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.

APSA Statement on US President’s Travel Ban

The Australian Political Studies Association (APSA) has now released its statement on the travel ban to the United States, a ban that has already begun to affect our members and students.
The statement reads:

The Australian Political Studies Association is deeply concerned by the Executive Order issued by the US President on January 27th 2017. The Executive Order bans entry into the United States for 90 days for travellers with citizenship from Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Libya and Yemen and bans travellers from Syria indefinitely.
A travel ban on people of selected nationalities harms academic freedom and inhibits the global exchange of knowledge and ideas that is central to academic enterprise. This is particularly harmful coming from a country which has such an important presence in the global academy. Australian-based academics who are citizens of or refugees from the affected countries, or who undertake research in the affected countries, may now face significant barriers to conference attendance, research or fellowships in the United States. Many American-based academics will now face the prospect of being unable to return if they leave the United States to attend conferences or undertake research. The uncertainty around the legality of this order, its exact terms, and how it will be implemented makes it very difficult for potentially affected people to plan international travel for either work or family reasons. This is unacceptably discriminatory and destructive of academic freedom.
We are also concerned that a ban on refugees for any length of time violates the obligations of the United States under the Geneva Convention, and that this ban targets people of Muslim faith in a way that may violate the United States Constitution. It endangers vulnerable people around the world and will damage relations between the United States and other countries. We join the calls of numerous Political Science associations worldwide, and express solidarity with our colleagues in the USA and with all Americans who are urging the President and the United States government to end this ban immediately.

You can link to the APSA statement here: http://www.auspsa.org.au/page/news

Cultural Diplomacy and Soft Power Show

In which the Nerds put away their penchant for kinetic energy weapons and kill ratios to talk about alternatives to war as politics by other means: soft power and cultural diplomacy.  With an expert panel they discuss the definition of the concept, its origins and what it looks like in practice, using Australia and China as two key case examples.  In the final part of the show, the Nerds talk about a new book on state succession and formation.

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:

  • Distinguished Professor Ien Ang, Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University
  • Professor Jocelyn Chey, Director, Australia China Institute for Arts and Culture, Western Sydney University,
  • Dr Ryan Griffiths, Department of Government, University of Sydney

With post-show chatter and a book give away!


Podcast Special: Interview with Farah Naz

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

The subject of the interview was his paper, titled “Digital age, extremism and radicalisation”

The abstract for the paper is:


    This paper aims to better understand the role of digital media in the age of extremism and radicalisation. Many academic scholarships suggest controlling digital media as a key weapon to control radicalization of the society, but is it possible to control digital media in the 21st century. When it becomes the right of every individual to have factual information about everything. To contribute to the existing scholarship, this study is based on primary and secondary data drawn from a variety of sources: interviews with the youth, terrorists and extremist, police and terrorist investigation officers responsible for terrorist activities, government data, newspaper and journal articles. The sample population will be small and will be taken entirely from Islamabad, Pakistan. The reason for a small sample population is due to the sensitive nature of the topic where information in the public domain is limited and also there is a limited number of individuals ready to speak about it with researcher in this field. This research paper will outline some of the key aspects of the digital media both positive and negative. It will also touch upon some of the problematic misunderstanding of the terms extremism and radicalisation in the digital age, and will draw some lessons to counter extremism and radicalisation in the digital age.