Stanford University

Society

FSI researchers work to understand continuity and change in societies as they confront their problems and opportunities. This includes the implications of migration and human trafficking. What happens to a society when young girls exit the sex trade? How do groups moving between locations impact societies, economies, self-identity and citizenship? What are the ethnic challenges faced by an increasingly diverse European Union? From a policy perspective, scholars also work to investigate the consequences of security-related measures for society and its values.

The Europe Center reflects much of FSI’s agenda of investigating societies, serving as a forum for experts to research the cultures, religions and people of Europe. The Center sponsors several seminars and lectures, as well as visiting scholars.

Societal research also addresses issues of demography and aging, such as the social and economic challenges of providing health care for an aging population. How do older adults make decisions, and what societal tools need to be in place to ensure the resulting decisions are well-informed? FSI regularly brings in international scholars to look at these issues. They discuss how adults care for their older parents in rural China as well as the economic aspects of aging populations in China and India.

Is South Korea Trapped or Transitioning? New Challenges of Low Birth Rate and Aging Population

-
Flyer for the talk "Is South Korea Trapped or Transitioning?" with portrait of speaker Kim Boo-kyum

Once the term "Japanification" was widely used in the Western media, cautioning that prolonged economic stagnation could spread to other countries like in Japan. But recently, "South Koreanification" has emerged, meaning that Korea's demographic crisis marked by low birth rates and rapid aging can become a reality elsewhere, too.

In this talk, Mr. Boo Kyum Kim, former Prime Minister of Republic of Korea, will examine the dual challenges of declining birth rate and accelerating aging population facing Korea, and discuss policy directions and strategies South Korea should take for its sustainable national growth. 

Portrait of Boo Kyum Kim

Mr. Boo Kyum Kim was the 47th Prime Minister of Republic of Korea (2021-22), and prior to that,  he was the First Minister of the Interior and Safety (2017-19). Since his college years in 1980s, Mr. Kim had been a leader of democratization movements, and he  served four terms as a National Assembly Member between 2000 and 2017. He received a BA in Political science from Seoul National University and an MA in public administration from Yonsei University in Korea.

Directions and Parking > 

Gi-Wook Shin
Boo Kyum Kim, former Prime Minister, Republic of Korea
Seminars
Korean Studies Colloquium Series
Image
Flyer for the talk "Is South Korea Trapped or Transitioning?" with portrait of speaker Kim Boo-kyum
Date Label

[BOOK TALK] Against Abandonment: Repertoires of Solidarity in South Korean Protest

-
Flyer for the book talk "Against Abandonment" with a portrait of author Jennifer Chun

BOOK TALK

Against Abandonment: Repertoires of Solidarity in South Korean Protest (Stanford University Press, 2025) by Jennifer Jihye Chun and Ju Hui Judy Han offers insight into the utility and futility of protesting precarity under neoliberal capitalism. Based on long-term ethnographic research and in-depth interviews with key labor and social movement activists, the book follows the protests of minoritized workers, especially women employed in precarious jobs, as they contend with what it means to be treated as disposable and what it takes to resist. Long-term protest camps, life-threatening hunger strikes, grueling prostrations, perilous high-altitude occupations are agonizing to perform and to witness but often powerful as affective catalysts of change. Through dramatic performances and rituals that are repeated across time and space, Against Abandonment finds that protesters cultivate repertoires of solidarity as a relational force that binds people and worlds together in a collective praxis of refusal. In doing so, Against Abandonment builds upon intersectional, transnational, and abolitionist feminist theorizing that has long emphasized the centrality of building relations of care and community in place-based struggles against capitalist abandonment.

portrait of Jennifer Chun

Jennifer Jihye Chun is Professor of Asian American Studies and Labor Studies at UCLA. Her research and teaching focus on labor and community organizing; gender, care, and migration; ethnography and intersectional feminist methods; and culture, power, and global capitalism. She is the author of the award-winning book Organizing at the Margins: the Symbolic Politics of Labor in South Korea and the United States (Cornell University Press) and Against Abandonment: Repertoires Solidarity in South Korean Protest (co-authored with Ju Hui Judy Han; forthcoming, Stanford University Press). Chun is currently Chair of International Development Studies (IDS) and Associate Director of the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment. 

