast, you'll hear Richard Kreitner, the magazine's archivist, discuss how The Nation covered the struggle for civil rights including the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark ruling against segregated public schools in 1954; the life and work of the slain African-American leader Malcolm X and poet Langston Hughes's essay on black culture that The Nation published in 1926. You'll also hear the voices of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and Langston Hughes.

 Lee Drutman, "The Business of America is Lobbying: How Corporations Became Politicized and Politics Became More Corporate" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:18:42

Lee DrutmanView on AmazonLee Drutman is the author of The Business of America is Lobbying: How Corporations Became Politicized and Politics Became More Corporate (Oxford UP 2015). Drutman is a senior fellow at New America. How do corporations seek influence in Washington? And should we be worried? Drutman's book moves beyond simple notions of how money and politics intertwine with nuanced writing and a bundle of new data analysis. He finds that corporate interest in politics has grown enormously since the 1970s, and now represents the vast majority of lobbying in Washington. But rather than simply placing money into a political "vending machine", Drutman shows a much more complex and muddled political process. Corporations win as often as they lose, and the growth in lobbying has to be understood in more sophisticated than simple "pay-to-play" descriptions. Drutman is worried, but not for the exact reasons you might expect, and he ends his book with ambitious proposals to reform lobbying and national policy making.

 Richard Kreitner, ed., "The Almanac: 150 Years of The Nation (2)" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:20:06

View on AmazonThe Nation magazine is one of America's most distinguished journalistic enterprises featuring the writing and work of such notable people as Calvin Trillin, Noam Chomsky, Jessica Mitford, James Baldwin and Naomi Klein. The Nation was founded 150 years ago this July. It's America's oldest weekly magazine. To mark its 150th anniversary, it's publishing a daily blog called The Almanac compiled by the magazine's archivist, Richard Kreitner. The Almanac looks at significant historical events that took place on each day of the year and how The Nation covered them. In this New Books Network podcast, you'll hear Richard Kreitner talk about The Nation's coverage of events from May 10 to May 16. Everything from The Nation's strong backing for Israel's declaration of independence in 1948 to the prowess of boxer Joe Louis and the death of Bob Marley.

 Peter Hanson, "Too Weak to Govern: Majority Party Power and Appropriations in the U.S. Senate" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:20:01

Peter HansonView on AmazonJust a few weeks ago, we heard Matthew Green discuss the minority in the House. Green explained that the minority party may not be as powerless as we typically think. In Too Weak to Govern: Majority Party Power and Appropriations in the U.S. Senate (Cambridge University Press, 2015), Peter Hanson offers another side of a similar story. Hanson argues that the majority party in the Senate, more restrained by rule and convention than in the House, has an equally interesting story to tell. Hanson draws on his experience as a staffer for Senator Tom Daschle to explain the evolution of "regular order" and emergence of continuing resolutions as a tool of the majority. Hanson's analysis may not convince you to love the Senate, but he sheds needed light on what's behind the maddening procedures of the "world's greatest deliberative body." Hanson is an assistant professor of political science at the University of Denver.

 Jason Stanley, "How Propaganda Works" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 1:03:59

Jason StanleyView on AmazonPropaganda names a familiar collection of phenomena, and examples of propaganda are easy to identify, especially when one examines the output of totalitarian states. In those cases, language and imagery are employed for the purpose of shaping mass opinion, forming group allegiances, constructing worldviews, and securing compliance. It is undeniable that propaganda is employed by liberal democratic states. But it is also undeniable that the use of propaganda is especially problematic in liberal democracies, as it looks incompatible with the democratic ideals of equality and autonomous self-government. It's surprising, then, that the topic of propaganda has gone relatively unexplored in contemporary political philosophy. In How Propaganda Works (Princeton University Press, 2015), Jason Stanley develops an original theory of propaganda according to which propaganda is the deployment of an ideal against itself. Along the way, Stanley distinguishes various kinds of propaganda and explores the connections between propaganda, ideology, stereotypes, and group identities. Stanley's central thesis is that propaganda poses an epistemological problem for democracy, as propaganda is the vehicle by which false beliefs are disseminated and opportunities for knowledge are closed.

