How to handle bad behavior and recognize harassment, and how to navigate dealing with harassment and discrimination: collecting evidence, making a report, and asking for changes.

This chapter argues that processes of racialisation have been radically transformed by large-scale data-processing techniques that use algorithmic sorting, identification, and classification. These techniques employ what we call “proxy logics”: using implicit forms of feedback and complex statistical transformations on data to sort individuals into contingent groupings or clusters. In these instances, race is ascribed not through modes of identification grounded in the body (via phenotype or genotype) or through cultural ascriptions (self-identification and processes of belonging), but by latent associations between data features (i.e. proxy indicators). To cluster individuals into groups, such systems don’t discern our “identity.” Rather, they draw inferences and approximations, creating clusters that group people together not on “common characteristics, or meeting specified criteria” but on “a spatialised proximity or distance” (Amoore, 2021, p. 6). We contend that these new techniques for constituting race require a new politics of identity: a “politics of proximity.”

A cherished common law notion is equality before the law. This notion has shaped and defined Australian laws, and is important to law’s capacity to produce justice because it requires that everyone is treated the same before the law. However, equality before the law has not produced effective social justice and equality in Australia: demographic and socio-economic indicators consistently paint a picture of broad social inequality and a growing poverty gap – rather than one of an egalitarian society in which everyone achieves the same justice. This chapter explores how Australian laws work with the idea of equality to help explain why certain groups continue to be disadvantaged in their access to justice and the legal system. It provides a window onto different perspectives and experiences of Australian laws, which we encourage you to reflect upon throughout your legal studies.

This chapter clarifies the substantive scope and core content of the right to science as enshrined in Art. 15 ICESCR. By employing a reverse-engineering methodology grounded in the core obligations identified by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in General Comment No. 25, the chapter systematically derives the core rights of the right to science. The analysis identifies four distinct yet interrelated substantive rights: the right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications (Art. 15(1)(b) ICESCR; the right to the conservation, development and diffusion of science (Art. 15(2) ICESCR); freedom of science (Art. 15(3) ICESCR); the right to international scientific ollaboration (Art. 15(4) ICESCR) and the right to equality and non-discrimination in science. Each dimension incorporates essential, immediately enforceable core rights, which constitute the non-derogable nucleus of the right to science, thereby making them inherently justiciable irrespective of resource limitations. The findings contribute to bridging gaps between theoretical frameworks and practical adjudication, enhancing the protection and realisation of the right to science.

There have been only a few surveys of radical economics and of those most have focused on a specific topic in economic literature. In the first years of the Union for Radical Political Economics (URPE) there were several proposals of definition of radical economics, including a foundational reliance on Marxian economics, the elaboration of an anti-marginalist paradigm, or the idealization of a radical scholar-activist. After an early enthusiasm, attempts at this kind of normative work fell away. Instead what drove radical work forward was critique and adaptation from pre-existing work in economics, particularly with respect to labor markets and its stratification. With labor issues often at its core, radical extended work into the analysis of education, gender, and the firm. Efforts to bring these strands of work together took a distinctively institutional flavour, not with the label of paradigm or radical, but as social structures of accumulation. The chapter concludes by examining radical textbooks and how they recorded the evolution and contributions of radical research.

The primary threat of AI is not a dystopian uprising, but the quiet, rational surrender of human autonomy for convenience. While existing risks like discrimination and disinformation are concerning, another profound danger is one we willingly embrace: a life optimized by AI. As we delegate increasingly consequential decisions – from career paths to personal relationships – to demonstrably superior AI systems, we become meat puppets, happier and healthier, yet stripped of meaningful agency. The chapter argues that this philosophical loss, driven by the competitive pressure to optimize our lives, likely cannot be curbed by regulation and will be the defining, irreversible tragedy of the AI age.

An important aspect of the developmental pathway for international adoptees involves issues of self-identification and the formation of a cultural–social identity. This chapter will review existing literature and highlight key challenges related to identity development among international adoptees. A major focus within this research is transracial adoption, which will also be discussed. Special attention will be given to practices aimed at fostering identity, including partial identification with the country of birth through linguistic and cultural connections.

Using a dataset of over 400,000 cases, this chapter empirically tests for multi-stage discrimination. It reveals that female complainants and cases involving violence against women systematically face longer delays, and unfavorable outcomes at every stage of the justice process.

