Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The invention of modern freedom-the equating of liberty with restraints on state power-was not the natural outcome of such secular Western trends as the growth of religious tolerance or the creation of market societies. Rather, it was propelled by an antidemocratic backlash following the Atlantic Revolutions. We tend to think of freedom as something that is best protected by carefully circumscribing the boundaries of legitimate state activity. But who came up with this understanding of freedom, and for what purposes? In a masterful and surprising reappraisal of more than two thousand years of thinking about freedom in the West, Annelien de Dijn argues that we owe our view of freedom not to the liberty lovers of the Age of Revolution but to the enemies of democracy. The conception of freedom most prevalent today-that it depends on the limitation of state power-is a deliberate and dramatic rupture with long-established ways of thinking about liberty. For centuries people in the West identified freedom not with being left alone by the state but with the ability to exercise control over the way in which they were governed. They had what might best be described as a democratic conception of liberty. Understanding the long history of freedom underscores how recently it has come to be identified with limited government. It also reveals something crucial about the genealogy of current ways of thinking about freedom. The notion that freedom is best preserved by shrinking the sphere of government was not invented by the revolutionaries of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries who created our modern democracies-it was invented by their critics and opponents. Rather than following in the path of the American founders, today's "big government" antagonists more closely resemble the counterrevolutionaries who tried to undo their work. --

Political philosophy. Social philosophy --- Philosophical anthropology --- Human rights --- World history --- ethics [philosophy] --- freedom --- politics --- Liberty --- Power (Social sciences) --- Government, Resistance to --- Liberté. --- Pouvoir (sciences sociales) --- Résistance politique. --- Liberty. --- Government, Resistance to.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Phillips offers an incisive, subtle, and compelling analysis of the cinematic present that also poses difficult questions for the political present. A Cinema of Hopelessness has the courage to deeply examine contemporary popular cinema in a political context. While pointing to a generalized affective atmosphere of hopelessness, this book does not succumb to negativity. On the contrary, out of hopelessness, Phillips glimpses the contours of hope, a way out, a future that contemporary cinema gives us the possibility of imagining. - Dr Richard Rushton, Lancaster University This book explores the circulation of anger and hostility in contemporary American culture with particular attention to the fantasy of refusal, a dream of rejecting all the structures of the contemporary political and economic system. Framing the question of public sentiment through the lens of rhetorical studies, this book traces the circulation of symbols that craft public feelings in contemporary popular cinema. Analyzing popular twenty-first century films as invitations to a particular way of feeling, the book delves into the way popular sentiments are circulated and intensified. The book examines dystopian films (The Purge, The Cabin in the Woods), science fiction (Snowpiercer), and superhero narratives (the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Joker). Across these varied films, an affective economy that emphasizes grief, betrayal, refusal, and an underlying rage at the seeming hopelessness of contemporary culture is uncovered. These examinations are framed in terms of ongoing political protests ranging from Occupy Wall Street, the Tea Party, Black Lives Matter, and the 6th January 2021 invasion of the US Capitol Building. Kendall R. Phillips is Professor of Communication and Rhetorical Studies at Syracuse University, USA. His publications include Projected Fears: Horror Films and American Culture (2005), Dark Directions: Romero, Craven, Carpenter and the Modern Horror Film (2012) and A Place of Darkness: The Rhetoric of Horror in Early American Cinema (2018).

Philosophy and psychology of culture --- Sociology of culture --- Film --- TV (televisie) --- cultuur --- film --- America --- Motion pictures --- Government, Resistance to, in motion pictures. --- Politics in motion pictures. --- Industrie du cinéma --- Résistance politique --- Science politique --- Industrie du cinéma --- Résistance politique

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

What is Violent Communication? If "violent" means acting in ways that result in hurt or harm, then much of how we communicate--judging others, bullying, having racial bias, blaming, finger pointing, discriminating, speaking without listening, criticizing others or ourselves, name-calling, reacting when angry, using political rhetoric, being defensive or judging who's "good/bad" or what's "right/wrong" with people--could indeed be called "violent communication." What is Nonviolent Communication? Nonviolent Communication is the integration of four things: - Consciousness: a set of principles that support living a life of compassion, collaboration, courage, and authenticity - Language: understanding how words contribute to connection or distance - Communication: knowing how to ask for what we want, how to hear others even in disagreement, and how to move toward solutions that work for all - Means of influence: sharing "power with others" rather than using "power over others" Nonviolent Communication serves our desire to do three things: - Increase our ability to live with choice, meaning, and connection - Connect empathically with self and others to have more satisfying relationships - Sharing of resources so everyone is able to benefit

Communicatie --- Interpersonal communication. --- Interpersonal relations. --- Nonviolence. --- Social psychology --- Mass communications --- interpersonele communicatie --- intermenselijke relaties --- psychologie --- Interpersonal communication --- Interpersonal relations --- Nonviolence --- 241.65*1 --- 159.923.33*1 --- 159.923.33*1 Communicatie. Relatie --- Communicatie. Relatie --- 241.65*1 Theologische ethiek: communicatieve en distributieve rechtvaardigheid --- Theologische ethiek: communicatieve en distributieve rechtvaardigheid --- Non-violence --- Government, Resistance to --- Pacifism --- Human relations --- Interpersonal relationships --- Personal relations --- Relations, Interpersonal --- Relationships, Interpersonal --- Social behavior --- Object relations (Psychoanalysis) --- Communication --- Communicatie.