Taylor & Francis Newsroom

, Oxford.

What is the value of inequality within Singapore’s education system?

Official statistics by the Ministry of Education, Singapore, reveal that Malays have sustained low academic achievement

50 years after Singapore gained independence, official statistics by the Ministry of Education, Singapore, reveal that Malays have sustained low academic achievement. Therefore, the possibility of a politically induced systemic inequality as a point of investigation has been raised. The relationship between this system and the reproduction of inequality, particularly through education policy, remains unclear.

Recently published in Critical Discourse Studies the article “INEQUALITY AS MERITOCRACY: The use of the metaphor of diversity and the value of inequality within Singapore's meritocratic education system” by Nadira Talib & Richard Fitzgerald, examines the way the metaphor of diversity provides a moral basis for inequality in Singapore.

This study is concerned in unfolding the will to power, and how specific values and outcomes are made desirable within Singapore's education policies.

The authors argue for change to be driven exclusively by changing political economies as a simple and certain way forward, drawing on Nietzsche's work on revaluation and trans valuation of values.

The main purpose of this study is to challenge the “taken-for-grantedness” that economic growth is the only way forward, and examine how this ideology dominates morality.

Talib & Fitzgerald’s analysis emphasizes that value judgements are continually at work in the policy discourse despite the level of meritocracy that the Singapore education system promotes. They consider  whether it is in the interests of the Singapore people that ‘talents’ should get privileged access to knowledge as it is through this more opportunities for the rest of the population can be created.

NOTE TO JOURNALISTS
When referencing the article: Please include Journal title, author, published by Taylor & Francis and the following statement:

* Read the full article online:http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17405904.2015.1034740

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life.  As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine.   From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues.


For more information please contact:

Katie Whittington
Journals Marketing Coordinator
Email: Katie.Whittington@informa.com

Follow us on Twitter @tandfnewsroom

, Oxford.

Zombie Family Values

A redefinition of the zombie genre?

Researchers studying the first three seasons of the AMC hit show The Walking Dead found the show and its characters push family as the best hope for the end times, rather than government, science or religion, and this redefinition of the zombie genre can help explain how the show has amassed its 14-million-per-episode fan base.

"'Family,' according to The Walking Dead, matters most at the end of the day — and at the end of the world. Government and its science programs cannot save us," according to a study by Joshua Ambrosius, assistant political science professor, and Joseph Valenzano III, communication professor. Their article "People in Hell Want Slurpees: The Redefinition of the Zombie Genre through the Salvific Portrayal of Family on AMC's The Walking Dead" is published in Communication Monographs.

The Walking Dead, which recently completed its fifth season and currently is the most-watched cable television show, is about a group of survivors enduring a zombie apocalypse in the American South. Ambrosius and Valenzano watched all 35 episodes of The Walking Dead's first three seasons twice and documented references to four social institutions that appear prominently in the show: science, religion, government and family. 

They found, rather than supporting the traditional 'leftist and subversive' critique of capitalism, individualism and Western society, the show displays a shift within the zombie genre that now prioritizes family as the central societal institution. The pair discovered the show presents but discredits science, religion and government as sources of salvation — just as the American public today is demonstrating less confidence in scientific, religious and political institutions.

In addition to the importance of family, Ambrosius and Valenzano also found The Walking Dead embraces alternative definitions of family other than the traditional nuclear family. "Despite some Americans today trying to live as a 'family of one,' this option becomes increasingly difficult after the apocalypse. Characters who lose loved ones quickly learn they must find a new family or risk the fate of the 'walkers,'" according to Ambrosius and Valenzano.

NOTE TO JOURNALISTS
When referencing the article: Please include Journal title, author, published by Taylor & Francis and the following statement:

* Read the full article online:http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17405904.2015.1034740

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life.  As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine.   From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues.  For more information please contact:

Marita Eleftheriadou, Marketing Executive, Journals

email: Marita.Eleftheriadou@tandf.co.uk

, Oxford.

Will April’s Facebook ‘likes’ predict the outcome of May’s general election?

Using Facebook to express support for politicians and their parties is standard practice for voters these days – but does how many ‘likes’ a party has before an election have any bearing on the eventual results? A new study of the 2014 Indian election published in the Asian Journal of Political Science suggests that it does.

Knowing that "clicking the 'like' button on a Facebook fan page could be considered as an expression of liking or an act of lending support", Francis P. Barclay from the PSG College of Arts and Sciences in Tamil Nadu and his colleagues analysed the number of ‘likes’ the leaders of the Congress, BJP and AAP parties received on their fan pages in the days leading up to the May 2014 Lok Sabha elections. 

