Liberal vs Conservative Brains


White men tend more toward conservatism in white dominated societies, but I wonder if men in all cultures aren't more “conservative” than women, if by conservative we mean dominance-oriented, sexist, physically competitive, status conscious and in-group oriented. I think these things are based on fear and anger, and highly related to the male tendency to glory in warfare. Nearly all little boys love toy soldiers.

I believe men have a greater tendency to accept the dominance situation than women do, and this is one of the keys to being a liberal, I believe. Liberals don't want to dominate, but they don't want to be dominated, either. They want to cooperate and be respected. Liberals are much more likely to think for themselves and form their own philosophy from the evidence of their eyes. They also are more likely to champion the “underdog” in a fight, and feel greater empathy toward people as individuals than do Conservatives do.

It would be interesting to see some studies on women and men who are at variance with their gender stereotypes on amygdala and ACC size. Are they also conservative or liberal in relation to the size of those structures? Does their gender identity (not necessarily sexual preference) match their respective amygdala/ACC size? Is that an inborn trait or perhaps occurring in early childhood development, or do lifetime stressors such as abusive treatment during an individual's life actually cause an increase in the size of the amygdala. Do all fearful people follow the leader because that seems safer?




Liberal vs. conservative: Who has better brain?
By DAVID W FREEMAN CBS NEWS April 7, 2011, 12:24 PM

(CBS) Are political leanings hard-wired into the brain? That's the suggestion of a new study that reveals striking anatomical differences between the brains of liberals and those of conservatives.

The brains of people who call themselves liberals tend to have larger anterior cingulate cortexes than the brains of people on the opposite side of the political spectrum, the study showed. The anterior cingulate cortex is a collar-shaped region around the corpus collosum, a structure that relays signals between the right and left hemispheres of the brain.

What about conservatives? Their brains tend to have larger amygdalas. The amygdala is an almond-shaped structure located deep within the brain.

Based upon what brain scientists know about the function of the two brain regions, researchers believe the structural differences support the notion that liberals are better equipped to make sense of conflicting information while conservatives are better able to recognize a threat.

"Previously, some psychological traits were known to be predictive of an individual's political orientation," study author Dr. Ryota Kanai of University College London Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, said in a written statement. "Our study now links such personality traits with specific brain structure."

For the study, published in the April 7 issue of the journal Current Biology, 90 healthy young people underwent MRI scans and completed questionnaires designed to determine their political leanings on a five-point scale - from very liberal to very conservative.

The study was undertaken following several previous reports showing that conservatives are more sensitive to feel threatened or anxious in the face of uncertainty, while liberals tend to be more open to new experiences - which is just what Kanai's study seemed to confirm.

The study didn't show what causes the structural differences in the first place. Are they set at birth? Do they arise over time as a result of experiences? And what explains people whose political views change over time?

Kanai had a diplomatic answer. "It's very unlikely that actual political orientation is directly encoded in these brain regions," he said. "More work is needed to determine how these brain structures mediate the formation of political attitude."





ANTERIOR CINGULATE CORTEX



http://ccpweb.wustl.edu/pdfs/1998Science747-749.pdf

Anterior Cingulate Cortex, Error Detection, and the Online Monitoring of Performance
Cameron S. Carter,* Todd S. Braver, Deanna M. Barch,
Matthew M. Botvinick, Douglas Noll, Jonathan D. Cohen
SCIENCE z VOL. 280 z 1 MAY 1998

An unresolved question in neuroscience and psychology is how the brain monitors performance to regulate behavior. It has been proposed that the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), on the medial surface of the frontal lobe, contributes to performance monitoring by detecting errors. In this study, event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging was used to examine ACC function. Results confirm that this region shows activity during erroneous responses. However, activity was also observed in the same region during correct responses under conditions of increased response competition. This suggests that the ACC detects conditions under which errors are likely to occur rather than errors themselves.



http://www.cel.huji.ac.il/courses/structureandprocesses/Bibliography/Bush_2000_TICS.pdf

Trends in Cognitive Sciences – Vol. 4, No. 6, June 2000
Cognitive and emotional influences in anterior cingulate cortex
George Bush, Phan Luu and Michael I. Posner

Anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) is a part of the brain’s limbic system. Classically, this region has been related to affect, on the basis of lesion studies in humans and in animals. In the late 1980s, neuroimaging research indicated that ACC was active in many studies of cognition. The findings from EEG studies of a focal area of negativity in scalp electrodes following an error response led to the idea that ACC might be the brain’s error detection and correction device. In this article, these various findings are reviewed in relation to the idea that ACC is a part of a circuit involved in a form of attention that serves to regulate both cognitive and emotional processing. Neuroimaging studies showing that separate areas of ACC are involved in cognition and emotion are discussed and related to results showing that the error negativity is influenced by affect and motivation. In addition, the development of the emotional and cognitive roles of ACC are discussed, and how the success of this regulation in controlling responses might be correlated with cingulate size. Finally, some theories are considered about how the different subdivisions of ACC might interact with other cortical structures as a part of the circuits involved in the regulation of mental and emotional activity.



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16982430

Neuron. 2006 Sep 21;51(6):871-82.
Resolving emotional conflict: a role for the rostral anterior cingulate cortex in modulating activity in the amygdala.
Etkin A1, Egner T, Peraza DM, Kandel ER, Hirsch J.

Abstract
Effective mental functioning requires that cognition be protected from emotional conflict due to interference by task-irrelevant emotionally salient stimuli. The neural mechanisms by which the brain detects and resolves emotional conflict are still largely unknown, however. Drawing on the classic Stroop conflict task, we developed a protocol that allowed us to dissociate the generation and monitoring of emotional conflict from its resolution. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we find that activity in the amygdala and dorsomedial and dorsolateral prefrontal cortices reflects the amount of emotional conflict. By contrast, the resolution of emotional conflict is associated with activation of the rostral anterior cingulate cortex. Activation of the rostral cingulate is predicted by the amount of previous-trial conflict-related neural activity and is accompanied by a simultaneous and correlated reduction of amygdalar activity. These data suggest that emotional conflict is resolved through top-down inhibition of amygdalar activity by the rostral cingulate cortex.



https://hbr.org/2010/09/when-emotional-reasoning-trumps-iq

Harvard Business Review
When Emotional Reasoning Trumps IQ
Roderick Gilkey, Ricardo Caceda, Clinton Kilts
FROM THE SEPTEMBER 2010 ISSUE

Many companies and B schools still treat strategy and execution as separate beasts, despite increasing evidence that the divide does much more damage than good. A large part of the problem may be that people view strategic reasoning as a high-level executive function of the brain and tactical thought as a discrete, lower-level activity. But the two kinds of thinking are linked in an important way: They both draw considerably on social-emotional reasoning, particularly in the brains of the most adept strategic thinkers. Indeed, strategic thought entails at least as much emotional intelligence as it does IQ.

In a recent study we conducted with Diana Robertson and Andrew Bate of the Wharton School, we asked managers in an executive MBA program to react to fictional strategic and tactical management dilemmas and measured their brain activity using functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI. Instead of simply identifying which parts of the brain “lit up” in response to particular tasks, we looked at how the brain regions were interacting.

The area of the brain people tend to associate with strategic thought is the prefrontal cortex, known for its role in executive function. It allows humans to engage in anticipation, pattern recognition, probability assessment, risk appraisal, and abstract thinking. Those abilities do help managers solve problems. However, when we examined the best strategic performers in our sample, we found significantly less neural activity in the prefrontal cortex than in the areas associated with “gut” responses, empathy, and emotional intelligence (that is, the insula, the anterior cingulate cortex, and the superior temporal sulcus). In other words, the conscious executive function was downplayed—while regions associated with unconscious emotion processing operated more freely.

What’s more, the strongest performers’ tactical reasoning relied not only on the insula (associated with emotional processing) and the anterior cingulate cortex (crucial for making new choices based on the assessment of past outcomes). It also engaged the part of the brain (the superior temporal sulcus) associated with parsing sensory stimuli and anticipating other people’s thoughts and emotions—for instance, understanding how action plans would be received by the workers charged with implementing them.

Of course, IQ-based reasoning is valuable in both strategic and tactical thinking—but it’s clear that managers integrate their brain processes as they become better strategists. When companies realize that, they may approach strategy and execution more holistically.




