As lawyers in Taiwan have reported, the Vietnamese government has a record of censoring communication about the 2016 Formosa marine disaster. The blocking of certain keywords (Formosa, dead fish, Vu Ang) is a form of media injustice that local and diaspora activists have to work around.
Sabina Vaught’s Compulsory challenges conventional understandings of state schooling through an ethnographic exploration of the juvenile prison school system in the United States. Vaught examines the ways in which juvenile prison and prison school are shaped by legal and ideological forces working across multiple state apparatuses. Vaught depicts these forces vividly through her ethnographic focus on Lincoln prison school, a site serving “as a window onto the massive institutional practices of juvenile schooling, knowledge production, and incarceration in the United States” (19). Her ethnography maps the network of relations converging through this site—between prisoners, teachers, state officials and mothers. In doing so, her ethnography captures an illustrative account of the institutional assemblages at work in constituting the state through material and ideological practices of dispossession and education of young Black men. She demonstrates the ways in which the state disproportionally displaces young Black men from home and subjects them to abuse, captivity, and forced submission through its educational apparatus.
In her approach, Vaught highlights distinct spaces of interest: inside and outside the juvenile prison school system. She works with these designations to map institutional powers across different spaces, arguing that “Inside and Outside are places just as Seattle and Canada are proper nouns with distinct features, bounded space, governing rules, sociocultural symbology, and so on” (12). In mapping these spaces, Vaught is also attentive to who is present and who is absent, both discursively and materially. Absences are recognized as shaping the field in which Vaught is working—for instance, her ethnographic focus on young men in prison schools is largely an outcome of institutional practices of hiding young black women from view. In the logic of prison administrators, “girls were too vulnerable to be exposed to research” (17)—despite paradoxically deemed “dangerous” in justifying their captivity.
Vaught’s attention to absence is also explicit in her examination of removal, as a practice aimed at disrupting the private spheres of people of color through prisons and schools. Removal entails the physical relocation of students from their homes to schools, where “they are subject to meaningless or hostile captive educational performances” (321). Removal, as Vaught demonstrates, is essential to the continuous construction of the US as a White, heteropatriarchal nation.
More specifically, removal disables the possibility of a Black private sphere by disrupting kinship relations between young Black men and their families and making young Black men into prisoners. Removal acts as an assault “on Black women as custodians of the house of resistance, on Black boys as figments of White criminal imaginations who antithetically define White male innocence and citizenship, and on Black girls as both hyperaggressive and broken ghost victims” (321). The state works to supplant other social and family relations with carceral kinship relations, which normalize and legitimize the removal process. This process is further reinforced with the psychological manipulation of young men through state-imposed “treatment,” which corrodes their sense of free will and promotes feelings of internal, individual culpability for their exclusion from citizenship.
Vaught argues that this disruption of Black private spheres is significant because these are important spaces of resistance, in which counter publics are formed. In the United States, “the public” is leveraged as a tool of white supremacist control in limiting the power of some. Rights themselves are exclusive and private—limited to those possessing property, a condition of whiteness dependent on the exclusion of people of Color. Dispossession and education are practices that maintain and rationalize this exclusivity, as young Black men are denied the possibilities of citizenship. These practices serve to protect the interests of the White state, to which the potential emergence of private Black citizens (and their potential publics) act as threats: “White freedom, will, and fitness for self-governance exist only through the ideological and structural denial of those very things in Black people” (322).
In her attention to the interrelations between the white supremacist state, prison schooling, and critical scholarship, Vaught offers direction for activists and scholars invested in social justice and education—particularly in her critique of the school-to-prison pipeline, which draws attention to the limitations of reform. As an apparatus of the state, schools are meant to function as prison pipelines. Scholars and activists applying the prison-to-pipeline logic in advocating for education reform overlook this essential fact and “unintentionally confirm the principal, most damaging misconception of school: that it is good” (37). Vaught’s Compulsory supports and gives life to alternative theoretical approaches focused on the racist organization of schools in relation to prisons. In this, Vaught exemplifies her approach to theory as stewardship: theory is “a stewardship of a kinship network of meaning. It is not just an abstraction we take up and give life to page by page but rather a living force that in some ways takes us up” (41). Ultimately, Vaught’s theoretical stewardship offers meaningful direction for scholars and activists: “State schooling … is the beating heart of a supremacist state. … To take on the heart of the state requires further mapping its reaches” (323).
