Paragraphs

More than the persistent beat of a song or the structural frame of poetry, rhythm is a deeply imbedded force that drives our world and is also a central component of the condition of human existence. It’s the pulse of the body, a power that orders matter, a strange and natural force that flows through us. Virginia Woolf describes it as a “wave in the mind” that carries us, something we can no more escape than we could stop our hearts from beating.

Vincent Barletta explores rhythm through three historical moments, each addressing it as a phenomenon that transcends poetry, aesthetics, and even temporality. He reveals rhythm to be a power that holds us in place, dispossesses us, and shapes the foundations of our world. In these moments, Barletta encounters rhythm as a primordial and physical binding force that establishes order and form in the ancient world, as the anatomy of lived experience in early modern Europe, and as a subject of aesthetic and ethical questioning in the twentieth century.

A wide-ranging book covering a period spanning two millennia and texts from over ten languages, Rhythm will expand the conversation around this complex and powerful phenomenon.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
University of Chicago Press
Authors
-

Links to Event Materials:

 

The Stanford Cyber Policy Center continues its online Zoom series: Digital Technology and Democracy, Security & Geopolitics in an Age of Coronavirus. These webinars will take place every other Wednesday at 10am PST. 

The next event, Digital Disinformation and Health: From Vaccines to the Coronavirus, will take place Wednesday, April 8, at 10am PST with Kelly Born, Executive Director of the Cyber Policy Center, in conversation with Professor David Broniatowski, from George Washington University, Professor Kathleen M. Carley, from Carnegie Mellon University, and Professor Jacob N. Shapiro, from Princeton University. 

In particular, Professor Broniatowski will discuss the results of new studies regarding bots and trolls in the vaccine debate, as well as what makes messages go viral from the standpoint of Fuzzy Trace TheoryProfessor Carley will explore how information moves from country to country, with a look at both the differences in who is broadcasting certain types of disinformation and the role bots play in the spread. Professor Shapiro will speak to trends and themes we are seeing in coronavirus disinformation narratives and in news reporting on COVID-related misinformation.


David Broniatowski 
Professor David Broniatowski conducts research in decision-making under risk, group decision-making, system architecture, and behavioral epidemiology. This research program draws upon a wide range of techniques including formal mathematical modeling, experimental design, automated text analysis and natural language processing, social and technical network analysis, and big data. Current projects include a text network analysis of transcripts from the US Food and Drug Administration's Circulatory Systems Advisory Panel meetings, a mathematical formalization of Fuzzy Trace Theory -- a leading theory of decision-making under risk, derivation of metrics for flexibility and controllability for complex engineered socio-technical systems, and using Twitter data to conduct surveillance of influenza infection and the resulting social response. 
Professor Kathleen M. Carley 
Professor Kathleen M. Carley is Director of the Center for Informed Democracy and Social-cybersecurity (IDeaS) and the director of the center for Computational Analysis of Social and Organizational Systems (CASOS). She specializes in network science, agent-based modeling, and text-mining within a complex socio-technical system, organizational and social theory framework. In her work, she examines how cognitive, social and institutional factors come together to impact individual, organizational and societal outcomes. Using this lens she has addressed a number of policy issues including counter-terrorism, human and narcotic trafficking, cyber and nuclear threat, organizational resilience and design, natural disaster preparedness, cyber threat in social media, and leadership.   
Professor Jacob N. Shapiro 
Professor Jacob N. Shapiro is professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University and directs the Empirical Studies of Conflict Project, a multi-university consortium that compiles and analyzes micro-level data on politically motivated violence in countries around the world. His research covers conflict, economic development, and security policy. He is author of The Terrorist’s Dilemma: Managing Violent Covert Organizations and co-author of Small Wars, Big Data: The Information Revolution in Modern Conflict. His research has been published in broad range of academic and policy journals as well as a number of edited volumes. He has conducted field research and large-scale policy evaluations in Afghanistan, Colombia, India, and Pakistan.

Kelly BornKelly Born is the Executive Director of Stanford’s Cyber Policy Center, where she collaborates with the center’s program leaders to pioneer new lines of research, policy-oriented curriculum, policy workshops and executive education. Prior to joining Stanford, she helped to launch and lead The Madison Initiative at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, one of the largest philanthropic undertakings working to reduce polarization and improve U.S. democracy.  There, she designed and implemented strategies focused on money in politics, electoral reform, civic engagement and digital disinformation. Kelly earned a master’s degree in international policy from Stanford University.

