Summing up his short but detailed report, he includes the following as propaganda strategies: Incompleteness Inaccuracy Driving the agenda Milking the story maximizing media coverage of a particular issue by the careful use of briefings, leaking pieces of a jigsaw to different outlets, allowing journalists to piece the story together and drive the story up the news agenda, etc. Exploiting that we want to believe the best of ourselves Perception Management in particular by using PR firms Reinforcing existing attitudes Simple, repetitious and emotional phrases e.
Originally published as 62 Tenn. Permission for WWW use at this site generously granted by the author. For educational use only.
The printed edition remains canonical. For citational use please obtain a back issue from William S. But what many casual readers may not realize is that those articles are simply the latest installments in what has become a rich and interesting literature. Although the Second Amendment was almost completely ignored by the academic community for the first two centuries of its existence, the past several years have seen an explosion of scholarship.
The reasons for that explosion are beyond the scope of this Article; they may stem in part from the increased prominence of "gun control" debates in contemporary politics, or from the natural tendency of constitutional law scholars to look for as yet unmined subjects for study.
But for whatever reason, the past five years or so have undoubtedly seen more academic research concerning the Second Amendment than did the previous two hundred.
In this Article, I will summarize and criticize that scholarship.
By doing so, I hope to serve two purposes. First, I hope to provide readers who are unfamiliar with the literature sufficient background to understand references to it in other articles on this issue, or simply to consider themselves "Second Amendment literate.
Although some aspects of Second Amendment theory have been developed with a thoroughness that would surprise those unfamiliar with the field, other aspects deserve additional study. I hope that readers of this Article will be inspired to join in the conversation. Introduction Before addressing the body of Second Amendment scholarship, it is worth taking a moment to put it into the context of the popular debate over gun controls and the right to bear arms.
Although it would be something of an oversimplification, it is probably fair to say that those who support p. For example, it is common to find "right wing" opponents of sexual liberty taking the position that the Ninth Amendment,  often cited as the root of the right to privacy that is typically implicated in cases involving sexual freedom,  means nothing.
Robert Bork, for example, has described the Ninth Amendment as an "inkblot" whose meaning cannot be deciphered,  and has referred to the right of privacy as a "loose canon in the law.
In the case of the Second Amendment, at least until a few years ago, there was no such caselaw or scholarship. Today there is still very little caselaw, but there is now a great deal of scholarship. That may change, and if it does it will probably be a good thing.
Perhaps surprisingly, what distinguishes the Second Amendment scholarship from that relating to other constitutional rights, such as privacy or free speech, is that there appears to be far more agreement on the general outlines of Second Amendment theory than exists in those other areas.
Indeed, there is sufficient consensus on many issues that one can properly speak of a "Standard Model" in Second Amendment theory, much as physicists and cosmologists speak of a "Standard Model" in terms of the creation and evolution of the Universe.
But the overall framework for analysis, the questions regarded as being clearly resolved, and those regarded as still open, are all generally agreed upon. This is certainly the case with regard to Second Amendment scholarship. Unfortunately, despite the existence of unusually broad areas of scholarly consensus, this literature has so far had less of a disciplinary effect on public debate than might otherwise be hoped.
Perhaps this Symposium, by increasing the awareness of general readers, will help to remedy that problem. I will discuss this subject at greater length below.
Of course, a Standard Model among lawyers is not the same thing as a Standard Model among physicists. For one thing, physicists can revise their theories based on new experiments and data. Lawyers lack such opportunities.
The Supreme Court is the closest thing we have to a theory-testing device, but the Court does not really serve a theory-testing purpose. First, as I have suggested elsewhere, prediction of Supreme Court decisions does little to validate particular theories, given the complexities involved. Similarly, the Supreme Court's treatment of the First Amendment until well into this century was very similar to its treatment of the Second Amendment up to this point.
At any rate, with these caveats I will discuss what can fairly be called the "Standard Model" of Second Amendment interpretation. I will also discuss those aspects of Second Amendment theory that can be characterized as outside the Standard Model.
Freedom’s Story is made possible by a grant from the Wachovia Foundation. Freedom’s Story Advisors and Staff Slave Resistance. James H. Sweet. My first reaction to this post was “Wow, what a bad reason to change your attitudes.” My reaction upon reflection was to notice that I was a leftish neoliberal in my conservative Bible Belt high school, and in my left-wing liberal arts college I became more libertarian, but also more culturally radical so no one could confuse me for one of those Lew Rockwell-type conservative libertarians. Antisemitic canards are unfounded rumors or false allegations which are defamatory towards Judaism as a religion, or defamatory towards Jews as an ethnic or religious group. They often form part of broader theories of Jewish r-bridal.coming to defense attorney Kenneth Stern, "Historically, Jews have not fared well around conspiracy r-bridal.com ideas fuel anti-Semitism.
I will then make some observations of my own regarding the shortcomings of both Standard Model and non-Standard Model theories, and will close with a few comments on the way in which the public debate over the Second Amendment has been influenced or not by the scholarly literature on the subject.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
What is a "militia"? What does it mean for one to be "well regulated"? What is a "right of the people"? What does it mean to "keep and bear arms"?
And what sort of infringements on that right are prohibited?My first reaction to this post was “Wow, what a bad reason to change your attitudes.” My reaction upon reflection was to notice that I was a leftish neoliberal in my conservative Bible Belt high school, and in my left-wing liberal arts college I became more libertarian, but also more culturally radical so no one could confuse me for one of those Lew Rockwell-type conservative libertarians.
These contradictions are shown to have negative and positive implications on Australia's development of its identity. Introduction Australia is a half grown and culturally diverse country which has difficulties with how to define its national identity.
Stereotypes: A Big Problem in Our Modern Society. I personally hate stereotypes. I dislike the fact that people think I should act one way because of my sex, personality, or nationality.
From the Invisibilia podcast, on June 15, “Scientific research has shown that even well meaning people operate with implicit bias – stereotypes and attitudes we are not fully aware of that nonetheless shape our behavior towards people of color. Abstract In this interview for Think magazine (April ’’92), Richard Paul provides a quick overview of critical thinking and the issues surrounding it: defining it, common mistakes in assessing it, its relation to communication skills, self-esteem, collaborative learning, motivation, curiosity, job skills for the future, national standards, and assessment strategies.
Freedom’s Story is made possible by a grant from the Wachovia Foundation.
Freedom’s Story Advisors and Staff Slave Resistance. James H. Sweet.