AMYGDALA



http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201104/conservatives-big-fear-brain-study-finds

Psychology Today
Conservatives Big on Fear, Brain Study Finds
Are people born conservative?
Published on April 19, 2011 by Nigel Barber, Ph.D. in The Human Beast

Peering inside the brain with MRI scans, researchers at University College London found that self-described conservative students had a larger amygdala than liberals. The amygdala is an almond-shaped structure deep in the brain that is active during states of fear and anxiety. Liberals had more gray matter at least in the anterior cingulate cortex, a region of the brain that helps people cope with complexity.

The results are not that surprising as they fit in with conclusions from other studies. Just a year ago, researchers from Harvard and UCLA San Diego reported finding a "liberal" gene. This gene had a tiny effect, however, and worked only for adolescents having many friends. The results also mesh with psychological studies on conflict monitoring.

What It Means 

There is a big unknown underlying these findings. Supposing that the size of one's amygdala really does increase the likelihood of being a conservative. Is the size of the amygdala determined at birth, or does it perhaps increase with frightening childhood experiences, such as authoritarian parenting and corporal punishment?

Similarly, one might ask whether the gray matter difference is affected by exposure to educational challenge, social diversity, or childhood cognitive enrichment.

The born versus acquired perspective on political attitudes is important to psychologists. After all, if political proclivities are fixed at birth in terms of brain anatomy, there is little hope of change. Most of us would probably like to see a world in which political attitudes were less polarized, and more changeable, but that may be a pipe dream.

Meanwhile, the neuro-scientific fact of two very different political creatures helps clarify much of the political antics of modern democracies.

Most societies are divided into a party that wants change (the more liberal party) and one that is afraid of change (the conservatives). The liberal party is generally more intellectual and the conservative party is more anti-intellectual.

The conservative party is big on national defense and magnifies our perception of threat, whether of foreign aggressors, immigrants, terrorists, or invading ideologies like Communism. To a conservative, the world really is a frightening place.

Given that their brains are so different, it is hardly surprising that liberals and conservatives should spend so much time talking across each other and never achieving real dialog or consensus.

As scientists we hope that these results are replicated because they shed so much light on political behavior. As citizens, we would prefer if politicians were not divided into such different categories of political animal.

If everyone was born with the same brain potential to acquire either conservative, or liberal, views, then we could be more optimistic about prospects for political communication and consensus-building. If voters were of like brain, perhaps they could be of like mind.




http://www.columbiaconsult.com/pubs/v52_fall07.html

The Columbia Consultancy
Understanding Ourselves: Gender Differences in the Brain
Volume #52, Fall 2007

Differences in Brain Structures 

The amygdala is an ancient part of the brain, influenced by hormones, that processes fear, triggers aggression and action, and stimulates competitiveness. It alerts us to danger and switches on the rest of the body. The amygdala in men's brains is larger than in women's. Moreover the male amygdala has testosterone receptors that heighten responses, providing a biological reason for why men compete with each other more aggressively than females and why men can quickly escalate situations and enjoy the fight.

Men and women respond differently to fear signals coming from the amygdala. When the amygdala fires a fear signal, a "fight or flight" reaction is triggered. We have now learned, however, that women's response can be different from men's: women's hormones, based on the evolution of their brains, tell them the way to safety is to gather in a group. So their response can be "tend and befriend." Women can reduce stress and promote a feeling of safety by connecting. When I wrote Success on Our Own Terms in the late '90s, one senior executive female told me that when she is stressed she needs to get out of her office and talk to others, while she noticed that the men at her level who were stressed tended to withdraw into themselves. What's important, as I mentioned in the last newsletter, is that if we are more conscious of the signals coming from our amygdala, we can change the way we respond to fear and adapt our behaviors to serve us better in today's world.

The prefrontal cortex is the decision-making executive center of the brain. It oversees emotional information and puts a check on the amygdala. The prefrontal cortex is larger in women and matures faster in women than in men. This difference, combined with the fact that women have less testosterone and more estrogen flowing through their brains, enables women to look for solutions to conflict, even if it means they might give up more themselves to resolve the situation. For me, this helps to explain the difference I've seen in my coaching practice in the way men and women approach negotiations or handle customers. Women tend to look for ways to compromise and serve the needs of others, even at their own expense. Men tend to look for ways to come out on top, even with their own customers.

