Modifying sense of place in a federal company town: Sunflower Village,Kansas, 1942 to 1959

The federal government built Sunflower Village, Kansas, to house employees of the Sunflower Ordnance Plant and their families during World War II. The community existed in this fashion until 1959 when a private real-estate developer bought the land and buildings. The Village evolved out of many perspectives in urban planning including those of federal ownership, ‘Garden City’ communities, and private company towns. This study examines a modified, or unique, development of sense of place that evolved here due to these varied urban forms and despite evidence of mobility and a short residence. Landscape analysis, archival searches and personal interviews also reveal a distinct difference in the experiences of youth and adults that resulted in varying processes of attachment within the community.     

日本武士阶级的文武合一思想

提倡文武两道,是日本封建武士道中的重要内容。到了江户时代儒学成为官学,经过儒学的改造,日本传统的文武两道观发展为以仁义之道为基础的文武合一论。而江户时代后期,由于承平日久,社会流于文弱,武士的文武观开始强调以尚武为主,认为统治阶级保持尚武精神是国家长治久安的关键。     

“They Will Take the Country from Us”: Labor Zionism,the Origins and Legacy of the “Other” in Israeli Mass Media,and Hegemonic Narratives

After 1948, Israel's governing elites embarked on a rigorous program of state building and settling hundreds of thousands of Jewish immigrants. In the process, the elites, primarily from the leading Mapai party, developed a process of othering Jewish immigrants from Arab countries, Arab citizens, and Orthodox Jews. They were physically segregated in their own schools and communities, and the elite culture described them as a threat against the European culture of Jewish immigrants from central Europe. The process targeted Mizrahi Jews before moving on to deplore the “demographic threat” of Orthodox Jews and resulted in the current normative hegemonic discourse in Israel that paints numerous groups as threatening the state. This article proposes a four‐part model for understanding “the other” in Israel: contemporary denial and nostalgia for a homogenous past, the view of Zionism as a civilizing mission, the application of separation of ethnic groups in planning, and demographic fear of the other. Altogether, they paint a picture of an Israel that has not come to grips with its past, and therefore continues the process of “othering” in its contemporary ethnocratic framework. Combining the analysis of geographic separation, and planning and media, it presents an innovative understanding of Israeli society.