Online, via Zoom: REGISTER

Professor David Broniatowski George Washington University
Professor Kathleen M. Carley Carnegie Mellon University
Professor Jacob N. Shapiro Princeton University
Seminars
Authors
Rose Gottemoeller
News Type
Blogs
Date
Paragraphs

NATO Foreign Ministers are meeting this week at a time when global institutions are struggling with the COVID-19 pandemic. Some institutions are even fighting for their lives, uncertain whether their missions and functions can emerge intact from this crisis. NATO does not have that problem—its focus as a military alliance is squarely on deterrence and defense against external threats, whether they flow from terrorists or state actors.  Its job is to defend its member states, and it will stay ready to do so. 

But NATO must pay attention. Some of its members may be tempted to upset democratic principles and take the law into their own hands. This process has already begun with Viktor Orbán in Hungary, who has extended the country’s state of emergency and declared that he will rule by decree for an indefinite period.  The excuse is that such measures are needed to fight the pandemic, but they extend a trend that was already underway in Hungary and Poland. 

NATO Foreign Ministers do not have the same toolbox to deal with such problems as the European Union: EU Justice Minister Didier Reynders has already launched a formal process to investigate and perhaps censure Hungary. NATO Foreign Ministers, however, can remind all of its members that the principles enshrined in its founding document, the Washington Treaty—democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law—are a condition of their participation in the institution.  They must post the warning this week.

Beyond stating its values, NATO Foreign Ministers need to make clear this week that the organization’s strength and coherence can be a global beacon in the fight with COVID-19. They need to show what international institutions can do if they stay together, focused on the fight and using the tools they have available. Being ready to fight on the military front means that NATO must be resilient, and not only in members’ armed forces, but also in their governments and civil societies. Alliance resilience is paying dividends now, as member countries tackle the pandemic.

For instance, NATO has long worked on providing military transport under even the most difficult of circumstances: this kind of capability is needed in crisis or conflict, but it is also needed in this pandemic, right now. NATO heavy transport planes have airlifted over 200 tons of crucial medical equipment acquired from China and South Korea. These shipments have gone to the Czech Republic, Romania and Slovakia. The transports are also delivering field hospital tents to Luxembourg.

This heavy lift capability is a NATO function, but individual NATO countries are also doing what they can: the United States has provided medical equipment to Italy, and the Czech Republic has donated 20,000 protective suits to Italy and Spain. Even today, Turkey is flying military supplies to Italy and Spain. On March 30, the German Luftwaffe flew 400 patients out of France to hospitals in Germany. More such transports are underway. Polish and Albanian medical teams are serving side by side with medical teams in Italy. Militaries across the alliance are setting up temporary hospitals, disinfecting public areas, and helping with logistics and planning.

NATO’s newest member, the Republic of North Macedonia, is finding out in real time how the alliance can help.  NATO’s long-standing disaster relief function has trained both Allies and partners to deal with natural disasters such as earthquakes and forest fires. Allies are able to call on the NATO crisis response system to help them cope with such disasters. With its flag just raised this week at NATO Headquarters, North Macedonia is already using the system to coordinate its government and provide the public with information and advice on COVID-19.

These efforts are a quiet testament to NATO’s most basic principle: all for one and one for all. It is the principle inscribed in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, that if the time comes to fight, all NATO members will stand together to defend each other. The message today is that the principle stands also in peacetime, when tragedy strikes. It is a powerful statement that NATO as an institution strives to be fit for purpose and ready for what is thrown at it, whether in crisis, conflict or peacetime. 

We need strong institutions right now, committed to the rule of law, coherence and cooperation.  NATO has shown what an international institution can do if its members stay together, focus on the fight and use the tools they have available. This Thursday, NATO Foreign Ministers should send that message out to the world: NATO is a global beacon in the fight against COVID-19.

