This book examines the extreme right in France during the interwar period. It begins by describing the background of the French right before 1914 and then provides commentary and analysis of the broad range of the extra-parliamentary right in interwar France. Organisations such as Action Française and the militant ligues are examined as well as prominent extreme-right intellectuals such as Lucien Rebatet, Robert Brasillach and Pierre Drieu la Rochelle. The various forms of French anti-Semitism are assessed, and the book also situates the French extreme right within a broader context by assessing its impact on other European countries, including the UK. It concludes by exploring the complicated politics of wartime France where some extreme-right activists collaborated with the Nazis while others opposed them, and where few generalisations prove possible. This volume will be of great interest to scholars and students of French history, the extreme right and interwar politics.
"This book examines the extreme right in France during the interwar period. It begins by describing the background of the French right before 1914 and then provides commentary and analysis of the broad range of the extra-parliamentary right in interwar France. Organisations such as Action Franðcaise and the militant ligues are examined as well as prominent extreme-right intellectuals such as Lucien Rebatet, Robert Brasillach and Pierre Drieu la Rochelle. The various forms of French anti-Semitism are assessed, and the book also situates the French extreme right within a broader context by assessing its impact on other European countries, including the UK. It concludes by exploring the complicated politics of wartime France where some extreme-right activists collaborated with the Nazis while others opposed them, and where few generalisations prove possible. This volume will be of great interest to scholars and students of French history, the extreme right and interwar politics"--
It seems that everyone wants to make the pope into their own image. Those outside the Church want him to be so-called "progressive" and are more than willing to project this attribute onto him, in a huge campaign of wishful thinking. But radical Catholic reactionaries, on the extreme right on the Catholic ecclesiological spectrum, become alarmed that the Church is compromising itself. A third group of obedient orthodox Catholics understand the pope's role and the nature and status of Catholic dogmas (which do not change), yet are confused by something a new pope says or does. Their concern is harmony with the existing tradition. For each "controversy" or supposed "scandal" or thing that Pope Francis said or did that has people in a confused state, I will attempt to show that the pope is in complete harmony with Catholic tradition. My hope and prayer is that my efforts will lessen the confusion of those who are sincerely seeking what the pope intends and means.
The decades between the Progressive Era of the 1920s and the civil rights struggles of the 1960s were a period of profound change in the lives of southern women. The life of Sarah Towles Reed (1882–1978) illuminates and parallels many of these transformations. Over the course of her long public life as a teacher, labor union lobbyist, and activist for the rights of public school teachers, Reed emerged as a groundbreaking leader, unafraid of taking on the educational and political hierarchies of the South. A Will of Her Own is the life story of a woman who had a lasting impact on her times as well as the story of the times themselves. Reed engaged the most significant concerns of the liberal reformers during the first half of the twentieth century—the struggle for economic independence for women and the fight for women's rights, the effort to maintain intellectual freedom in the face of cold war paranoia, and the pursuit of racial justice. Her successes, as well as her failures, lend a personal perspective to these national trends. Her career also helps to clarify what it meant to be a southern liberal in the twentieth century and how the region's peculiar circumstances shaped the politics and strategies of southern reformers.
I read this book based on my reading of General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy by Dr. Jeffry Caulfield. As portrayed in the Caulfield book, Dombrowski was in the eye of the segregationist hurricane which swept the South in the 1950's and 1960's following the Brown decision by the Supreme Court. This book gives a different perspective on the civil rights movement in the South. Such classics as Where Rebels Roost by Susan Klopfer and Gothic Politics in the Deep South by Robert Sherrill tend to give a condescending attitude toward the South. By contrast, Dombrowski describes a different version of events, a version which shows that the "behind the scenes" activities for Southern liberalization were very methodical and proceeded at a businesslike pace and with very steady progress all the way from the New Deal right up until the more radical 1970's. The book makes a case that, if there were actually such a thing as The New South, then Dombrowski had a very strong case for its paternity. Dombrowski, as many may already know, had close personal links to Justice Hugo Black of Alabama who was himself a pioneer of a more open-minded attitude to the race problem in the South.
In The Name of Hate is the first book to offer a comprehensive theory of hate crimes, arguing for an expansion of the legal definitions that most states in the U.S. hold. Barbara Perry provides an historical understanding of hate crimes and provocatively argues that hate crimes are not an aberration of current society, but rather a by-product of a society still grappling with inequality, difference, fear, and hate.
This book is empirically grounded on Zimbabwe and looks at hate speech as a bad omen for any society, family, nation and organisation. Hate speech divides and kills any peace, unity, tolerance, inclusivity, philosophy, race and geographical area, sacred places of worship, freedoms, identities, culture, unity and development in any space. It is not a good recipe for both animate and inanimate. It is never a solution to be applied in any geographical location. Hate speech, conflict and violence usually go together. The book clearly shows that, hate speech must never be tolerated in any religion, space (both private and public spaces), scriptures, society and nation. It is poisonous and manifests in different forms such as language (verbal or electronic), discriminations, beliefs, practices, laws, censorship, graffiti and even physical assault.