The anterior cingulate cortex, which is another part of the rational decision making center of the brain that weighs options, is also larger in women, and has been labeled as the "worrywart" center of a woman's brain. Research demonstrates that anxiety is four times more common in women than men. So while evolution prompted women to be extremely cautious and collaborative so that they could protect their young, this cautiousness in today's business world can be interpreted, particularly by men influenced by risk-taking testosterone, as not being confident enough to step-up and take risks.

The brain is divided into two hemispheres: the left hemisphere deals with language and verbal abilities as well as the ability to process information in an orderly, logical way. The right deals with visual and spatial information, as well as abstract thinking and emotional responses. The corpus callosum, which is the part of the brain that connects both hemispheres, is thicker in women enabling them to use both the right and left sides of the brain in a more connected way than men do. Women use both sides of their brains for visual and verbal processing, and use both sides to respond to emotional experiences, while men use the right side of their brain for spatial skills and the left for verbal skills. Even within the language-centered, left-hand side of the brain, there are differences between men and women's brains. Anne Moir and David Jessel, authors of Brain Sex, claim that "the difference in the layout of the average male or female brain is found to have a direct effect on the way men and women differ in their ways of thinking -- differences in brain organization in men and women will lead to differences in the efficiency with which they perform certain tasks."

The hippocampus is the center for learning, memory and emotion and is larger and more active in the female brain. It is also estrogen sensitive and is a relay station for processing memories into words. Women have 11% more neurons than men in the brain centers for language and hearing. The connections between the two sides of women's brains enable them, on average, to be better at expressing emotions and remembering details of emotional events and communicating them. They use language to talk about feelings and develop consensus more efficiently than men do. Men's brains, more specifically organized and with fewer connections, enable men, on average, to focus more intensely and not be as distracted by superfluous information. Men using only the right side of their brains are able to zone in more quickly than women on certain kinds of tasks, for example, activities requiring spatial skills. Using both sides of their brains for processing spatial information takes women longer, while men take longer to process emotional information and to use certain language skills because of the location of these functions in the male brain. Several years ago, I conducted a 360-feedback process for one of my female clients. When I interviewed her male boss, he told me one of the characteristics he most admired about my client was her ability to read the emotions of people. He often took her with him to meetings because he recognized she could read people's emotions better than he could. Afterwards, she would debrief him, helping him interpret what he might not have been able to figure out as quickly by himself.

Both men and women experience advantages and disadvantages from these brain differences. A strong belief in coaching is that the more you understand your strengths and weaknesses, the better able you will be to devise a plan to leverage those strengths and compensate for those weaknesses. Knowing the advantages and disadvantages of the biological basis of who you are can help you to understand how to best use the advantages your brain provides, what to be aware of around the disadvantages, and how to make changes that will enhance your ability to succeed in your present environment. Knowledge is power and we shouldn't be afraid of understanding the biological component that contributes to making us who we are.

HORMONES

Chemicals that impact the structure and operation of the brain and interact with the brain to influence behavior.

Estrogen.A hormone found in much greater abundance in women than in men that enhances female brain circuits helping women master nuanced social skills of communication, observation, and intuition. Estrogen protects physical health and mental wellbeing. It moves women toward developing harmonious relationships, staying connected, and toward a preference for avoiding conflict, and increases a woman's ability to literally feel gut sensations more than men.

Oxytocin. A hormone that drives desire for connection, nurturing and bonding behavior, especially when combined with estrogen. In women, the feeling of connection reduces stress.

Progesterone.A hormone that works in conjunction with estrogen - sometimes mellowing; sometimes the opposite.

Testosterone. A fast-acting, aggressive, hormone and driver of sex. Men have 10 to 100 times more testosterone than women, enabling men to engage in interpersonal conflict and competition. The higher the level of testosterone, the more interest there is in winning the game, gaining the power, and defending the territory through strength, and the less interest there is in high quality social relationships.

Vasopressin. When combined with testosterone this hormone has a subtle aggressive impact; when combined with oxytocin it supports connection, bonding and socializing.