This chapter discusses the development of international law in the post-war era that aimed to liberate global information flow to guarantee world peace. It starts by discussing the achievements and failures of the 1948 Geneva conference on the freedom of information and considers two avenues in which the post-war project of freedom of information continued after the 1948 conference. First, in the drafting of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, freedom of information as a peace project became framed into a fundamental human right, displacing the question about the material and interstate aspects of freedom of information. Second, freedom of information was addressed in forums of international telecommunication and trade dominated by the United States, where freedom of information became equated with the elimination of discriminatory telecommunication rates to enable American global trade. This chapter shows a division of labour and crucial conceptual compatibility between the human rights framing and free trade framing of freedom of information and multiple fault lines surrounding the early intimation of the dual-sided framework.

Chapter 5 reviews the tensions that arise between the Liberal ideology’s broader goal of establishing and enforcing the rule of law, including sovereign equality, and states’ perennial interest in using trade as an instrument of influence. The multilateral system is founded upon a bedrock principle of non-discrimination, and yet statesmen have a natural desire to treat allies better than adversaries. The chapter explores how philosophers and statesmen manage these tensions in theory and in practice, distinguishing first between the ideas on the left and the right and then between the strategies of the British and American hegemons. This introduction to the two leaders’ differing objectives and styles sets up the detailed histories that follow.

Chapter 3 summarizes that doctrine’s three variants, emphasizing how the current iteration hearkens back to the original article by appealing to the interests of the most powerful states. Major elements in the latest version of Mercantilism emerged as a US response to the competitive challenge from Japan. Although this proved to be an overreaction, it did set important precedents for the discriminatory measures – both positive and negative – that Washington would later use in its trade war with Beijing.

This essay explores the intersection of race and the field of war and society in U.S. history. Centering race as a critical fault line, it examines how racial identities, hierarchies, and constructions have shaped—and been shaped by—U.S. experiences of war, both during and beyond moments of active conflict. While race is the central focus, the essay also considers how gender, ethnicity, and class intersect with it. These interconnected forces help define not only who is recognized within "society" but also how war is waged, experienced, and remembered. By analyzing key historiographic debates, the essay considers how scholarship on race has contributed to a deeper, more complex understanding of the war and society field. It also argues that race-based inquiry challenges conventional definitions of war and society, expanding them beyond state-sanctioned actors and discrete wartime events to include long-term, systemic forms of violence and resistance. In doing so, the essay highlights the co-productive relationship between war and society and how race reshapes our understanding of both.

Pacific peoples disproportionately experience health and social complexity that contributes to poorer health outcomes compared to those of the total population in New Zealand. The Pacific healthcare workforce plays a critical role in providing health care, influencing service delivery and system design that can reduce health inequities for Pacific communities. Pacific nursing specifically has been recognised as critical in delivering and assisting with the design of culturally appropriate and equitable healthcare services that can positively contribute to addressing these disparities. This chapter will provide insights to deepen nurses’ understanding of Pacific peoples in New Zealand and support reflective practice as part of continued professional development. Culturally safe care enhances the ability to provide clinically safe practice and is a continual process of reflection and applied critical thinking.

Discrimination measures do not capture experiences specific to people who were transracially and transnationally adopted. Using a small measurement approach, a new seventeen-item measure of transracial, transnational adoption discrimination encompassing three dimensions – ethnic and racial discrimination, coethnic discrimination (i.e., cultural exclusion from being Korean), and adoption discrimination – was administered to 155 Korean American young adults. We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis, tested for demographic differences, and performed correlation and multiple linear regression analyses to establish validity. The three-factor model of discrimination demonstrated good fit, and the subscale scores had good internal reliability. All three discrimination subscales were significantly correlated with one another. Ethnic and racial discrimination correlated with ethnic and adoptive identity subscales except ethnic identity exploration; coethnic discrimination correlated with ethnic identity affirmation and adoptive identity; and adoption discrimination did not correlate with any identity subscales. Ethnic and racial discrimination was related to psychological distress.

This chapter provides a critical reflection on past and current research on ethnic and racial discrimination and youth development with recommendations for future research directions. First and foremost, I emphasize the need for positionality, reflexivity, and representational ethics to avoid advancing false or problematic narratives and to advance research that is more transparent and accountable. It also is necessary to distinguish and better contextualize ethnic discrimination (rooted in ethnocentrism) and racial discrimination (rooted in modern imperialism and White supremacy) rather than conflate these two constructs and measure them in ahistorical ways. These considerations require researchers to select or develop critically appropriate measurement tools, moving beyond commonly used measures that may not be relevant or appropriate to all racialized groups. Ethnic and racial discrimination during youth development requires special considerations, as discrimination coincides with identity formation and pubertal development. Yet there remains limited research on the ways in which these developmental tasks and experiences interplay. Given the complexities of how ethnic and racial discrimination manifest during youth development, researchers may want to consider novel methods like storytelling to embody discriminatory experiences and strengthen ecological validity.