Based on previous studies, Barclay and his colleagues expected there to be a correlation between 'mass political preference’ and ‘likes’ on fan pages. “It is also logical to assume that [the] more people there are that prefer a party, the more votes it will secure in the election. So, it is safe to assume that mass political preference has a direct positive effect on the number of votes.”

They hypothesised further: “If there is a strong correlation between the number of ‘likes’ recorded during the election campaign period and the vote count, then the former could be used to predict the latter. In other words, the politician or party that secures the most number of ‘likes’ on Facebook during the campaign period is likely to secure the most number of votes in the elections.”

Once all the data were collected and several variables taken into account, Dr Barclay and his team crunched the numbers. The result was a powerful regression equation able to predict the probable winner.

They concluded: “When the percentages of ‘likes’ recorded on the official Facebook fan pages of the political parties are correlated with the election results, a linear and positive association is found.”

Indeed, when the researchers used data from the month before the election, "the probable vote share of these parties can be deduced and the winner can be predicted with an accuracy of 87%"; when data from the several months before the vote were taken into account, that accuracy dropped slightly, to 69%.

Although Barclay and his colleagues only studied one Indian election, their results have important implications for UK politicians, journalists and opinion pollsters as our own general election approaches. Their work has established beyond question that Facebook is an accurate guide to the public’s current mood – and where that mood will take them in the polling booth.

NOTE TO JOURNALISTS
When referencing the article: Please include Journal title, author, published by Taylor & Francis and the following statement:

* Read the full article online:http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02185377.2015.1020319

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life.  As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine.

From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues.

For more information, please contact:

Katie Thompson, Taylor & Francis Group
Email: Katie.Thompson@tandf.co.uk

, Oxford.

How to stop songs from getting stuck in our heads? Chew some gum!

An effective solution to get rid of earworms, those annoying tunes that keep on re-playing in never ending loops in our heads, has been found by a team of scientists at the University of Reading, UK. Published in the Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (Taylor & Francis) the results of the research show the best way to block obsessive melodies is neither to read a good novel nor solve complex anagrams but, simply, to chew gum.

As much widespread as frustrating, earworms are experienced by over 99% of individuals (J. Kellaris) and often source of great stress for many. The part of our brain that processes auditory information – the auditory cortex – is triggered when we listen to a song so, when we hear a familiar tune again, our mind fills in the rest, repeatedly. This would suggest tune wedgies "may be a form of involuntary musical memory" explains Dr Philip Beaman, the academic leading the research. Getting rid of earworms is tricky but the academic believes the solution is to be found in gum; the act of gum-chewing is very similar to irrelevant sub-vocalisation, which has proved to degrade short term memory performance as well as auditory images.

Not only "auditory images [are] less vivid when [individuals are] engaged in tasks" loading on their inner voice, but irrelevant sub-vocalisation, like chewing, reduces the repetition of sticky tunes, explains Beaman. To test this theory the team carried out three separate experiments, in which participants were exposed to catchy tunes while either chewing or not chewing gum. Experiment 1 evaluated the effect of bubble-gum on the conscious appearance of musical images, as well as the recurrence of earworms once attempts to suppress them had ceased; participants exposed to a popular melody were first asked not to think about the music, and then let free to do so. Predictably, results proved gum-chewing reduced the number of times the tune was consciously experienced in both music suppression and overt expression condition. Experiment 2, which looked at the actual ‘hearing’ of music in participants’ heads, also demonstrated the reducing effect of gum-chewing upon the music-hearing phenomenon. Last but not the least, Experiment 3 was designed to assess whether the effects of gum were common to any kind of motor activity, or specific to the speech articulators only; to this end, partakers were asked to either chew some gum or tap with their fingers at the beat of a novel melody. Interestingly, the outcome showed that motor activity per se (tapping) was less effective than sub-vocal actions (chewing) in moderating the appearance of earworms.

The first to look at gum in the context of voluntary as well as involuntary musical imagery, this study demonstrates chewing gum interferes with the experience of hearing musical recollections therefore can be recommended as an aid to get rid of earworms. So, next time we get stuck with a tune, let’s forget intricate anagrams and get some bubble-gum instead.

NOTE TO JOURNALISTS
When referencing the article: Please include Journal title, author, published by Taylor & Francis and the following statement:

* Read the full article online:http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17470218.2015.1034142

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life. As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, e-books and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine. 

From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues. 

For more information please contact: 
Claire Thomas, Senior Marketing Executive, Behavioral Science Journals 
email: claire.thomas@tandf.co.uk

, Oxford.