Directions and Parking > 

Paul Y. Chang
Jennifer J. Chun, Professor, Asian American Studies and Labor Studies, UCLA Professor, Asian American Studies and Labor Studies, UCLA
Seminars
Korean Studies Colloquium Series
Image
Flyer for the book talk "Against Abandonment" with a portrait of author Jennifer Chun
Date Label

Cross-cultural differences in retaliation: Evidence from the soccer field

Paragraphs

While the threat of retaliation can stabilize cooperation, retaliatory cultures have also been linked to violence and war. There is little systematic evidence for cross-cultural variation in the use and consequences of retaliation in real-life settings. Analyzing a novel data set of foul play from three seasons of nine professional men’s soccer leagues (n = 230, 113n=230,113), I show that players from a cultural background that places a higher value on revenge are more likely to retaliate for a foul during a game but are not more likely to commit fouls overall. I find that players are more retaliatory early on in a game, consistent with the use of retaliation as a deterrent to future transgression. Retaliation is indeed found to limit repeated offenses, as long as the perpetrator’s cultural background also emphasizes retaliation. This informal conflict management interacts with formal sanctioning by the referee in several ways. Victims are less likely to retaliate if the foul was sanctioned with a yellow card, indicating a crowding out by the formal punishment mechanism. Both forms of sanction successfully reduce repeated offenses by the perpetrator of a foul, with sanctioning by a yellow card being around three times as effective as retaliation by the victim. These results provide unique evidence for cultural differences in establishing and maintaining cooperative equilibria and for the interaction of formal and informal punishment mechanisms for sustaining cooperation.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Authors
Alain Schläpfer
Number
July 2024

The Impact of Regional Conflict in MENA on Authoritarian Stability and Dissent

-
The Impact of Regional Conflict in MENA on Authoritarian Stability and Dissent

This panel examines the impact of the ongoing wars in Gaza and Lebanon on regime stability in the region. How have ruling establishments managed popular sentiment and protests as Israel’s military campaigns in Gaza and Lebanon have continued with no end in sight? How have opposition forces and protest movements responded to these developments? What challenges have they faced? What is the relationship between movements in solidarity with Palestine and Lebanon and domestic oppositional politics? The panelists will discuss the major trends and contextualize them in historical perspective.

PANELISTS:

  • Joel Beinin, Donald J. McLachlan Professor of History and Professor of Middle East History, Emeritus
  • Samia Errazzouki, Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of History and Humanities Center 
  • Hesham Sallam, Associate Director, Program on Arab Reform and Development


This event is co-sponsored by CDDRL's Program on Arab Reform and Development and Democracy Day at Stanford University.

About the Speakers

Joel Benin

Joel Beinin

Donald J. McLachlan Professor of History and Professor of Middle East History, Emeritus
full bio

Joel Beinin is the Donald J. McLachlan Professor of History and Professor of Middle East History, Emeritus at Stanford . His research and writing focus on the social and cultural history and political economy of modern Egypt, Palestine, and Israel, and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. He received his A.B. from Princeton University in 1970, A.M. from Harvard University in 1974, and Ph.D. from the University of Michigan in 1982. He taught at Stanford from 1983 to 2019 with a hiatus as Director of Middle East Studies and Professor of History at the American University in Cairo in 2006-08.

Samia Errazzouki

Samia Errazzouki

Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of History and Humanities Center
full bio

Samia Errazzouki is a Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of History and Humanities Center at Stanford University. She holds a PhD in History from UC Davis and MA in Arab Studies from Georgetown University. She is also the social sciences editor for the Journal of North African Studies and co-editor with Jadaliyya. Samia is a former Morocco-based journalist, where she reported for the Associated Press and, later, for Reuters.

