A century ago, governments buoyed by Progressive Era–beliefs began to assume greater responsibility for protecting and rescuing citizens. Yet the aftermath of two disasters in the United States–Canada borderlands--the Salem Fire of 1914 and the Halifax Explosion of 1917--saw working class survivors instead turn to friends, neighbors, coworkers, and family members for succor and aid. Both official and unofficial responses, meanwhile, showed how the United States and Canada were linked by experts, workers, and money. In Disaster Citizenship, Jacob A. C. Remes draws on histories of the Salem and Halifax events to explore the institutions--both formal and informal--that ordinary people relied upon in times of crisis. He explores patterns and traditions of self-help, informal order, and solidarity and details how people adapted these traditions when necessary. Yet, as he shows, these methods--though often quick and effective--remained illegible to reformers. Indeed, soldiers, social workers, and reformers wielding extraordinary emergency powers challenged these grassroots practices to impose progressive "solutions" on what they wrongly imagined to be a fractured social landscape.

Confronting Prejudice and Discrimination: The Science of Changing Minds and Behaviors focuses on confrontation as a strategy for reducing bias and discrimination. The volume tackles questions that people face when they wish to confront bias: What factors influence people's decisions to confront or ignore bias in its various forms? What are the motives and consequences of confrontation? How can confrontation be approached individually, through education and empowerment, and in specific contexts (e.g., health care) to yield favourable outcomes? These questions are paramount in contemporary society, where confrontation of bias is increasingly evident. Moreover, great strides in the scientific study of confrontation in the past 20 years has yielded valuable insights and answers. This volume is an essential resource for students and researchers with an interest in prejudice and prejudice reduction, and will also be valuable to non-academics who wish to stand up to bias through confrontation. - Addresses factors that determine individuals' decisions to confront stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination - Analyzes how personal and collective motives shape responses in confrontation-relevant situations - Examines the consequences of confrontation from the perspectives of targets, perpetrators and bystanders - Provides a roadmap for how to prepare for and engage in successful confrontations at the individual level - Covers confronting bias in various settings including in schools, health care, the workplace and on the internet - Discusses confrontation in the context of racism, sexism, sexual harassment and other forms of bias, including intersectional forms of bias

The fight against terrorism is receiving increased awareness due to recent wor- wide large-scale terrorist acts, and only since then has some attention been directed specifically to victims of terrorism. Existing legal instruments of international b- ies like the European Union, the Council of Europe and the United Nations c- cerning victims of terrorism are relatively abstract or include victims of terrorism under the broader heading of victims of crime in general. In addition, policies and legislation relating to victims of crime or victims of terrorism vary widely on the domestic level. Against this background, the European Union commissioned a project that should aim to develop more extensive standards for the aid and ass- tance of victims of terrorism at the European level. This study provides the basis from which more extensive standards could be derived. The study focuses parti- larly on developing standards in the field of continuing assistance, access to justice, administration of justice and compensation to victims of terrorism. A novel feature of the approach is that also the possible utility of restorative justice approaches is examined. An important question to address was whether there is a real need to adopt s- cific standards for victims of terrorism, thereby implying that their needs might differ from victims of ordinary crime.

According to the United States Department of Justice (Krebs et al., 2016), 1 in 5 women are sexually assaulted in college. Gender-based violence occurring in universities and on university campuses is an issue researched at the international level, especially in the United States (Coker et al., 2016). Several social and student movements have been working in different parts of the world to prevent and overcome this problem. Their influence has created situations favorable to the establishment of institutional measures and specific laws to address gender-based violence at universities. Nevertheless, the role of social movements and their contributions to the prevention of gender violence in institutes of higher education has not received much academic attention. In Spain, the first study that analyzed gender violence in Spanish universities (Valls, 2005-2008) concluded that 62% of university students knew of or had experienced sexual harassment situations at their colleges. This research project inspired several publications in scientific journals such as Violence Against Women (Valls, Puigvert, Melgar & Garcia-Yeste, 2016). This dissertation analyzes the role of student movements in relation to preventing and overcoming gender violence in the university context, focusing on one of such complaints in Spain, which occurred at the University of Barcelona (also refereed here as UB) in 2011. The dissertation examines the contributions of the Solidarity Network of Victims of Gender Violence at Universities (also referred here as Solidarity Network) the first initiative that emerged "from below" in Spain, created in late 2013 by victims of sexual violence in the Spanish academy and by the people who supported them: university members who often became the victims of second order harassment (Dziech & Weiner, 1990). The need for peer support is also emphasized throughout the dissertation, highlighting the bystander intervention (Banyard et al., 2005) as an effective response. At a comparative level, this study also analyzes the process of one of the first American sexual harassment complaints against a faculty member, which was made in 1979 at the University of California, Berkeley (also referred here as UC Berkeley or UCB). To continue the comparison, previous solidarity networks in American universities are examined, such as the WOASH (Women Organized Against Sexual Harassment), and the EROC (End Rape on Campus), the latter created in 2013 by survivors of sexual violence in college. These facts are analyzed to present evidence on the contribution of student movements in overcoming gender violence in universities. The methodological paradigm used in this dissertation is focused on a qualitative approach, especially the portraiture method (Lightfoot, 1981) and the communicative methodology of research (Puigvert, 2014), which has been validated by several research projects and highly relevant scientific publications that present the results of daily life stories and in-depth interviews with victims, faculty members and institutional representatives. The results of this dissertation show that the mobilizations of the victims and those who support them and dare to take their side have an important impact on both raising awareness regarding this problem and in the transformation of existing university structures. According to the findings, by doing this, survivors and their supporters contribute to the shaping of universities that take a stand in preventing and responding to gender violence, thereby becoming better able to protect the victims and moving closer to the goal of being free of sexual violence.

Accounts of solidarity typically defend it in teleological or loyalty terms, justifying it by invoking its goal of promoting justice or its expression of support for a shared community. Such solidarity seems to be a moral option rather than an obligation. In contrast, A Moral Theory of Solidarity develops a deontological theory grounded in equity. With extended reflection on the Spanish conquest of the Americas and the US Civil Rights movement, Kolers defines solidarity as political action on others' terms. Unlike mere alliances and coalitions, solidarity involves a disposition to defer to others' judgment about the best course of action. Such deference overrides individual conscience. Yet such deference is dangerous; a core challenge is then to determine when deference becomes appropriate. Kolers defends deference to those who suffer gravest inequity. Such deference constitutes equitable treatment, in three senses: it is Kantian equity, expressing each person's equal status; it is Aristotelian equity, correcting general rules for particular cases; and deference is 'being an equitable person, ' sharing others' fate rather than seizing advantages that they are denied. Treating others equitably is a perfect duty; hence solidarity with victims of inequity is a perfect duty. Further, since equity is valuable in itself, irrespective of any other goal it might promote, such solidarity is intrinsically valuable, not merely instrumentally valuable. Solidarity is then not about promoting justice, but about treating people justly. A Moral Theory of Solidarity engages carefully with recent work on equity in the Kantian and Aristotelian traditions, as well as the demandingness of moral duties, collective action, and unjust benefits, and is a major contribution to a field of growing interest.