Cortisol.A highly sensitive hormone, made in the adrenal glands, that is activated under emotional and physical stress. Research on cortisol levels suggest that leaders with lower cortisol levels know how to relax under pressure and stay cool when facing challenges.

Dopamine. A neurochemical that stimulates pleasure circuits in the brain and provides a sense of well being.

Serotonin. A neurochemical that provides a sense of ease and calm, controls impulses and aggression. Women, in general, have about 30% more serotonin than men. Women whose ovaries make the most estrogen and progesterone are more resistant to stress because they have more serotonin. Women with less estrogen and progesterone are more sensitive to stress and have less serotonin.

A CANDID LOOK AT THE STATES

DECEMBER 20, 2014




STATE FACTS – BOTH ENTERTAINING AND SOBERING



https://www.yahoo.com/travel/what-every-state-in-the-u-s-is-worst-at-105417305752.html?hp=1

What Every State in the U.S. Is Worst at (Including North Dakota at Tourism)
Thrillist
By Kate Peregrina
December 17, 2014

One thing that makes the U.S. great: no two states are the same. That diversity leads to distinct strengths and weaknesses, but how can you know what makes North Dakota different from South Dakota, besides a made-up line separating them? Well, in the interest of showing that every state sucks in some way, we picked out one key area where each is most deficient. This is what every state is the worst at.



Alabama: Most child smokers

Alabama is one of the few states in the Union that has raised its smoking age to 19, but apparently this measure is improving health about as much as fast food restaurants listing how many calories are in a bacon double cheeseburger. Smokers gonna smoke.

Alaska: Highest chlamydia rate

All that oil money apparently leads to some bad decisions. But really, in the state with the lowest population density that’s also got the coldest average temperature, you can also just blame it on lonely Alaskans looking for another warm body.

Arizona: Worst at going to the dentist

Nearly 60% of people in Arizona say they don’t get regular dental exams. Which, if you’re retired and have dentures, probably makes sense. But still — gross.

Arkansas: Fewest advanced degrees per capita

Only 6.1% of people in Arkansas have an advanced degree or higher. You know your state is doing something wrong when West Virginia is calling “SCOREBOARD” about its academic prowess compared to yours.

California: Most polluted cities

Everybody already knows the air in Los Angeles feels like it was imported from a Mad Max movie. But, not surprisingly, the air also sucks in Bakersfield, Modesto, Sacramento, and Fresno. As if you needed another reason not to visit Fresno.

Colorado: Greatest cocaine use

The next time you’re in Colorado, and somebody at a party is talking about fresh-cut powder, don’t assume the discussion is about skiing conditions.

Connecticut: Most unequal incomes

Connecticut has a lot going for it, with the highest rate of school enrollment in the country and the highest per capita income. But the top 1% in Connecticut earn 41 times what everyone else earns. The rich get richer, and everybody just keeps trying to figure out what New Haven pizza is.

Delaware: Least regular exercise

According to a Gallup poll, less than half of people from Delaware report exercising regularly — for 30 minutes a day, three times a week. According to Google Maps, it only takes about an hour to drive from the north end of Delaware to the south end, and surely very few Delawareans know how long it takes on foot.

Florida: Most recreational boat accidents

Florida has the highest number of boat accidents and fatalities. Yet studies consistently show that Floridians operate boats at least as well as highly caffeinated orangutans.

Georgia: Least integrity

Politicians in Georgia are the least ethical in the country, with an estimated 658 state workers having accepted gratuities during a two-year period. State legislators were not available for comment without an offer of basketball tickets or honey baked hams.

Hawaii: Highest homelessness rate

The good news is that homelessness has been decreasing in the United States in recent years. The bad news is that Hawaii still has about five times more homeless people than Mississippi, Indiana, and Kansas. At least they get to sleep on a beach?

Idaho: Worst drivers

Fortunately, drivers in Idaho do not cause the most road accidents, since few people live in Idaho or really need to drive through the state on their way somewhere else. The next-worst places in this survey were the District of Columbia and New York, which makes sense, given their reputations. Apparently, Idaho’s drivers are just total jerks behind the wheel.