Portrait of Hesham Sallam

Hesham Sallam

Associate Director, Program on Arab Reform and Development
full bio

Hesham Sallam is a Senior Research Scholar at CDDRL, where he serves as Associate Director for Research. He is also Associate Director of the Program on Arab Reform and Development. He is author of Classless Politics: Islamist Movements, the Left, and Authoritarian Legacies in Egypt (Columbia University Press, 2022), co-editor of Struggles for Political Change in the Arab World (University of Michigan Press, 2022), and editor of Egypt's Parliamentary Elections 2011-2012: A Critical Guide to a Changing Political Arena (Tadween Publishing, 2013). Sallam received a Ph.D. in Government (2015) and an M.A. in Arab Studies (2006) from Georgetown University.  
 

Levinthal Hall (424 Santa Teresa St., Stanford)

This in-person event is open to Stanford affiliates only.

Joel Beinin
Samia Errazzouki

Hesham Sallam

Encina Hall, E105
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
Senior Research Scholar
hesham_sallam_thumbnail_image_for_cddrl_1-2_copy.jpg

Hesham Sallam is a Senior Research Scholar at CDDRL, where he serves as Associate Director for Research. He is also Associate Director of the Program on Arab Reform and Development. Sallam is co-editor of Jadaliyya ezine and a former program specialist at the U.S. Institute of Peace. His research focuses on political and social development in the Arab World. Sallam’s research has previously received the support of the Social Science Research Council and the U.S. Institute of Peace. He is author of Classless Politics: Islamist Movements, the Left, and Authoritarian Legacies in Egypt (Columbia University Press, 2022), co-editor of Struggles for Political Change in the Arab World (University of Michigan Press, 2022), and editor of Egypt's Parliamentary Elections 2011-2012: A Critical Guide to a Changing Political Arena (Tadween Publishing, 2013). Sallam received a Ph.D. in Government (2015) and an M.A. in Arab Studies (2006) from Georgetown University, and a B.A. in Political Science from the University of Pittsburgh (2003).

 

Associate Director for Research, Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law
Associate Director, Program on Arab Reform and Development
Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label
Hesham Sallam
Panel Discussions
Date Label

The Muslim Social: Neoliberalism, Poverty, and Charity in Turkey | Book Talk with Gizem Zencirci

-
Gizem Zencirci

Since coming to power, Turkey’s governing party, the AKP has made poverty relief a central part of their political program. In addition to neoliberal reforms, AKP’s program has involved an emphasis on Islamic charity that is unprecedented in the history of the Turkish Republic. To understand the causes and consequences of this phenomenon, Gizem Zencirci introduces the concept of the Muslim Social, defined as a welfare regime that reimagined and reconfigured Islamic charitable practices to address the complex needs of a modern market society.

Through an in-depth ethnography of social service provision, in The Muslim Social: Neoliberalism, Charity, and Poverty in Turkey (Syracuse University Press, 2024), Zencirci demonstrates the blending of religious values and neoliberal elements in dynamic, flexible, and unexpected ways. Although these governmental assemblages of Islamic neoliberalism produced new forms of generosity, distinctive notions of poverty, and novel ways of relating to others in society, Zencirci’s analysis reveals how this welfare regime privileged managerial efficiency and emotional well-being at the expense of other objectives such as equality, development, or justice. The book provides a lens onto the everyday life of Islamic neoliberalism, while also mapping the kind of political concerns that animate poverty governance in our capitalist present.

Book talk co-sponsored the by Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies, CDDRL's Program on Turkey, and the Middle Eastern Studies Forum.

ABOUT THE SPEAKER

Gizem Zencirci, PhD studies the cultural politics of neoliberalism in Turkey. Zencirci is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Providence College. Her research interests include Islamic neoliberalism, civilizationism, heritage studies, and cultural economy. Her work has been published in journals such as the International Journal of Middle East Studies, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, and the Journal of Cultural Economy.