Hero Image
gettyimages 1191854951
Photo: Dan Kitwood - Getty Images
All News button
1
-

The 2017 iteration of the Festival de Marseille, with its dual sub-themes of “Focus Afrique” and “Focus Marseilles”, produced a space of being-in-common in response to the divided political climate of France. It encouraged a rethinking of citizenship and nationhood in terms of an inoperative community, rather than a center-periphery dualism.  For three weeks, the festival's performers danced, acted, and embodied their identities as a reminder that (the identity of social) space is constantly re-produced and re-inscribed with new meaning. Stemming from a larger ethnographic study that investigates the political potential of the festival as an intervention into fraught immigration policies of integration particular to France, this essay reimagines the Festival de Marseille—danse et arts multiples 2017 as a successful production of space for rehearsing an inoperative community in Europe’s most diverse city, as it contextualizes place, body, event, and the commons at the site of the festival. Located at the periphery of Europe, the Mediterranean, and North Africa, Marseille lives as a city on the edge, a geographic point that decenters the border of French national identity. Yet through its temporary occupation of the city, the festival crossed spatial, aesthetic, and thematic divisions of the center and periphery through its installation.
 
Anna Jayne Kimmel is a second year PhD student in Performance Studies pursuing a minor in Anthropology and graduate certificate in African Studies, with an emphasis in dance, memory, and public performance as politics. Her current research intersects: race, national identity, and post-colonialism through performance. As a dancer, Kimmel has performed the works of: Ohad Naharin, Trisha Brown, John Jaspers, Francesca Harper, Rebecca Lazier, Olivier Tarpaga, Marjani Forte, Susan Marshall, Loni Landon, and Christopher Ralph, amongst others. She holds an AB from Princeton University in French Studies with certificates in African Studies and Dance, and serves on the Future Advisory Board to Performance Studies international.

Zoom

Anna Jayne Kimmel Stanford University
Workshops
Authors
Yong Suk Lee
News Type
Blogs
Date
Paragraphs

Technology companies in South Korea helped tackle COVID-19. The U.S. government can incentivize U.S. tech companies do the same.

As a resident of Silicon Valley heading into our second week under the shelter in place order, what surprises me is the sudden low profile of the tech companies that dominate this area. Until just a month ago it seemed like these companies were taking over the world - churning out new products, connecting people online, providing information and news, and in turn driving equity and real estate prices to unprecedented new highs. But as the COVID-19 cases explode in the US, we rarely hear about them. Public health workers are at the frontlines fighting the war against COVID-19, and grocery stores and retailers are stepping up to the challenge of trying to maintain normalcy of life and providing for the people.

I wonder whether Apple is still pre-occupied with the development of the next iteration of the iPhone, and Google with the development for better search algorithms. Wouldn’t today’s tech companies with their vast resources, creative minds, and technical skill be able to help minimize the impact of COVID-19?

Tech companies in South Korea have played an important role in containing the spread of the virus and reducing casualties. Soon after the first COVID-19 case was confirmed within South Korea, at least four tech companies have launched apps that provide detailed information of the movement of all people who tested positive for COVID-19 – from which restaurant the person visited at what time, to the seat number the person sat in which movie theatre.

The information was collected from a variety of sources including smartphone location data and credit card transactions. The names were anonymized but providing such detailed information raised privacy concerns. However, the South Korean government was swift to declare COVID-19 a public health emergency, which ultimately gave the people the right to information for their safety, and companies to use such data. Moreover, the government allowed companies to by-pass traditional regulatory hurdles.

When Seegene, a biotech company in Seoul, used artificial intelligence to develop South Korea’s first COVID-19 test kit, it needed to get government approval for use. The approval process typically can take over a year, but the Korea Center for Disease Control approved it in a week. Though COVID-19 cases surged in South Korea soon after its first case, the aggressive testing policy and the information provided through these apps have helped South Korea to quickly “flatten the curve,” that is, slow the rate of new infections.

So why don’t we see U.S. tech companies developing new technologies and innovation that can help contain the spread of the virus, minimize the impact, and develop strategies that help people cope with the crisis? It’s because such actions would not generate immediate returns to the company. Despite the greater societal benefit of slowing down the spread of the virus, unless there are clear private returns CEOs and shareholders will be unlikely to devote their resources to fighting a virus with so much uncertainty.

In simple economics terms, it’s a classic case of market failure; and the standard remedy in cases of market failure is government intervention. The government needs to provide incentives, either through relaxing regulatory hurdles or by subsidizing research and development, to encourage tech companies to help contain the virus and minimize the impact of COVID-19 on our society. It is not an issue of big vs. small government, but governments creating the right incentives when private firms can’t easily make the right call.