FIFA and UEFA:  Is their autonomy curtailed by the EU?

FIFA and UEFA are considered by many as influential and supremely powerful forces in the world of football.  Their authority in the footballing sphere has placed them seemingly beyond regulation from outside.  The European Commission states that autonomy of sporting organisations is conditional to good governance; FIFA and UEFA have both been under the microscope, is their long enjoyed sovereignty under threat?  A study published in Journal of European Public Policy examines tensions between the EU, FIFA and UEFA and defines how and to what degree the EU controls the football giants.

Geeraert & Drieskens draw on EU documents, stakeholder interviews and past research to illustrate how the EU has used law and sporting policy routes to monitor, sanction and steer the actions of FIFA and UEFA.  EU law has influenced player transfer procedures, sales of match media rights and ticket availability for fans.  Likewise EU sporting policy has given influence to fight match-fixing and doping and to monitor sports agents and transfer rules.  So with the ‘shadow of hierarchy’ looming over FIFA and UEFA, how do they mitigate?

It is not all bad news; FIFA and UEFA have quickly recognised the benefits of an EU relationship based on goodwill.  The Commission are more likely to be lenient with EU footballing law in light of cooperation.  The Commission also strives to foster social dialogue in professional football, bring in finance, support projects and connect stakeholders.  Indeed the combined efforts of the Commission, FIFA and UEFA have guaranteed European minimum standards for footballing contracts, a definite plus.

FIFA and UEFA have developed methods of modifying EU control; expansion of sports arbitration to defer EU jurisprudence, empowering football principals in strategic committees and councils for decision making.  They also have the power to withhold rights for countries to participate in or host important footballing events, a threat to the Commission and a means to ensuring weight of government support against them.

In conclusion, the authors observe the EU and Commission as agents in international football “indeed have the capacity to curtail FIFA and UEFA’s autonomy…Yet…the Commission never truly operates autonomously of the member states and…the Parliament”.  It seems the EU, FIFA and UEFA are a case of swings and roundabouts.

NOTE TO JOURNALISTS
When referencing the article: Please include Journal title, author, published by Taylor & Francis and the following statement:

* Read the full article online:http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13501763.2015.1022206

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life.  As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine.   From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues.

For more information please contact:
Mel Phillips, Marketing Executive
Taylor & Francis Journals
Email: melissa.phillips@tandf.co.uk

, Oxford.

The ‘left to die’ boat: responsibility and blame for migrant deaths in the Mediterranean

Just who is responsible for saving – or not saving – the lives of the hundreds of migrants who perish each year while trying to cross the Mediterranean in search of a better life in Europe is the focus of a new study in the Journal of Human Rights.

Karolina S. Follis explores the issue through the lens of the sad case of what’s come to be known as the "left to die" boat: a rubber dinghy in which 63 of its 72 Libyan passengers died, left to drift for two weeks "in the middle of the busiest sea in the world", despite its desperate state being known to military vessels and the authorities on land.

As a result of the 2011 tragedy, brought to the world’s attention by The Guardian, the Dutch socialist Senator Tineke Strik was tasked with conducting an enquiry for the Council of Europe. It is this final report, accepted by the Council, that Follis analyses and finds unsatisfactory. In her view, the report merely identifies "failures" – of the Rome Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre, the Libyan authorities, the United Nations, NATO and even the people smugglers themselves – rather than apportions blame.

Key to Follis’ criticism is the understanding of "responsibility" as two separate concepts: "duty" and "guilt". She writes: “While it is unsurprising that no one wants to accept any blame, the rapporteur is likewise not eager to cast it. In the report, responsibility is instead proposed as a duty, one that extends to a range of different actors and agencies. On the particular occasion under investigation, these responsibilities went unmet, but the account stops short of direct attribution of fault. Instead, ample use is made of the concept of ‘failure’.”

She concludes: "Failure… suggests that something just broke down, rather than that there is a guilty part, or parties, that could be held to account in a court of law or another comparable forum."

For Follis, this lack of accountability poses huge problems for human rights and for dealing with similar tragedies in future. "The language of 'omissions' and failures may be diplomatic, but ultimately it perpetuates ideas of collective responsibility, that is, obligations distributed so widely that no one agent can be held to account," she writes. "Without a clear naming of those who failed in their duties, it is difficult to pinpoint who exactly is responsible for implementing “lessons for the future”, or to see how anybody could be held to account if the report’s goals do not materialise."

The fate of the increasing number of desperate migrants at sea is set to remain uncertain for some time to come.