In-person: Philippines Conference Room (Encina Hall, 3rd floor, 616 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford)
Online: Via Zoom

Gizem Zencirci
Seminars
Date Label

Majority rule: Do minorities live in ‘tighter’ social worlds?

Paragraphs

Exploring social norms through a diversity perspective, this review examines whether minorities live in ‘tighter’ worlds, wherein they are subject to stricter rules and punishments. Integrating research from psychology, economics, and organizational behavior, we first examine whether minorities are more likely to have tightness imposed on them—i.e., receive more monitoring and harsher penalties in response to norm violations, compared to their majority counterparts. Turning to the subjective experience of minority group members, we explore whether minorities are calibrated to these penalties and experience greater lived tightness—the feeling of being chronically surveilled, judged harshly, and fearing excessive punishment for wrongdoing. We suggest that both imposed and lived tightness contributes to power inequalities and patterns of segregation. This framework helps to organize disparate research streams investigating minorities' experience of social norms, and highlights unanswered questions about when, and why, minority group members feel more constrained by social rules, as well as the consequences of these experiences for their economic and psychological well-being.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Current Opinion in Psychology
Authors
Michele Gelfand
Number
December 2024, 101885

The Political and Social Legacies of South Korean Authoritarianism

-
event flyer image card

Much of the scholarship about Park Chung Hee and South Korea's developmental state has focused on economic modernization. This talk complements that literature by highlighting the long-lasting legacies of authoritarianism for the political and social development of South Korean society. The talk first covers the consequences of dictatorship for the evolution of civil society. We then shift to the historical origins of the demographic crisis South Korea is facing today. The central purpose of the talk is to show how both civil society and family change were shaped profoundly by authoritarian policies during the Park Chung Hee era.

portrait of Paul Chang

Paul Chang is Senior Fellow at Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; and Tong Yang, Korea Foundation, and Korea Stanford Alumni Association Senior Fellow at Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University. Before joining Stanford, Chang was an associate professor of sociology at Harvard University. 

A sociologist by training, Chang’s research on South Korean society has appeared in flagship disciplinary and area studies journals. He is the author of Protest Dialectics: State Repression and South Korea’s Democracy Movement, 1970-1979 (Stanford University Press) and co-editor of South Korean Social Movements: From Democracy to Civil Society (Routledge). His current work examines the diversification of family structures in South Korea.

Gi-Wook Shin
Gi-Wook Shin

Paul Y. Chang

Stanford University
Encina Hall, Room E301
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Tong Yang, Korea Foundation, and Korea Stanford Alumni Association Senior Fellow at Shorenstein APARC
Paul Chang_0.jpg PhD

Paul Y. Chang is the Tong Yang, Korea Foundation, and Korea Stanford Alumni Association Senior Fellow at Shorenstein APARC; Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; and Professor by courtesy in the Department of East Asian Languages and Cultures. Chang also serves as the Deputy Director of the Korea Program at Shorenstein APARC and Co-Editor of The Journal of Korean Studies. Before joining Stanford, Chang served on the faculty at Harvard University, Yonsei University, and the Singapore Management University. His current work examines the diversification of family structures in South Korea.

Deputy Director, Korea Program at Shorenstein APARC
Professor by courtesy, Department of East Asian Languages and Cultures
CV
Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label
Paul Y. Chang
Seminars
Korean Studies Colloquium Series
Date Label

Stanford Japan Barometer Unveils Insights into Japanese Public Opinion on Same-Sex Marriage and Marital Surname Choices

Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

What policy options does the Japanese public prefer, and what might shift its attitudes? These are some questions the Stanford Japan Barometer (SJB) sets out to answer. SJB is a large-scale public opinion survey on political, economic, and social issues in Japan. Co-developed and led by Stanford sociologist Kiyoteru Tsutsui, the deputy director of APARC and director of the Center’s Japan Program, and Dartmouth College political scientist Charles Crabtree, a former visiting assistant professor with the Japan Program, SJB has so far published the results from its first two waves.