The U.S. has finally taken measures in the manufacturing sector to fight COVID-19. The White House after several days of going back and forth, eventually invoked the Defense Production Act to order GM to produce ventilators. But hospitals around the country also need masks and personal protection equipment. Unlike smaller countries without a strong manufacturing base, the U.S. has the manufacturing capacity to produce these goods, if the will is there. These manufactured goods are essential for our doctors and nurses in helping patients and fighting the virus.

However, we need more innovative approaches, beyond traditional public health approaches, to fight COVID-19 and future pandemics. Tech companies, in addition to pharmaceuticals and biotech companies that are developing vaccines and cures, can play a significant role in fighting pandemics. Tech companies can use information and communication technology (ICT) to inform the public and reduce the spread of diseases, use machine learning to diagnose new diseases, predict future outbreaks and the spread of current outbreaks, and predict when and which resources would be in need in different parts of the country. Furthermore, there may be more innovative ways to tackle the virus that many of us have not yet thought of. The government can induce tech companies to actively take action by offering R&D grants and loans, providing access to critical information and data, and reducing red-tape.

The South Korean government recognized the urgency of the situation and enlisted the help of private tech firms allowing them to do what they do best with minimal red tape and access to the necessary resources. The European Union has recently put out a call for startups that are developing technologies and innovation related to COVID-19 to apply for fast-track funding.

Chinese tech giants like Alibaba and Tencent, potentially through explicit or implicit government directive, have been actively involved in fighting the COVID-19 crisis. Alibaba has deployed an AI algorithm that predicts COVID-19 from lung CT scans. The procedure only takes a few seconds, which not only substantially speeds up diagnosis but also reduces the risk of doctors and nurses being exposed to the virus. Tencent has committed over 1.5 billion Yuan (over 210 million USD) to help fight COVID-19, which will be spent on prevention and control but also on funding companies that are developing new ways to overcome the pandemic and help with the recovery.

People are sacrificing their individual rights and income. Small businesses are closing doors. All this for the good of the greater public. U.S. tech companies, together with the right push from the federal and state governments, should be able to put aside private returns and short-termism for the moment and work towards an innovative approach to mitigating the impact of today’s crisis.

Yong Suk Lee is an Economist at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Deputy Director of the Korea Program at Stanford University.

Hero Image
gettyimages 98590925
Photo: Justin Sullivan - Getty Images
All News button
1
Paragraphs

By the end of the eighteenth century, politicians in America and France were invoking the natural rights of man to wrest sovereignty away from kings and lay down universal basic entitlements. Exactly how and when did “rights” come to justify such measures?
 
In On the Spirit of Rights, Dan Edelstein answers this question by examining the complex genealogy of the rights regimes enshrined in the American and French Revolutions. With a lively attention to detail, he surveys a sprawling series of debates among rulers, jurists, philosophers, political reformers, writers, and others, who were all engaged in laying the groundwork for our contemporary systems of constitutional governance. Every seemingly new claim about rights turns out to be a variation on a theme, as late medieval notions were subtly repeated and refined to yield the talk of “rights” we recognize today. From the Wars of Religion to the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, On the Spirit of Rights is a sweeping tour through centuries of European intellectual history and an essential guide to our ways of thinking about human rights today.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Authors
Paragraphs

Thinking is much broader than what our science-obsessed, utilitarian culture often takes it to be. More than mere problem solving or the methodical comprehension of our personal and natural circumstances, thinking may take the form of a poem, a painting, a sculpture, a museum exhibition, or a documentary film. Exploring a variety of works by contemporary artists and writers who exemplify poetic thinking, this book draws our attention to one of the crucial affordances of this form of creative human insight and wisdom: its capacity to help protect and cultivate human freedom. All the contemporary works of art and literature that Poetic Thinking Today examines touch on our recent experiences with tyranny in culture and politics. They express the uninhibited thoughts and ideas of their creators even as they foster poetic thinking in us. In an era characterized by the global reemergence of authoritarian tendencies, Amir Eshel writes with the future of the humanities in mind. He urges the acknowledgment and cultivation of poetic thinking as a crucial component of our intellectual pursuits in general and of our educational systems more specifically.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Stanford University Press
Authors
Amir Eshel
Paragraphs

Empires of Knowledge charts the emergence of different kinds of scientific networks – local and long-distance, informal and institutional, religious and secular – as one of the important phenomena of the early modern world. It seeks to answer questions about what role these networks played in making knowledge, how information traveled, how it was transformed by travel, and who the brokers of this world were.

