“Involved in something (involucrado en algo)”: Denial and stigmatization in Mexico’s “war on drugs”

This article responds empirically to the question posed by Stan Cohen about “why, when faced by knowledge of others’ suffering and pain—particularly the suffering and pain resulting from what are called ‘human rights violations’—does ‘reaction’ so often take the form of denial, avoidance, passivity, indifference, rationalisation or collusion?”. Our context is Mexico's “war on drugs.” Since 2006 this “war” has claimed the lives of around 240,000 Mexican citizens and disappeared around 60,000 others. Perpetrators include organized criminal gangs and state security services. Violence is pervasive and widely reported. Most people are at risk. Our study is based on qualitative interviews and focus groups involving 68 “ordinary Mexicans” living in five different Mexican cities which have varying levels of violence. It investigates participant proximity to the victims and the psychological defense mechanisms they deploy to cope with proximity to the violence. We found that 62 of our participants knew, directly or indirectly, one or more people who had been affected. We also found one dominant rationalization (defense mechanism) for the violence: that the victims were “involved in something” (drugs or organized crime) and therefore “deserved their fate.” This echoes prevailing state discourses about the violence. We argue that the discourse of “involved” is a discourse of denial that plays three prominent roles in a highly violent society in which almost no-one is immune: it masks state violence, stigmatizes the victims, and sanctions bystander passivity. As such, we show how official and individual denial converge, live, and reproduce, and play a powerful role in the perpetuation of violence.     

The Broken Ethnography: Lessons from an Almost Hero

Qualitative Sociology - In the past, ethnographers often presented themselves in the classic hero frame, where they appeared authoritative and calm. Recent ethnographers, though, reveal hardship...     

Transparency and Unmasking Issues in Ethnographic Crime Research: Methodological Considerations

A transparency movement has begun urging researchers to publicize their data in order to ease replication and accountability. Some ethnographers have also begun arguing that researchers should unmask, or fully disclose, field sites and participant identities in order to replicate studies, verify accounts, and monitor social phenomena over time. However, for ethnographers studying violence and crime, full transparency or unmasking can get an ethnographer harmed. Thus, I broaden the unmasking/masking discussion by arguing for partial disclosures in dangerous research. To do so, I provide examples from my previous drug market ethnography and my ongoing gang research. I then propose safer ways to disclose field sites and participants, mainly through the following: semibiographical disclosure, where the ethnographer strategically omits some data in otherwise rich biographical portraits; through partial spatial disclosures, where the ethnographer reveals the field site's general area; and through invitational disclosure, where the ethnographer invites outsiders to meet participants in the field.     

Detecting level shifts in ARMA-GARCH (1,1) Models

The purpose of this article is to present a new method to detect level shifts in the context of conditional heteroscedastic models. First, we define precisely what type of outlier we are referring to, a concept that has been scarcely touched in the field of GARCH (1,1) models, and then we go on to present our methodology based on the nature of the Lagrange multiplier tests. The validity and efficiency of the proposed procedure are demonstrated through different simulation experiments. To conclude, we present a practical application of the method to the time series of returns of US short-term interest rates.     

The EU integration process and the convergence of social protection benefits at national level

The essential objective of this article is to measure and interpret the degree of convergence of social protection benefits in European Union member states as the process of European integration has progressed. In this sense, the article analyses the potential role of per capita income and of the socio-demographic characteristics of the population as explanatory variables for the levels of social protection provision in European countries. The empirical study focuses on the period from 1985 to 1999, and investigates whether differences in welfare provision levels decreased as European integration progressed, in line with the convergence in economic and socio-demographic variables between member states.