Future of Work Show

In which the nerds discuss the direction of employment of work, the implications of changing employment around the world: what changes are coming, and how we can react to change.

Hosts:

  • Dr Amanda Elliot, Department of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Sydney
  • Dr Peter Chen, Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney

Guests:

  • Alexandra Heron, Research Associate, Women, Work & Leadership Research Group, The University of Sydney Business School
  • Associate Professor Sarah Kaine, Management Disciple, University of Technology Sydney
  • Professor John Buchanan, The University of Sydney Business School

Includes extra discussion in the podcast extra chat.


IPSA/APSA Statement on the Central European University (CEU)

The International Political Science Association (IPSA) has released a statement on the conflict between the Central European University and the Hungarian Government, which has now been endorsed by the Australian Political Studies Association (APSA):

The International Political Science Association (IPSA) is deeply concerned about the eventual consequences of the recent proposal by the Hungarian Government to amend the country’s Education Law such that Central European University (CEU) will not be able to continue its work in Hungary. The CEU is a highly respected institution that excels in many disciplines including Political Science. We feel that its closing would be a significant loss for the international political science community as well as for the Hungarian Political Science Association and our Hungarian colleagues.

IPSA is dedicated to the pursuit of the academic study and teaching of political science and its various sub-disciplines. This endeavor which entails close cooperation among political scientists around the world including IPSA’s national member organizations, can only be conducted if the academic freedom of scholars and their institution are respected. We feel that the proposal of the Hungarian government constitutes an attempt to silence an institution that is committed to the preservation of academic freedoms, an institution where political science is studied and taught in a manner which is commended by colleagues from around the world. We consider the proposal to be in violation the academic freedom of our colleagues working at the CEU, and therefore strongly object to its adoption.

IPSA requests the Hungarian Government to reconsider its decision and withdraw the amendment to the country’s Education Law.

İlter Turan

President

W.A.y Out West WA Election Wrap-up show

In which the Nerds dissect the 2017 Western Australian state election, looking at the context of the outgoing Liberal government, the campaign and key issues, players and results, and the incoming ALP government, its faces and challenges.

Your hosts:

  • Dr Stewart Jackson, Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney
  • Dr Amanda Elliot, Department of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Sydney

With their guests:

  • Dr Ian Cook, Senior Lecturer, Murdoch University
  • Professor Rodney Smith, Professor of Australian Politics, University of Sydney
  • Ben Raue, Electoral Analyst, http://tallyroom.com.au/

With! Bonus! Post-show podcast extra discussions of the implications of the election for the participants, and wider Australian politics, and a detailed discussion of the recent Dutch national elections!

The Nerds’ New Content Partner

We’re pleased to announce that we’ve become a partner with the POP Politics Australia blog and will be syndicating show content into their feed from this Sunday.

We’re a good fit for POP Politics, as they:

explore both established and new forms of political participation and organisation. The POP Politics Blog is intended to stimulate the work of the group and foster connections between academic and practice based researchers.  It aims to promote and broaden the debate about political participation and organisations in critical and reflective way.

Sound interesting?  Check out their great posts: https://poppoliticsaus.wordpress.com/

Crime and Punishment Show

In which the nerds talk about the prospect of Senator Cory Bernardi’s, new conservative splinter party, examine crime, justice and the media in Australia, and look at research research examining the strategic decision making of Hamas in Palestine.

Hosts:

  • Dr Stewart Jackson, Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney
  • Dr Amanda Elliott, Department of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Sydney

Guests:

  • Dr Alyce McGovern, Senior Lecturer in Criminology, School of Social Sciences, University of New South Wales
  • Dr. Martin Kear, Lecturer, Department of Government and International Relations

With post-show chatter!

Podcast Special: Interview with Shaun Ratcliff

A full length interview with Shaun Ratcliff (University of Sydney), recorded at the 2016 Australian Political Studies Association conference at UNSW Australia.

The subject of the interview was his paper, titled “Same-sex Marriage debate in Australia: Public opinion and policy congruence”, written with DrsAndrea Carson (University of Melbourne) and Yannick Dufresne (Universite Laval)

The abstract for the paper is:

    Democratic theory is predicated on the representative role of parties. In particular, representative democracies require that a certain degree of congruence exists between public opinion and the policies pursued by legislators. This paper seeks to identify the degree of this congruence on a particular issue: same sex marriage. This policy area is particularly useful for studying the link between public opinion and legislator policy activity as it is one of the few matters of public concern for which reliable data is available for both voters’ preferences in every Australian electorate and the position taken by most legislators in the Australian Federal Parliament. We study the relationship between public opinion on same-sex marriage and legislator’s position on this issue, and the individual and environmental factors that condition this relationship, using the unique Vote Compass data, collected during the 2013 federal election campaign, information from the 2011 Census, and advances in public opinion estimation. This methodology is used to create estimates of support for same-sex marriage in all 150 electoral divisions contested in this election. We then estimate the probability a parliamentarian would support same-sex marriage legislation in 2012, 2015 and the likelihood they would change their position from no to yes between these years. This study’s findings provide the first Australian test of the relationship between public opinion and legislators’ policy positions.

Podcast Special: Interview with Kcasey McLoughlin

A full length interview with Dr Kcasey McLoughlin (University of Newcastle), recorded at the 2016 Australian Political Studies Association conference at UNSW Australia.

The subject of the interview was his paper, titled “Offensive intrusions and protected spaces: The personal, the public and the political” with Jim Jose (University of Newcastle).

The abstract for the paper is:


    In 2013 the High Court ruled on whether the application of s.471.12 of the Criminal Code 1995 to prosecute Man Haron Monis (and his partner, Ms Amirah Droudis) for sending offensive material through the postal services contravened their right to free speech. All members of the High Court agreed the material was offensive but in an historic first the Court split on gender lines—the three women judges upheld the constitutional validity of the Criminal Code, whereas the three men judges found for Monis and Droudis. The divergent opinions adopted by the men and women judges in Monis are revealing about contemporary judicial understandings of the public and private spheres, and perhaps the political nature of the personal. We argue that these judicial opinions signal a seismic shift in how at least half the court thought about what properly belonged in which sphere. When these judgments are interpreted in the context of the political discourses which permeated the decision, both within and beyond the High Court, these judicial understandings of the contours of freedom of communication and notions of ‘harm’, ‘home’, ‘private’ and ‘public’ mean that offensive intrusions are protected, the private space of one’s home is not. Further, we argue that the judgments in Monis reveal a propensity to embed linguistic violence within judicial language and in effect give licence to antisocial, violent behaviour. In consequence, the judgments endorse a return to masculinist understandings of political behaviour and democratic practice.