Bringing together an international group of historians of science and medicine, this book looks at the changing relationship between knowledge and community in the early modern period through case studies connecting Europe, Asia, the Ottoman Empire, and the Americas. It explores a landscape of understanding (and misunderstanding) nature through examinations of well-known intelligencers such as overseas missions, trading companies, and empires while incorporating more recent scholarship on the many less prominent go-betweens, such as translators and local experts, which made these networks of knowledge vibrant and truly global institutions.

Empires of Knowledge is the perfect introduction to the global history of early modern science and medicine.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Routledge
Authors
Paula Findlen
Paragraphs

The run-up to the 2016 U.S. presidential election illustrated how vulnerable our most venerated journalistic outlets are to a new kind of information warfare. Reporters are a targeted adversary of foreign and domestic actors who want to harm our democracy. And to cope with this threat, especially in an election year, news organizations need to prepare for another wave of false, misleading, and hacked information. Often, the information will be newsworthy. Expecting reporters to refrain from covering news goes against core principles of American journalism and the practical business drivers that shape the intensely competitive media marketplace. In these cases, the question is not whether to report but how to do so most responsibly. Our goal is to give journalists actionable guidance.

Included in the report is the Newsroom Playbook for Propaganda Reporting and a helpful Implementing the Playbook flowchart. 

Read More > 

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
White Papers
Publication Date
Authors
Andrew Grotto
Authors
Rose Gottemoeller
News Type
Blogs
Date
Paragraphs

In the midst of the COVID-19 crisis, good news often goes missing.  It’s worth highlighting that today, March 27, NATO has a new member, the Republic of North Macedonia.   Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg tweeted the news from NATO HQ in Brussels, and Skopje, the capital, was ecstatic: "The Republic of North Macedonia is officially the new, 30th NATO member," the government said in a statement. "We have fulfilled the dream of generations."

The Republic of North Macedonia’s journey was a long one, dragged out by a dispute with Greece over the name of the country, and who had the greater claim to certain historical figures, particularly Alexander the Great.  For a long time, Athens feared that Skopje would go after its territory, the region of Greece that also goes by the name Macedonia.  Because Greece is a member of both NATO and the European Union, it could hold up Skopje’s membership in both institutions.  Luckily, the logjam was broken by an important compromise in 2018, when the country agreed after difficult negotiations with Athens to go by the name “Republic of North Macedonia.”

One can easily see the importance of NATO membership to the Republic of North Macedonia, but what is its importance to NATO?  The first point to emphasize is that no country gets invited to join NATO unless it has gone through a long and difficult process to bring its armed forces up to NATO standards: countries cannot enter NATO unless they are capable of being security providers, serving in NATO operations when they are called on to do so. 

The second point is that the Republic of North Macedonia is in a difficult neighborhood, the Western Balkans, long a source of bloody disputes among neighbors and never-ending instability.  To become a member, Skopje had to resolve those disputes, and not only with Greece, but also with NATO members Bulgaria and Albania.  As a result, new stability has come to a region stretching from the Adriatic to the Black Sea, across the southeast of Europe.  New stability means a better shot at economic development, as the last member to enter NATO, Montenegro, found out.  Its economy grew strongly in the years after its accession in 2017.  Economic health, in turn, further bolsters stability—a beneficial cycle.

So what the Republic of North Macedonia can do for NATO is help provide for stability in a region of the globe that has long suffered a dearth of it.  This result would be good at any time, but while we must grapple with the implications of COVID-19, having this small country with NATO in the fight will be a benefit to all. 

NATO is a military alliance, but it also provides its members with assistance, training and expertise on matters such as disaster relief and border security.  The high standards that NATO maintains ensures that its members can contribute responsibly both in their regions, but also, if asked, on the international front.  Whether NATO as an institution will be asked to contribute to address COVID-19 is not clear at this time.  Perhaps the NATO Foreign Ministers meeting virtually next week will have something to say on that score.  But we can say that NATO is capable of contributing—including its newest member, the Republic of North Macedonia. 

Hero Image
gettyimages 1191861581
NATO leaders listen to UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson (centre right) while attending their summit at the Grove Hotel on December 4, 2019 in Watford, England. Photo: Dan Kitwood - Getty Images
All News button
1
Subscribe to Europe