Illinois: Most rail accidents

That’s right, people in Illinois are harmed by things other than guns and deep-dish pizza. Having all those rail yards and being the heart of America ends up bringing a lot of derailments to your backyard, too. Illinois just barely edged out Texas in total train accidents.

image

Credit: Thrillist/Jennifer Bui

Indiana: Most meth incidents

Huge upset here — who didn’t think this title would go to Florida?

Iowa: Highest racial disparity in marijuana arrests

Black and white Iowans use marijuana at about the same rate, yet black Iowans are eight times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession. FYI: that’s a lot.

Kansas: Ugliest scenery

Have you ever wondered why The Wizard of Oz starts in black and white? Well, it turns out that Kansas actually looks like that. Or, at least, that’s what most of America thinks Kansas looks like.

Kentucky: Worst to be an animal

While the Kentucky Wildcats claim eight NCAA championships, being an actual wild cat there is no fun, seeing how Kentucky is on an unprecedented seven-year run as the worst state for animal protection.

Louisiana: Highest murder rate

Louisiana has both the highest murder rate and the highest rate of death by firearm, so think twice about where you’re stumbling around after a Mardi Gras night out. Otherwise, guys like Rust Cohle will be chain smoking in a storage unit a decade from now, wondering how you disappeared.

Maine: Fewest heliports

You might have to hop over to nearby New Hampshire in order to land that helicopter. Tough life, Mainers.

Maryland: Worst at incarcerating the elderly

In Maryland, old people can literally get away with murder. OK, so maybe not, but only 7.5% of all the state’s inmates are over the age of 50, which is about half the rate nationwide.

Massachusetts: Worst at happy hour

Massachusetts was the first state to ban happy hour in 1984. That means for 30 years, people have been complaining about their bosses after work over FULL-PRICED drinks.

Michigan: Worst roads

8 Mile helped put Detroit back on the Hollywood map. Too bad every other mile in the state is as terrible as the Tigers in this year’s playoffs, since Michigan spends the least per capita on its roads and bridges, at $174 per person annually.

Minnesota: Most tornadoes

In 2010, Minnesota had 145 tornadoes, statewide. That number nearly equals the number of “Land of 10,000 Lakes” and Fargo references the average Minnesotan encounters from out-of-towners every year.

Related: Stay in a Lighthouse or Helicopter: The Coolest Hotel in Every State

Mississippi: Shortest life expectancy

If you live in Mississippi, you’re only going to live for 75 years, on average. There are 11 states in the Union in which residents are expected to live to at least 80 years old, a full five years more than Mississippians get. And they’re five extra years NOT spent in Mississippi.

Missouri: Worst puppy mills

Cue the Sarah McLachlan music.

Montana: Most traffic fatalities per capita

Back in the late 90s, Montana actually abolished speed limits during the day, so you could drive as fast as you wanted to get out of Montana. It was like the Autobahn, except in Montana and not Germany, although drivers were singing songs like “Barbie Girl” in both places. Some things just shouldn’t be emulated. Thankfully, Montana re-instituted speed limits, and Americans stopped liking Aqua.

Nebraska: Least furniture manufacturing

If you’re looking for a coffee table slapped with a “Made in Nebraska” sticker on it, you’re gonna have a tough time finding it.

Nevada: Highest divorce rate

This is the least surprising statistic in the Union. Just think of all those Elvis-officiated ceremonies and booze-fueled nuptials between strangers, then thank God legal proceedings that happen in Vegas can also stay in Vegas.

image

Credit: Thrillist/Jennifer Bui

New Hampshire: Fewest inland waterways

Apparently, there’s not a whole lot to complain about in New Hampshire. But if you’re trying to navigate the state via boat, you’re pretty much out of luck.

New Jersey: Worst for speeding tickets

New Jersey has a speed trap every 30 miles, the most in the nation, and it collects $30,000 per mile in road user fees. But the real kicker: if you get caught doing even 10 mph over the limit, your fine can be doubled for “racing.” Turns out the real Jersey Turnpike is even more offensive than Deena’s dance on “Jersey Shore”.

New Mexico: Most accidental deaths

And the award for most fatally careless goes to…New Mexico!