Wave 1 focused on issues related to gender and sexuality in Japanese politics, while Wave 2 focused on issues related to foreign policy and national defense. SJB findings fielded in these two waves indicate that most Japanese support recognizing same-sex unions, legalizing a dual-surname option for married couples, promoting women’s leadership in society, and that, in a Taiwan contingency, ​​Japanese people would be hesitant to fight China but would respond to a request from the U.S. military for logistical support.

Jointly with the Japan Program, GLOBE+, an international news outlet operated by the esteemed Japanese newspaper Asahi Shimbun, is publishing a series highlighting SJB findings. You can read an English translation of the first three pieces in this series. Here, we provide an English translation of the latest installment in the series, published on September 19, 2024. The translation was initially generated via DeepL. The text below was edited for accuracy and style.


Japanese Public Opinion on Legalizing Same-Sex Unions


Japan remains the only G7 country that has not legalized same-sex marriage or introduced a partnership system that offers marriage-equivalent rights at the national level. It is also the only country worldwide that mandates married couples to adopt the same surname.

Yet, according to the SJB survey, 47.2% of respondents were either "very much in favor" (18.6%) or "somewhat in favor" (28.6%) of legalizing same-sex marriage in Japan. In contrast, 15.8% were either "very much against" (6.8%) or "somewhat against" (9.0%), while 36.9% held a neutral stance, being “neither in favor nor against.” Support for same-sex marriage outpaced neutral responses by nearly three times.

The survey also explored public support for same-sex couples in leadership roles by asking respondents what kind of individuals they would like to see as members of the Diet or as outside directors of companies.

Participants were asked to consider six key attributes when identifying the types of candidates they would prefer to see in the next House of Representatives elections:

  • Age (from 32 years old to 82 years old, in 10-year increments)　
  • Gender　
  • Marriage (married, never married, divorced, same-sex couple)　
  • Number of children　
  • Educational background　
  • Work experience (11 types, including finance, economy, industry, and foreign affairs bureaucrats, business owners and executives, governors, local legislators, and homemakers)


Respondents were asked to create two “candidate images” by randomly combining six attributes and selecting one in a two-choice format. The same question was repeated a total of 10 times with different choices. The responses obtained from all survey participants were tabulated and analyzed.

The reason for the complexity of the method is that, from a statistical point of view, it allows the researchers to get closer to the “true feelings” (public opinion) of the respondents.

For each of the attributes, the percentage would be 50% if the respondents were indifferent to sexual orientation, but 45% of the respondents were in favor of electing a person from a same-sex couple to the National Assembly and 43.5% were in favor of electing a person from a same-sex couple to be a non-executive director, showing a downward trend in support. Although many people are in favor of same-sex marriage, it is evident that there is still a sense of discrimination against sexual minorities holding important public positions.

Of note, male respondents were less supportive of electing a person from a same-sex couple to the National Assembly, at 37.6%, compared to 50.6% of women. Support for electing a person from a same-sex couple to the National Assembly was also lower among respondents aged 70 and older at 31.1%, and higher among younger respondents: 58.9% of those aged 18 and 19, 60.5% of those aged 20 to 24, and 56.5% of those aged 25 to 29.

To identify what conditions could move public opinion, the researchers designed seven prompts regarding same-sex marriage, assigned them randomly to respondents, and compared their answers. The prompts included assumptions such as “In Japanese society, marriage is traditionally between two people of the opposite sex;” “If same-sex marriage is recognized, it will make it easier for same-sex couples to raise children, which may lead to an improvement in the declining birth rate and have beneficial effects for Japanese society;” and “From the perspective of human rights and gender equality, it would be unfair not to recognize same-sex marriage.”

The results show that support for same-sex marriage increases the most when respondents are presented with an argument that not allowing same-sex marriage is unfair from the point of view of human rights and gender equality.
 