  Joseph E. Uscinski and Joseph M. Parent, "American Conspiracy Theories" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:48:56

View on Amazon"Conspiracy theories are neither the vile excrescence of puny minds nor the telltale symptom of a sick society. They are the ineradicable stuff of politics." That's a quotation from American Conspiracy Theories (Oxford UP, 2014), by Joseph E. Uscinski and Joseph M. Parent, two professors of political science at the University of Miami. Their study of conspiracy theories concludes that nearly all Americans hold conspiracy beliefs and that "conspiracy theories bring to the surface people's deepest political anxieties." The book studies American conspiracy theories over 120 years from 1890 to 2010. It analyzes well-known conspiracy theories such as the many about the assassination of JFK and the events of 9/11 to more obscure ones such as the Congressional plot to kill pet dogs.  In this interview with the New Books Network, co-author Joseph Uscinski suggests American conspiracy theories can teach us a lot about everyday politics.

 Kevin Dougherty and Rebecca Natow, "The Politics of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Origins, Discontinuations, and Transformations" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:00:01

View on AmazonFunding for higher education in the U.S. is an increasingly divisive issue. Some states have turned to policies that tie institutional performance to funding appropriations so to have great accountability on public expenditure. In exploring the origins and implementation for these kinds of policies, Kevin Dougherty and Rebecca Natow recently published a new in-depth book on this topic, entitled The Politics of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Origins, Discontinuations, and Transformations (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2015). In the book, the authors have explored the origins of this policy, its effects on the landscape of American higher education, and its future. This publication weaves extensive policymaker, educator, and administer interviews to form a thorough picture of the nature and debates of these policies– from policy entrepreneurs to advocacy coalitions. They even explore comparisons to performance funding policies abroad. Dougherty, Associate Professor of Higher Education and Education Policy at Teachers College-Columbia University, and Natow, Postdoctoral Research Associate at the Community College Research Center, both join New Books in Education for the interview. For questions or comments on the podcast, you can also find the host on Twitter at @PoliticsAndEd.

 Jennifer Delton, "Rethinking the 1950s: How Anticommunism and the Cold War Made America Liberal" | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 0:57:39

Jennifer DeltonView on AmazonConventional wisdom among historians and the public says anticommunism and the Cold War were barriers to reform during their height in the 1950s. In this view, the strong hand of a conservative anticommunism and Cold War priorities thwarted liberal and leftist reforms, political dissent and dreams of social democracy. Jennifer Delton is a professor of history at Skidmore College, and her new book, Rethinking the 1950s: How Anticommunism and the Cold War Made America Liberal (Cambridge University Press, 2013) encourages us–as the title suggests–to rethink that conventional view. She argues that in fact the Cold War and anticommunism promoted and justified many liberal goals rather than stifling them. Her book demonstrates that supposed conservatives championed many liberal causes while many liberals genuinely supported the Cold War and anticommunism. For example, she discusses the liberal beliefs and actions of business leaders and politicians like Dwight Eisenhower, who are often thought of as conservative figures, to show the dominance of liberal political ideas during this period. On the other side, she also argues that liberals, such as many labor activists, were themselves strongly anticommunist because they saw communism as truly damaging to their cause, not simply because they aimed to avoid the taint of a communist label. These sentiments had important effects on policy as well. From high taxes to regulation, civil rights and the continuance of New Deal programs, liberal ideas held sway. They had a powerful effect on policy, not in spite of, but because of the larger Cold War context. In the interview, Delton discusses her book and its importance in reforming both historians' views of the period and our broader thinking about partisan politics and nationalism.

Comments

Login or signup comment.