Community Acknowledgment

Volunteers in non-profit groups are a valuable workforce that contributes to economic development and supports people in need in the U.S. However, many non-profit groups face challenges including engaging and sustaining volunteer participation, as well as increasing visibility of their work in the community. To support non-profit groups' service, we explored how engaging community members in the volunteer-acknowledgment process may have an impact. We set up workstations and invited community members to write thank-you cards to volunteers in non-profit groups. We conducted 14 interviews with volunteers and community members, collected and analyzed 25 thank-you cards. We found that the acknowledgment activity can help circulate social goods through multiple stakeholders, that authenticity was valued in the acknowledgment process, and that non-profit groups intended to distribute, reuse, and publicize the acknowledgments to utilize them to a fuller extent. Our contributions include expanding knowledge on experiences, needs, and impact of community acknowledgment from different stakeholders, as well as presenting design opportunities.

Le Média – A Populist Critique of Journalists and the Media by Journalists

ABSTRACT – This paper aims to question the critique of journalists and the media by Le Média, a French press body close to a populist party (La France insoumise), which means regularly opposing “the people” and “the elites” (De Cleen & Stavrakakis, 2017; De Cleen, 2019). Through a methodology inspired by the sociolinguistics of Gee (2014) and by the concept of “social goods”, the results bring to light: a metajournalistic critique based on the opposition between “the people” and “the elites”, a desire to delegitimize legacy media and the wish to make journalism a “social good” in the service of “the people”. RÉSUMÉ – Cette recherche vise à interroger la critique des journalistes et des médias par Le Média, un organe de presse français proche d’un parti populiste (La France insoumise), c’est-à-dire qui met régulièrement en avant l’opposition entre le “peuple” et les “élites” (De Cleen & Stavrakakis, 2017; De Cleen, 2019). Plus particulièrement, à travers une méthodologie inspirée de la sociolinguistique de Gee (2014) et notamment du concept de “social goods”, ce travail met au jour une critique métajournalistique, basée sur l’opposition entre le peuple et les élites, qui, tout en délégitimant les médias traditionnels, pose le journalisme en véritable “bien social” au service du peuple. RESUMO – Esta pesquisa busca questionar a crítica sobre os jornalistas e a mídia feitas por Le Média, um veículo da imprensa francesa próximo a um partido populista (La France insoumise), ou seja, que destaca regularmente a oposição entre o “povo” e as “elites” (De Cleen & Stavrakakis, 2017; De Cleen, 2019). De forma mais específica, por meio de uma metodologia inspirada na sociolinguística de Gee (2014) e, particularmente, no conceito de “social goods”, a pesquisa atualiza uma crítica metajornalística, baseada na oposição entre povo e elites, que, ao mesmo em que deslegitimam as mídias tradicionais, definem o jornalismo como um verdadeiro “bem social” a serviço do povo. RESUMEN – Este estudio tiene como objetivo interrogar la critica de los periodistas y de los medios por Le Média, una entidad de prensa francesa cercana al partido populista (La France insoumise), es decir que destaca a menudo la oposición entre el “pueblo” y las “elites” (De Cleen & Stavrakakis, 2017; De Cleen, 2019). Y más específicamente, a través de una metodología inspirada de la sociolingüística de Gee (2014) y del concepto de “social goods” que pone al dia una critica metaperiodista, basado en la oposición entre el pueblo y las élites que, al tiempo que deslegitima los medios tradicionales, plantea al periodismo como un verdadero “social good” al servicio del pueblo.

Democracy’s Conceptual Politics

The language we use for democracy matters, the struggles over how it is defined are real, the outcomes are consequential. This is what a conceptual politics approach emphasizes, pointing to the vital role played by contestation in determining which meanings prevail and which are marginalized. Among all the meanings of democracy that exist, it is liberal democracy that stands at the center, it has effectively won conceptual and political battles resulting in its current primacy. In this sense, liberalism is much more deeply baked into contemporary discussions about democracy than some might be comfortable admitting. This is not without cause, as liberal democracy has achieved, and continues to unevenly provide, political, economic, and social goods. In the rush to dig up alternatives, it is important not to lose sight of how and why this liberal conception of democracy has come to dominate and the ways it conditions democratic possibilities.

Theories of Justice Applied to the Pandemic: The Case of Vaccine Distribution

The problem of the distribution (in a broad sense) of the coronavirus vaccines – concerning the criterion by which the beneficiaries of the vaccine are selected – constitute a particular case of the general problem of the distribution of social goods. For this reason, it is necessary to discuss whether the selection criterion to be adopted is that of commutative justice or that of distributive justice and, consequently, whether the approach to the problem must follow an individualist perspective or a collectivist perspective, such as it happens regarding the general problem of the distribution of social goods. Therefore, problem of the distribution of the coronavirus vaccines is still a problem of social justice. In this essay, I will rehearse an application of each of these criteria to the problem at hand.

Distributive Justice

This chapter develops the implications of liberal relational egalitarianism for the distribution of goods produced by social cooperation. It shows that there are not only strong instrumental reasons to set stringent limits to inequality of income, wealth, and opportunity, on grounds of both non-domination and social status, but, contrary to what both many critics and proponents of relational equality argue, strong non-instrumental, expressive reasons to do so, as well: since participants in social cooperation are equals, all inequalities in social goods need to be justified by justice-relevant reasons even where they do not lead to domination or social status inequality. Rightly understood, relational egalitarianism thus requires a concentric attack on material inequality in society as well as on its sources in power inequality, through a plurality of rationales.

Significados de los bienes sociales: alcances en la justicia distributiva / Meanings of social goods: scope in distributive justice

Los principios éticos de la justicia distributiva se establecen mediante la importancia y sentido que diversas posturas teóricas le confieren a los bienes sociales. Se presenta un análisis sobre las limitantes en una sociedad plural y equitativa, al favorecer un solo tipo de bien social. El objetivo es contrastar tres corrientes filosóficas que abordan la teoría de la justicia, mediante propuestas de diversos precursores en el tema y concluir con una propuesta donde se incluyan distintos bienes que garanticen la diversidad de planes de vida y circunstancias. La primera pertenece al utilitarismo de Bentham y Mill; la segunda es de Rawls, filósofo liberal; en la tercera se incorpora “las capacidades” de Sen; la cuarta propuesta corresponde al filósofo de la tradición comunitarista Walzer. Por último, se integra la “teoría contractualista moral” de Scanlon. Por consiguiente, es imposible privilegiar un solo tipo de bien social, se propone la inclusión de la diversidad de significados y contextos como elementos que integren principios éticos filosóficos para el desarrollo de una sociedad justa e incluyente. Se utiliza como método el análisis y comparación de los autores con la finalidad de encontrar convergencias y divergencias entre éstos, lo cual permite ampliar la investigación para poder contextualizar cada postura teórica.

Group Maintenance in Aggregative Multicellularity

Aggregative multicellularity occurs when dispersed cells join together to form a highly cooperative unit, in contrast to clonal multicellular organisms formed by cells that remain in contact after descent from a single cell. Because aggregative groups may include non-relatives, aggregative multicellular organisms should be particularly vulnerable to the rise of cheater cells that take advantage of social goods without paying the costs, reducing cooperation, and even threatening extinction. We review the key mechanisms by which aggregative multicellular organisms control cheaters with a focus on the best studied aggregative organisms, Myxococcus xanthus and Dictyostelium discoideum. These include various passive and active mechanisms to maintain high relatedness within aggregates, to enforce cooperation on aggregate members, and the costs of cheating on other key functions. Ultimately, aggregative multicellular organisms are not that different from clonal organisms descended from a single cell.