New York: Worst to be a taxpayer

New Yorkers pay the highest average state and local taxes, at a wallet-busting $9,718 per year; that’s 39% higher than the national median. Even when adjusted for cost of living, New York still comes in dead last.

North Carolina: Worst state for education

North Carolina was determined to be the worst state for education based on a number of factors such as education spending, student-to-teacher ratio, and percentage of dumb kids.

North Dakota: Least visited

Geography isn’t really helping North Dakota out, since it’s isolated from a lot of the country. But it’s not like South Dakota is somehow geographically sexier. The big difference: North Dakota doesn’t have a huge tourist attraction like Mt. Rushmore. You know, unless you consider the National Buffalo Museum a must-see.

Ohio: Worst water

Ohio came in dead last in a study of water cleanliness by the Natural Resources Defense Council. “There’s something in the water” might actually explain why Ohio’s professional sports teams never win anything.

Oklahoma: Lowest produce consumption

While Oklahoma’s fast food titan, Sonic, offers 398,929 different drink combinations and sells roughly 3 billion Tater Tots a year, it doesn’t appear as if too many fruits and vegetables are making their way into those meals.

Oregon: Most prescription painkiller abuse

There are two rules to painkillers in Oregon: don’t touch their Percocets, and do you have any Percocets?

Related: Ranking All 50 U.S. State Flags From Worst to Best (Sorry, Maryland)

Pennsylvania: Worst bridges

Of the 22,660 bridges in PA, 23% are considered “structurally deficient”. Crossing a bridge in Pennsylvania sounds like a good way to end up in The Mothman Prophecies 2: PA Boogaloo.

Rhode Island: Highest teacher absenteeism

More than half of Rhode Island teachers had missed more than 10 days during the school year, and one in five had missed at least 20 days of school. If you did that as a student, you’d be held back. And to think, Rhode Island’s teachers still get paid more than teachers in South Dakota.

South Carolina: Most violent crime

Of all 50 states, South Carolina has the highest rate of violent crime at 766 per 100,000 residents. So much for that whole concept of Southern hospitality.

image

Credit: Thrillist/Jennifer Bui

South Dakota: Lowest-paid teachers

The good news is that teachers aren’t singled out in South Dakota, because everyone gets paid less statewide. South Dakota actually has the lowest salaries in the country. Bad news for employees, great news for employers.

Tennessee: Most dangerous

Not in the Michael Jackson Dangerous way. Just straight up “keep your head on a swivel” dangerous.

Texas: Fewest high school graduates per capita

Less than 80% of Texans have a high school diploma. It’s actually the only state that dips below 80%, too. Everything is bigger in Texas — including dropout rates, apparently.

Utah: Nerdiest state

A study calculated the nerdiest state based on public Facebook likes. So maybe it’s more correct to say that Utah is the most openly nerdy state. Either way, it’s hard to argue against a state that sells only three-two beer and has last call at 1 a.m. being nerdy.

Vermont: Most illicit drug use

Vermont’s love for drugs can perhaps be linked to the fact that it is also the state with the fewest children, and now most of its residents have reached an age where they realize the incurable pain life has to offer. Either that, or they’re just really into partying.

Virginia: Lowest oil production per capita

Alaska, of course, ranks highest in this category. Fortunately for Virginia, it still gets bragging rights for being so much better at not having chlamydia.

Washington: Worst at loving Justin Bieber

Washington residents are not Beliebers. The state had by far the lowest per-capita Facebook likes for the pop star at 6.82%.

West Virgnia: Fewest college graduates per capita

West Virginia is only “almost heaven” in John Denver lyrics — economically speaking, the state is kind of a black hole. In addition to the fewest college graduates, it also has thefewest full time workers, and the lowest level of optimism about the economy.

Wisconsin: Highest incarceration rate of African Americans

A shocking 12.8% of African American men are incarcerated in Wisconsin, nearly double the national average of 6.7%, and 3 percentage points worse than the next-worst state, Oklahoma. An African American man has a higher chance of being sent to jail in Wisconsin than from the B&O railroad in Monopoly.

Wyoming: Highest suicide rate

Wyoming has the highest rate of suicides at 23.2 per 100,000. The state with the highest will to live is New Jersey, which has a suicide rate nearly three times lower than Wyoming’s. Thankfully, Wyoming is also the least populous state.