Public Opinion on Legalizing Dual-Surname Option for Married Couples


The SJB survey also examined the public opinion of the selective surname system, which would allow married Japanese people to keep their premarital surnames if they wished. In surveying this issue, the researchers used two different question formats to shed light on a debate surrounding the Japanese government’s modification of its public opinion survey on this issue between 2017 and 2021. After the government revised the question asked on this matter, support for the selective surname system dropped from a record high of 42.5% in 2017 to a record low of only 28.9% in 2021. Therefore, the SJB randomly assigned respondents to answer two versions of the government survey under scrutiny, from 2017 and 2021.

In the 2021 government survey, respondents had to read certain materials before saying whether they approve or disapprove of the selective surname system. The materials included two tables. One, titled “Reference Material on Married Couples’ Surnames and Family Names,” explains the current system of married couples' surnames, the selective system of married couples' surnames, and the legal system for the use of the common name of the maiden name, respectively.

The other table explains the options, with the horizontal axis divided into “maintain the system of married couples with the same surname” and “introduce a selective system of married couples with separate surnames,” and the vertical axis divided into “no” and “yes” for “need to establish a legal system for using the maiden name as the common name.”

In 2021, the respondents were asked to choose from the following three options: “It is preferable to maintain the current system of married couples having the same family name;” “It is preferable to maintain the current system of married couples having the same family name and establish a legal system for the use of the maiden name;” and “It is preferable to introduce a selective system of married couples having separate family names.”

On the other hand, the question until 2017 was “Currently, married couples must always take the same surname.” After explaining the current system and the system of selective married couples' surnames, the question was “As long as a couple is married, they should always take the same surname.. If a couple wishes to take their premarital surname, they may change the law to allow each person to take their pre-marital surname. The couple should take the same surname, but it is acceptable to change the law so that a person who has changed his/her surname by marriage can use his/her pre-marital surname as a common name anywhere.”

As a result, under the 2021 method, 30% of the respondents chose “it is better to maintain the current system of the same family name for married couples,” 39% chose “it is better to maintain the current system of the same family name for married couples and establish a legal system for the use of the maiden name as a common name,” and 30% chose “it is better to introduce an optional system of separate family names for married couples.

On the other hand, in the 2017 method, 23% of respondents said “As long as a couple is married, they should always take the same surname (family name), and there is no need to change the current law,” while 57% said “If a couple wishes to take their pre-marital surname (family name), it is fine to change the law to allow each couple to take their pre-marital surname (family name). 57% said they “do not mind” and 19% said they “do not mind” if the law is changed to allow married couples to use their maiden name as a common name even if they wish to keep their maiden name. In other words, 57% of the respondents chose to selectively separate their surnames.

The 2021 method was criticized for how the question was asked, which was different from how it had been asked until 2017 and allegedly induced more support for using common names. The results of the SJB survey show that even if respondents were randomly assigned to the 2017 and 2021 methods at the same time, the results of the 2021 method would show more support for using common names. In other words, one should be wary of citing the results of the 2021 method to argue that support for the use of common names is higher than support for a legal change to selective married couples.

To find out under what conditions public opinion would move toward selective surnames for married couples, the SJB also conducted an experiment on different arguments that might influence support for a legal change to allow married couples to keep different surnames.

The arguments included different prompts: “In Japanese society, there is a tradition that married couples take the same surname once they get married;” “In Japanese society, there is a tradition that married couples take separate surnames once they get married;” “Among those who had surnames in pre-modern Japan, and even in early Meiji Era Japan, it was normal for married couples to have separate surnames after marriage;” “It is largely women who change their surnames after marriage;” “If married couples take different surnames after marriage, it will weaken family ties and have negative impact on children, which will lead to a loss for Japanese society.” The respondents were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the prompts.

The results show that the argument about social costs — how allowing married couples to maintain different surnames would weaken family ties with harmful effects on children — seems to substantially change public attitudes, reducing support for a legal change.

The SJB survey results suggest that responses to polls vary depending on how the questions are asked and on the assumptions made. When looking at poll results, it is therefore important to note the framing of the questions and prompts.