NOTE TO JOURNALISTS
When referencing the article: Please include Journal title, author, published by Taylor & Francis and the following statement:

* Read the full article online:http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14754835.2014.987737

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life.  As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine.   From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues.  For more information please contact:

Iain Matthews, Senior Marketing Executive, Journals

Email: Iain.matthews@tandf.co.uk

, Oxford.

The Social Network: the changing face of a London street gang

With 225 gangs currently reported to be operating in London, gang culture is a burning issue in the capital. Yet, despite a wealth of literature on the matter, the outdated notion of gangs as rigidly ordered groups with drug dealing activities at their core, still prevails today. But perceptions are about to change, as a new study from Routledge takes a fresh look at the increasingly concerning matter of British street crime and reveals gang structure is more ‘fluid’ than we think.

Published in the Journal of Youth Studies, the research examines the organisation as well as drug trafficking of Red Gang, a clan operating in the highly deprived area of Rose Borough in London.  

Following David Cameron’s crackdown on organised street crime, social concerns have increased in recent years; yet, ‘there is [still] a lack of empirical research on how gangs are structured in the British context’ reveal the academics leading the study. Determined to rectify this situation, between June 2012 and January 2013, the researchers carried out a series of interviews on a sample of 12 young individuals – current as well as ex-Red Gang members – aged between 12 and 18 years.  Alongside this group, seven practitioners from the Youth Offending Team (YOT) in Rose Borough were also involved in the study. Questions were specifically designed to elicit information on drug dealing activities and organisation of crime and, as the study progressed, a number of key issues started to emerge.

Contrary to current beliefs viewing gang structure as hierarchical and clan recruiting processes as rigorous, Red Gang members described their gang structure as a loose social network into which individuals drifted through friendships with current associates; similarly, gang leadership was said to be the result of personal dexterity – individuals ascended to command status because of their personal traits – rather than the outcome of a selective system imposed from above.

Surprisingly, drug dealing activities were also described as loose; virtually subjected to no supervision from the clan, narcotic trafficking was left to the entrepreneurial skills of individual members. Therefore, because of the freedom of trade enjoyed by its associates, Red Gang could hardly be defined as a drug dealing association. Curiously, the picture painted by the Red Gang’s members didn’t match the one provided by the interviewed practitioners, who described the clan as a hierarchical organisation driven by a strict code of conduct and set on recruiting vulnerable youths in its ranks.

In showing the fluctuating nature of gang structure – which is very much dependent on individual members as well social factors – this interesting study calls obsolete views into questions and provides invaluable new insights into the diverse and shifting face of London street gangs. What’s more, in exposing a discrepancy between how members and practitioners view Red Gang, not only it uncovers a crucial gap in the knowledge base, but warns researchers and policy makers it is now time to really get to grips with the matter of gangland London.

NOTE TO JOURNALISTS
When referencing the article: Please include Journal title, author, published by Taylor & Francis and the following statement:

* Read the full article online:http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13676261.2015.1020925

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life.  As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine.   From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues.

For more information please contact:
Rebecca Bray
Taylor & Francis Journals
Email: rebecca.bray@tandf.co.uk

, Philadelphia.

Ebola – the implications of a worldwide epidemic

“It now seems a lifetime ago. The first case of Ebola had come to the Western hemisphere and taken the life of Thomas Eric Duncan at a Dallas, Texas hospital. His death, and other cases in the “developed” world, led to a predictable media deluge, a good bit of hysteria, and predictable political posturing. As the November election approached, fear and ideology took hold, with calls for quarantine and allegations of discrimination coming from predictable precincts.” Joseph J. Fins, M.D in 'Ideology and Microbiology: Ebola, Science and Deliberative Democracy'.

Ebola – from a small village in Guinea, the deadly virus took hold of West Africa in 2014, and to date has taken the lives of over 10,000 people. The virus threatens to destabilize world health efforts and has induced global fear, with citizens from far away nations concerned about the “what ifs?” of Ebola landing on their doorsteps.

Shining a light through the media stories, health claims and international panic, this edition of The American Journal of Bioethics focuses on the latest research on ebola, an epidemic which has enormous implications for health practitioners, scientists, and policy makers worldwide. With articles focused on the ethics of quarantine, on the design of clinical research trials, on non-approved therapies, and public health ethics, this issue seeks to address many of the key questions that have been raised in recent months on how we respond and adapt to such a deadly health crisis.

Essential reading for academics, policy makers, health professionals and anyone with an interest in the outbreak, the research is available on Taylor & Francis Online

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life.  As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine.

From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues.

