This year the Janus Forum plans to focus our discussions on income inequality and the scale in which it exists across different cross sections of society. A recently released film has sparked discussion around income inequality among Asian Americans specifically. In a recent study included in the New York times it’s been found that income inequality among Asian-Americans has doubled in the last 50 years, read more <a href="http://This year the Janus Forum plans to focus our discussions on income inequality and the scale in which it exists across different cross sections of society. A recently released film has sparked discussion around income inequality among Asian Americans specifically. In a recent study included in the New York times it's been found that income inequality among Asian-Americans has doubled in the last 50 years, read more here
Gender is one of the many contributing factors to the income inequality that plagues the U.S. The gender pay gap is a controversial subject with many different opinions and studies pointing to different reasons as to why women earn almost a quarter less than men. In light of the clear disparity, U.K companies employing more than 250 people on staff are required by law to report on their gender pay gap. Below is the findings from the staff of the Economist Newspaper in the U.K.
The findings show that while women and men make up about even portions of the total staff, women are primarily in the lowet tier positions while men occupy managerial and executive positions. In summarizing their findings the Economist group explains that top positions have much less turnover and become a lot less diverse then entry positions with quick turnover.
Read for yourself here!
“Among lower- and middle-income households, white families have four times as much wealth as black families and three times as much as Hispanic families.”
The Janus Forum at UVM focuses on constructive discussion aimed towards solving critical problems in society. Income inequality in the U.S is an important part of this discussion on improvement as well as a contentious subject. In light of this, and the steady incline in income inequality that has taken place over the past 40 years, the Janus Forum has decided to focus on income inequality for the upcoming year. The Janus Forum will be hosting events such as debates and panel discussions related to this topic, more specific topics and dates to come!
Want to do some reading on the subject? Check out this 2017 research from the Pew Research Center on Income Inequality below!
“How wealth inequality has changed in the U.S. since the Great Recession, by race, ethnicity and income” -Rakesh Kochhar
When is civil disobedience justified on college campuses?
This questions continues to be asked when reflecting on events like the occupation of Waterman at UVM organized by Nonames for Justice as well as the protests over controversial speakers at Middlebury, UConn, the University of Michigan and Columbia. The Janus Forum Welcomed scholars David Shih and Jonathan Rauch to discuss the topic of Free Speech on College Campuses this past February and this past April members from UVM’s Lawrence Debate Union along with Dr Thomas Streeter and Dr. Winnie Looby participated in a public debate to answer the question of if and when civil disobedience on college campuses is justified. Here is a noteworthy moment from the discussion:
“College campuses are often seen as preparation for real-world activism. Because of this idea, it’s important that we are reflective and responsible with the ways we choose to engage in activism, and that we promote discussions on how to respectfully and effectively address systemic issues”
What are your thoughts?
The Lawrence Debate Union at UVM is sponsoring a debate on when civil disobedience is justified featuring Dr. Winnie Looby and Dr. Thomas Streeter. Dr. Winnie Looby is a faculty member assigned to the Center on Disability and Community Inclusion in the College of Education and Social Services at UVM. Looby’s scholarly work focuses on Interdisciplinary Collaboration, Disability Studies, Early Childhood Special Education, Technology in Education, and Family-School Partnerships. Dr Thomas Streeter is a professor in the Sociology Department at UVM. Streeter’s scholarly work has a focus on media, culture, the internet, media law and policy. Interested in watching the debate? Come to the Memorial Lounge from 6:30 to 8:00 on Tuesday, April 24.
Janus Forum at the University of Vermont
Published by Lilly Oates · March 28 at 6:25pm ·
On February 12, 2018 the Janus Forum welcomed scholars Jonathan Rauch and David Shih to debate whether or not free speech should be restricted on college campuses. Jonathan Rauch is a Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institute as well as an editor and contributer to the Antlantic. Rauch’s scholarly work includes six books and many articles related to political, economic and social issues with an emphasis on the quality of life for members of the lGBTQ community. Rauch published an article titled “The case for Hate Speech” in the Atlantic that can be found here . David Shih is an associate professor of english at the University of Wisconsin Eau Claire. Shih’s scholarly work is primarily focused on Asian American Studies, Critical Race Theory, Critical Hmong Studies and Antiracist Professional Development. Shih was featured on NPR discussing his views on free speech that can be found here .
Want to watch the debate? Click here
Did you miss the debate on free speech on college campuses? Do you want to hear more from Jonathan Rauch on his perspective? Read the article to hear more from Rauch about free speech with regard to gay rights advancement through the years.
This past February the Janus Forum welcomed scholars Jonathan Rauch and David Shih to debate whether or not free speech should be restricted on college campuses. David Shih, associate professor of english at the University of Wisconsin advocated for restrictions saying,
“The marketplace of ideas is a space where ideas struggle for truth and bad ones fall away or burn away, and what remains is truth to be enshrined as knowledge. This is my claim, the marketplace of ideas paradigm does not change the racial status quo. Hate speech is therefore not a means to a truthful end and it may just be the end. One reason for this is because when it comes to ideas about race in the market, americans are less rational consumers because of their personal experiences or their absence of them”
What are your thoughts: Should hate speech be left to fail in the marketplace of ideas? Or should race be an exception that we regulate?
If you missed the debate you can watch it here:
This past September the Janus Forum at UVM hosted a panel discussion on gun control where Cassandra Crifasi (John Hopkins), Michael Huemer (University of Colorado, Boulder), and Sanford Levinson (University of Texas, Austin), all weighed in on the constitutional, social, and moral questions related to gun control. The events that took place in Parkland this past February have revived and prompted the current gun-control debate. With the controversy and pressure from people, especially students, across the country this debate has reached the floor of Congress with many potentials policies at play. Considering this, it’s useful to note the global difference in gun policy, how does the U.S compare with other countries? You can find out information on this from a report done by the Council on Foreign Relations below. And, if you missed the gun control panel discussion you can watch that using one of the links below as well.
Did you miss the debate on free speech restrictions on college campuses? See below to watch the full debate and catch up on what you missed.