A New York Times Book Review Editors' Choice | Winner of the New Deal Book Award An immersive account of the New Deal project that created state-by-state guidebooks to America, in the midst of the Great Depression—and employed some of the biggest names in American letters The plan was as idealistic as it was audacious—and utterly unprecedented. Take thousands of hard-up writers and put them to work charting a country on the brink of social and economic collapse, with the aim of producing a series of guidebooks to the then forty-eight states—along with hundreds of other publications dedicated to cities, regions, and towns—while also gathering reams of folklore, narratives of formerly enslaved people, and even recipes, all of varying quality, each revealing distinct sensibilities. All this was the singular purview of the Federal Writers’ Project, a division of the Works Progress Administration founded in 1935 to employ jobless writers, from once-bestselling novelists and acclaimed poets to the more dubiously qualified. The FWP took up the lofty goal of rediscovering America in words and soon found itself embroiled in the day’s most heated arguments regarding radical politics, racial inclusion, and the purpose of writing—forcing it to reckon with the promises and failures of both the New Deal and the American experiment itself. Scott Borchert’s Republic of Detours tells the story of this raucous and remarkable undertaking by delving into the experiences of key figures and tracing the FWP from its optimistic early days to its dismemberment by the House Committee on Un-American Activities. We observe notable writers at their day jobs, including Nelson Algren, broke and smarting from the failure of his first novel; Zora Neale Hurston, the most widely published Black woman in the country; and Richard Wright, who arrived in the FWP’s chaotic New York City office on an upward career trajectory courtesy of the WPA. Meanwhile, Ralph Ellison, Studs Terkel, John Cheever, and other future literary stars found encouragement and security on the FWP payroll. By way of these and other stories, Borchert illuminates an essentially noble enterprise that sought to create a broad and inclusive self-portrait of America at a time when the nation’s very identity and future were thrown into question. As the United States enters a new era of economic distress, political strife, and culture-industry turmoil, this book’s lessons are urgent and strong.
In this book, Andrew Brindle analyzes a corpus of texts taken from a white supremacist web forum which refer to the subject of homosexuality, drawing conclusions about the discourses of extremism and the dissemination of far-right hate speech online. The website from which Brindle’s corpus is drawn, Stormfront, has been described as the most powerful active influence in the White Nationalist movement (Kim 2005). Through a linguistic analysis of the data combining corpus linguistic methodologies and a critical discourse analysis approach, Brindle examines the language used to construct heterosexual, white masculinities, as well as posters’ representations of gay men, racial minorities and other out-groups, and how such groups are associated by the in-group. Brindle applies three types of analysis to the corpus: a corpus-driven approach centered on the study of frequency, keywords, collocation and concordance analyses; a detailed qualitative study of posts from the forum and the threads in which they are located; and a corpus-based approach which combines the corpus linguistic and qualitative analyses. The analysis of the data demonstrates a convergence of reactionary responses to not only women, gay men and lesbians, but also to racial minorities. Brindle’s findings suggest that due to the forum format of the data, topics are discussed and negotiated rather than dictated unilaterally as would be the case in a hierarchical organization. This research-based study of white supremacist discourse on the Internet facilitates understanding of hate speech and the behavior of extremist groups, with the aim of providing tools to combat elements of extremism and intolerance in society.
For the last 2,500 years literature has been attacked, booed, and condemned, often for the wrong reasons and occasionally for very good ones. The Hatred of Literature examines the evolving idea of literature as seen through the eyes of its adversaries: philosophers, theologians, scientists, pedagogues, and even leaders of modern liberal democracies. From Plato to C. P. Snow to Nicolas Sarkozy, literature’s haters have questioned the value of literature—its truthfulness, virtue, and usefulness—and have attempted to demonstrate its harmfulness. Literature does not start with Homer or Gilgamesh, William Marx says, but with Plato driving the poets out of the city, like God casting Adam and Eve out of Paradise. That is its genesis. From Plato the poets learned for the first time that they served not truth but merely the Muses. It is no mere coincidence that the love of wisdom (philosophia) coincided with the hatred of poetry. Literature was born of scandal, and scandal has defined it ever since. In the long rhetorical war against literature, Marx identifies four indictments—in the name of authority, truth, morality, and society. This typology allows him to move in an associative way through the centuries. In describing the misplaced ambitions, corruptible powers, and abysmal failures of literature, anti-literary discourses make explicit what a given society came to expect from literature. In this way, anti-literature paradoxically asserts the validity of what it wishes to deny. The only threat to literature’s continued existence, Marx writes, is not hatred but indifference.