The Covid-19 Pandemic Vulnerability Index (PVI) Dashboard, which relies on the Toxicological Prioritization Index (ToxiPi) to integrate diverse data into a geospatial context.
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS). COVID-19 Pandemic Vulnerability Index (PVI) Dashboard. 2021. Available online: https://covid19pvi.niehs.nih.gov/ (accessed on 24 July 2021).
The PVI dashboard is included in the CDCD’s Covid-19 Data Tracker as part of the “Unique Populations” tab.
NIEHS also developed Covid-19 PVI lesson plans for high school students (grades 9 – 12) to learn to examine risk factors associated with Covid-19 using the index. The goals of the curriculum are to provide students with a tool for examining the spread and health outcomes of a pandemic, to promote their awareness of how various factors (biological, social, behavioral, etc.) impact disease spread and outcomes, and to support the development of prevention and intervention strategies that reduce exposures to risk factors and their adverse health impacts. The lesson plans highlight the significance of social and environmental determinants in public health.
Learning objectives of the curriculum include:
The PVI dashboard was also used by anthropologist Jayajit Chakraborty to examine the relationship between Covid-19 vulnerability and disability status in the US. Chakraborty applied the dashboard and data from the 2019 American Community Survey to investigate whether vulnerability to the pandemic has been significantly greater in counties containing higher percentages of people with disabilities in four timeframes from May 2020 to February 2021. Chakraborty found that the percentage of people with disabilities (as well as those reporting other cognitive, vision, ambulatory, self-care and independent living difficulties) was significantly greater in counties with the highest 20% of the PVI. Chakraborty calls for further research to better understand the adverse impacts of Covid-19 on PwDs (people with disabilities).
Chakraborty, J. Vulnerability to the COVID-19 Pandemic for People with Disabilities in the U.S. Disabilities 2021, 1, 278-285. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities1030020
The index produces an overall score derived from 12 indicators distributed across four domains (current infection rates, baseline population concentration, current interventions, and health and environmental vulnerabilities. Each vulnerability factor is represented as a slide of a radar chart (see below).
The dashboard can also be used to visualize changes over time in cases, deaths, PVI, and PVI rank (with a line chart and a bar chart), as well as predicted changes in cases and deaths (with a line chart), see below.
Additional visual layers can be added to the PVI map (e.g. number of cases and deaths).
The PVI offers a visual synthesis of information to monitor disease trajectories, identify local vulnerabilities, forecast outcomes, and guide an informed response (e.g. allocating resources). This includes short-term, local predictions of cases and deaths. The PVI dashboard creates profiles (called PVI scorecards) for every county in the United States.
The PVI dashboard can be customized to specific needs by adding or removing layers of information, filtering by region, or clustering by profile similarity. The Predictions panel connects historical tracking to local forecasts of cases and deaths. The dashboard applies an integrated concept of vulnerability composed of both dynamic (infection rate and interventions) and static (community population and health care access) factors.
The statistical modeling supporting the PVI dashboard (generalized linear models of cumulative outcome data) has indicated that following population size, the most significant predictors of cases and deaths were the proportion of Black residents, mean fine particulate matter [particulate matter ≤2.5μm in diameter (PM2.5)], percentage of population with insurance coverage, and proportion of Hispanic residents.
The ToxPi*GIS framework, from which the PVI was built, is a free tool that integrates data streams from different sources into interactive profiles that overlay geographic information systems (GIS) data. This enables people using the tool to compare, cluster, and evaluate the sensitivity of a statistical framework to component data streams. In other words, this enables the integration of data that are not normally compared (data are combined into a matrix comprised of various domains or categories, varying weights and represented by color schemes).
Data is drawn from the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), testing rates from the COVID tracking project (produced by the Atlantic Monthly Group), social distancing metrics from mobile device data, and USA Facts’ measures of disease spread and case numbers.