About The American Journal of Bioethics

Every issue of AJOB contains peer-reviewed Target Articles that zero in on tough questions, answered by Open Commentary articles from scholars across disciplines and cultures. The American Journal of Bioethics provides an authoritative, annotated conversation that has been used by judges, Senators, journalists, scholars, schoolteachers, and millions of others as the key source on thousands of topics in the health sciences.

AJOB is the most-widely read journal on bioethics in the world. Hundreds of thousands more readers have discovered bioethics through InFocus articles and other features of bioethics.net. Our readers include faculty and students at virtually every graduate and professional school in the world, thousands of elected officials and judges, and most health news journalists. The American Journal of Bioethics has followed through on the innovative vision that built bioethics: serious discussion of the social implications of biomedicine.

2013 Journal Citations Report® ranks The American Journal of Bioethics 1st out of 50 journals in Ethics, 1st out of 58 journals in History & Philosophy (S), 1st out of 42 journals in History & Philosophy (Ss), 1st out of 42 journals in Social Issues, 1st out of 18 journals in Medical Ethics, 2nd out of 37 journals in Biomedical Social Sciences with an Impact Factor of 3.887
© 2014 Thomson Reuters

Editor-in-Chief: David Magnus, PhD – Stanford University

For more information please contact:

Marisa Starr, Marketing Manager, Journals
Taylor & Francis Journals, Taylor & Francis Group
530 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 · 215-606-4206
marisa.starr@taylorandfrancis.com

, New York.

Routledge Publishes Tim Ingold’s The Life of Lines

Following his groundbreaking 2007 book, Lines, Tim Ingold further develops his unique approach to anthropology in The Life of Lines.

A prominent anthropologist at the University of Aberdeen, Ingold is known for his exploration of the relations between human beings and the environments they inhabit. With this new book, Ingold studies the life of lines in a series of original meditations on life, ground, weather, imagination, and what it means to be human.

While anchored in anthropology, The Life of Lines will delight and intrigue readers interested in a wide range of disciplines, including philosophy, geography, sociology, art, and architecture.

Augustin Fuentes, professor of Anthropology at Notre Dame, says, “In The Life of Lines Ingold develops a philosophical and ecological anthropology that is at once expansive, integrative, and inclusive. Taking us on a journey through movement, knots, weather, atmosphere and surfaces, he guides us to a critical conclusion: to human is a verb.”

About the author

Tim Ingold is Professor of Social Anthropology at the University of Aberdeen, UK. His books for Routledge include Lines: A Brief History (2007), The Perception of the Environment (reissued 2011), Being Alive (2011) and Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art and Architecture (2013).

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life.  As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine.

From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues.

For more information please contact:

Samantha Skurdahl
Marketing Assistant
Email: samantha.skurdahl@taylorandfrancis.com
Direct line: +1 (917) 351-7157

, Oxford.

Should voting be compulsory or should we have a right not to vote?

Each year, millions of people fail to vote without reproach.  Does abstention constitute a citizen’s right not to vote? This article in Australian Journal of Political Science explores whether we have a legal right to a ‘no vote’ and if such a right should be protected as fiercely as the right to vote. Lisa Hill discusses the ‘no vote’, its implications for society and reaches a firm conclusion.

Many assert that not voting is a fundamental right, a free expression of political discontent. Some go as far as to say that compulsory voting is worse than being denied a vote and a violation of rights. Legal cases have been brought in defence of the right not to vote but to date no court has enforced it. Should it be true that the right to vote could be waived and hence in itself be a right not to vote and deserve constitutional protection? If so could other basic rights be waived? The minimum wage? Equal employment? Hill argues that legal recognition of the right not to vote is a dangerous path to tread.

The right to vote is an individual liberty but crucially a collective right at the core of democracy. Without political participation from society, government, public interests, security and the very fabric of society would be at stake. Vulnerable social groups would lose their voices; failure to vote could bring political oppression and far greater infringements to personal freedom. Hill therefore reasons that voting is a right and a duty; key to the structure and values of society, a moral responsibility and more important than an individual’s right not to vote.

So voluntary voting systems can continue to allow abstention, compulsory systems can have exemptions but as Hill states this “will not – and should not – constitute the exercise of any particular right,” and “doing so would endanger – and possibly destroy – the system for which it exists: representative democracy.”

NOTE TO JOURNALISTS
When referencing the article: Please include Journal title, author, published by Taylor & Francis and the following statement:

* Read the full article online:http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10361146.2014.990418

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life.  As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine.   From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues.

For more information please contact:
Mel Phillips, Marketing Executive
Taylor & Francis Journals
Email: melissa.phillips@tandf.co.uk