Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper examines the themes of terrorism and counterterrorism as they are manifest in the popular culture of the United States and United Kingdom, by focusing on eight contemporary cinematic or televisual representations of the dialectics of terrorism and counterterrorism. In each of the eight works I have chosen, the dilemmas posed by counterterrorist mobilization of the security apparatus are either implicitly or explicitly confronted in fictional spaces. I compare similarities and differences in the representation of agents (individuals) and agencies (organizations) involved in terrorism and counterterrorism, and how this impacts democratic polities, by examining four different types of cultural products. 1) 24 (US Fox Network), and Spooks (UK BBC), are television series based on fictionalized narratives that try to simulate the activities of counterterrorist operations either in: a wholly fictional Counter Terrorist Unit (CTU); and fictionalized MI-5 agents, respectively.2) Sleeper Cell (US Showtime) and Dirty War (BBC) were mini-series which examined the activities of sleeper cells in the United States, and the United Kingdom, who, in the first mini-series plan a series of terrorist attacks in Los Angeles, and in the second detonate a radiological dispersal device in central London. 3) Two science fiction television series The 4400 (USA Network US, Sky One UK) and Battlestar Galactica (SciFi Channel US, Sky One UK) which are produced and aired both in the United States and United Kingdom and address the: in The 4400 the activities of a fictionalized US Department of Homeland Security dealing with security threat posed by 4400 people returned from Earth?s future with enhanced telekinetic and other powers; and in Galactica the struggle between humans and a sentient machine race, respectively. 4) The movies Syrianna and V For Vendetta, which examine: fictionalized US covert activities in the Middle East; and the activities of a ?lone wolf? terrorist/dissident in a near-future totalitarian England, in that order. In all of these works, the dangers to civil liberties, privacy, and human rights posed by both terrorist attacks, and overt and covert internal security operations, lie at the core of their narrative structure. Each of these works deals with issues of intra-organizational competition and factionalization within intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the elite networks which direct these agencies. Additionally, Syrianna and V For Vendetta, and to a lesser extent 24, The 4400, and Battlestar Galactica take a somewhat ambiguous stance vis-à-vis dissident and/or security agent tactics that at times verge on the level of terrorist, or at the very least, criminal behavior.Each of these works have received much critical attention and debate about their significance for interpreting the cultural aftereffects of the ?war on terror?, the role of intelligence and military services, and violence and suspicion and paranoia in the political culture of early 21st century United States and United Kingdom. These programs and films were in development, or being broadcast, during a time period which spanned the before and after of September 11th, 2001, and the attacks of July 2005 in London, providing an opportunity to detect cultural shifts or the durability of certain themes. Scripts and airdates were altered in certain instances, raising questions of censorship and the possible conflation of the real and the fictional. By examining these works, and how the represent the motivations and activities of agents and agencies, I seek to answer the following questions: are these works subversive, merely the commodification of anxiety, or do they in certain cases contribute to the legitimacy of internal security and intelligence agencies?

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Is it “President” or “president” of the United States? Why do many political scientists and other authors now capitalize “Congress” and “Supreme Court” but not “president”? Why has this lowercase referent become so commonplace, and who, if anybody, is responsible for this trend? The purpose of this article is to address these very questions. After perusing references to the “President” and “president” in classic political documents, we examine the critical nature of political symbolism, the profound importance of the “President” as a national symbol, and the perceived status of that symbol as reflected in its capitalization. Next, we offer a typology for analyzing the grammatical changes that have occurred in leading political science monographs, introductory college textbooks, professional journals, popular periodicals, newspapers, and style manuals over the past three decades. The data clearly reveal that before the Nixon Administration, the vast majority of publications employed the uppercase referent to the “President.” However, beginning with the Nixon Administration and accelerating in the late-1970s, this near universal standard changed dramatically. Moreover, our study suggests that, contrary to popular belief, it was neither journalists, grammarians, publishers nor politicians, but prominent presidential scholars (viz., Thomas E. Cronin and George E. Reedy) who led the nation’s intellectual charge to make the lowercase “president” the rule rather than the exception. We believe this grammatical relegation represents, to a large extent, both a desire by leading political scientists to make the office appear less “imperial ” and a significant symbolic reaction to presidential transgressions concerning the Viet Nam War and, most importantly, the Watergate Scandal. These alterations, we contend, thus redound more from the desire by prominent political scientists to “de-imperialize” or “de-glamorize” the office than any concerted effort to establish “grammatical correctness.” The article concludes by offering suggestions for standardized grammatical references to both our nation’s highest elected office and the occupant of that office.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Chief Justice John Roberts made unanimity and collegiality a priority when he assumed office at the start of the 2005 Term of the United States Supreme Court. Conventional wisdom says that the more unanimous a decision is, the more legitimacy it will have with future justices, lower courts, elites, and the public at large. During Roberts’ first Term, the Court issued more unanimous opinions than at any other time in recent history (54%). How did Roberts achieve this new-found consensus? While he personally discussed the benefits of consensus with his colleagues, it was through his formal powers that he promoted unanimity. First, at the private conferences of the justices he used his prerogative to speak first in order to frame the issues on narrow grounds. Second, Roberts used his power to assign opinions when in the majority to reward those who worked toward moderation and consensus. But was it Roberts’ efforts that led to the new-found unanimity or was it because his colleagues were more cooperative in the Chief’s first year—a kind of honeymoon period? We hypothesize that it was not the honeymoon effect that led the Court to greater unanimity, but was instead a product of the informal and formal tactics used by Roberts to lessen disensus. To test this hypothesis, we examine the amount of Court consensus in the first terms of recent past chief justices. Specifically, we compare Roberts’ first term with his predecessors Chief Justices Rehnquist, Burger, and Warren.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper examines the relationship between the United States and the United
Nations in regional policy toward the Middle East. The essay analyzes the
areas of both cooperation and contention between the two actors and highlights
the successes and failures of the relationship, including U.S. policy toward
Israel and the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Persian Gulf War, and the Iraq War.
Specifically, the essay explores how the world body has augmented U.S. policy
initiatives and the ways in which the UN is dependent on the United States for
both overt and tacit support. External factors, including the superpower
competition of the Cold War and the impact of the subsequent end of the bipolar
struggle are also examined.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper reviews the literature on relationships of communication as well as communication network structures with organizational productivity. An hypothesis that flows from the literature is that higher network density is associated with higher productivity. We investigated associations between communication network structures and productivity in four vehicle assembly plants. Network analysis of communication about industrial materials use revealed that valued network density had an R2 of .97 with IM cost per unit produced. The highest productivity plants had IM network members communicating weekly or more often. We performed a triad census in each plant that also identified triad members so that we could propose a network rewiring intervention for three plants to change their networks to be similar to the highest productivity plant. The rewiring strategy is accurate, tractable, and reproducible.