Read More

Portrait of Kiyoteru Tsutsui and a silhouette of the Toyko Syline at night.
News

Decoding Japan's Pulse: Insights from the Stanford Japan Barometer

The Asahi Shimbun is publishing a series highlighting the Stanford Japan Barometer, a periodic public opinion survey co-developed by Stanford sociologist Kiyoteru Tsutsui and Dartmouth College political scientist Charles Crabtree, which unveils nuanced preferences and evolving attitudes of the Japanese public on political, economic, and social issues.
Decoding Japan's Pulse: Insights from the Stanford Japan Barometer
College students wait in line to attend an information session at the Mynavi Shushoku MEGA EXPO in Tokyo, Japan.
News

A New Approach to Talent Development: Lessons from Japan and Singapore

Stanford researchers Gi-Wook Shin and Haley Gordon propose a novel framework for cross-national understanding of human resource development and a roadmap for countries to improve their talent development strategies.
A New Approach to Talent Development: Lessons from Japan and Singapore
People enjoy lunch at a Chinese community centre
News

New Study Reveals Geopolitical Rivalries Shape Attitudes Toward Immigrants

Researchers including Stanford sociologist Kiyoteru Tsutsui, the deputy director of APARC and director of the Japan Program at APARC, find that geopolitical rivalries and alliances significantly shape citizen perceptions of immigrants.
New Study Reveals Geopolitical Rivalries Shape Attitudes Toward Immigrants
Hero Image
Social research concept: Hand with magnifying glass over Montessori knobbed cylinders-like people conveying the idea of a community.
All News button
1
Subtitle

A new installment of the Asahi Shimbun’s GLOBE+ series highlights Stanford Japan Barometer findings about Japanese public opinion on recognizing same-sex unions and legalizing a dual-surname option for married couples. Co-developed by Stanford sociologist Kiyoteru Tsutsui and Dartmouth College political scientist Charles Crabtree, the public opinion survey tracks evolving Japanese attitudes on political, economic, and social issues and unveils how question framing changes the results of public opinion polls.

Date Label

Serkan Yolacan

0
Assistant Professor of Anthropology
serkan-yolacan-square1668128089469.jpg

Serkan Yolaçan’s research broadly focuses on the interplay of past and present in the lives of individuals, diasporas, and states. In all his projects, Yolaçan combines broad space and deep history empirically, and history and anthropology methodologically, to generate geo-historical frames that speak to questions of human mobility, international order, and social change.

His book project, Time Travelers: Pasts and Possibilities in the Caucasus, weaves the modern experiences of Turkey, Iran, and Russia through the lens of a diasporic people from the region of Azerbaijan. By placing mobile Azeris at the center of three major states, he ties together their near-synchronous transformations from constitutional revolutions at the beginning of the twentieth century to expansionist agendas in the twenty-first. Yolaçan’s second project is a comparative study of millennial and messianic movements. It explores how embodied authority, eschatological beliefs, and textual traditions interact to create invisible forms of sovereignty.

He is also part of a collaborative project that opens a new inquiry in political anthropology by studying two ubiquitous figures of the 21st century: strongman and informal diplomat. By shifting the basis of understanding their partnership from bureaucracies to networks, law to trust, and protocols to rituals, the project renders these opaque figures legible to ethnographic and historical inquiry while offering new methodological approaches to the study of populism, authoritarianism, diplomacy, and internationalism.

Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label

Kabir Tambar

0
Associate Professor of Anthropology
kabir-tambar-square1667237656559.jpg

Kabir Tambar is a sociocultural anthropologist, working at the intersections of politics, language, and religion. He is broadly interested in the politics of history, performances of public criticism, and varieties of Islamic practice in Turkey.

Tambar’s first book is a study of the politics of pluralism in contemporary Turkey, focusing on the ways that Alevi religious history is staged for public display. More generally, the book investigates how secular states govern religious differences through practices of cultural and aesthetic regulation. Tambar is currently working on a new project that examines the historical imagination in contexts of political closure, both at the end of the Ottoman empire and during periods of emergency rule in the era of the nation-state.

Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label
Subscribe to Society