More from Thrillist:

These Are The Most Miserable Places To Live In The World

17 Things You Need To Explain To International Visitors About America

What Every European Country Is Worst At

Homosexuality And Mental Health


Facts About Homosexuality and Mental Health

Historical background  
 
Modern attitudes toward homosexuality have religious, legal, and medical underpinnings. Before the High Middle Ages, homosexual acts appear to have been tolerated or ignored by the Christian church throughout Europe. Beginning in the latter twelfth century, however, hostility toward homosexuality began to take root, and eventually spread throughout European religious and secular institutions. Condemnation of homosexual acts (and other nonprocreative sexual behavior) as "unnatural," which received official expression in the writings of Thomas Aquinas and others, became widespread and has continued through the present day (Boswell, 1980). [Bibliographic references are on a different web page]

Religious teachings soon were incorporated into legal sanctions. Many of the early American colonies, for example, enacted stiff criminal penalties for sodomy, an umbrella term that encompassed a wide variety of sexual acts that were nonprocreative (including homosexual behavior), occurred outside of marriage (e.g., sex between a man and woman who were not married), or violated traditions (e.g., sex between husband and wife with the woman on top). The statutes often described such conduct only in Latin or with oblique phrases such as "wickedness not to be named"). In some places, such as the New Haven colony, male and female homosexual acts were punishable by death (e.g., Katz, 1976).

By the end of the 19th century, medicine and psychiatry were effectively competing with religion and the law for jurisdiction over sexuality. As a consequence, discourse about homosexuality expanded from the realms of sin and crime to include that of pathology. This historical shift was generally considered progressive because a sick person was less blameful than a sinner or criminal (e.g., Chauncey, 1982/1983; D'Emilio & Freedman, 1988; Duberman, Vicinus, & Chauncey, 1989).

Even within medicine and psychiatry, however, homosexuality was not universally viewed as a pathology. Richard von Krafft-Ebing described it as a degenerative sickness in his Psychopathia Sexualis, but Sigmund Freud and Havelock Ellis both adopted more accepting stances. Early in the twentieth century, Ellis (1901) argued that homosexuality was inborn and therefore not immoral, that it was not a disease, and that many homosexuals made outstanding contributions  to society (Robinson, 1976). 
 
Sigmund Freud 

Sigmund Freud's basic theory of human sexuality was different from that of Ellis. He believed all human beings were innately bisexual, and that they become heterosexual or homosexual as a result of their experiences with parents and others (Freud, 1905). Nevertheless, Freud agreed with Ellis that a homosexual orientation should not be viewed as a form of pathology. In a now-famous letter to an American mother in 1935, Freud wrote:

"Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation, it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function produced by a certain arrest of sexual development. Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc.). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime, and cruelty too....
"If [your son] is unhappy, neurotic, torn by conflicts, inhibited in his social life, analysis may bring him harmony, peace of mind, full efficiency whether he remains a homosexual or gets changed...." (reprinted in Jones, 1957, pp. 208-209, from the American Journal of Psychiatry, 1951, 107, 786).

 Later psychoanalysts Later psychoanalysts did not follow this view, however. Sandor Rado (1940, 1949) rejected Freud's assumption of inherent bisexuality, arguing instead that heterosexuality is natural and that homosexuality is a "reparative" attempt to achieve sexual pleasure when normal heterosexual outlet proves too threatening. Other analysts later argued that homosexuality resulted from pathological family relationships during the oedipal period (around 4-5 years of age) and claimed that they observed these patterns in their homosexual patients (Bieber et al., 1962). Charles Socarides (1968) speculated that the etiology of homosexuality was pre-oedipal and, therefore, even more pathological than had been supposed by earlier analysts (for a detailed history, see Lewes, 1988; for briefer summaries, see Bayer, 1987; Silverstein, 1991). 

 Biases in psychoanalysis Although psychoanalytic theories of homosexuality once had considerable influence in psychiatry and in the larger culture, they were not subjected to rigorous empirical testing. Instead, they were based on analysts' clinical observations of patients already known by them to be homosexual.

This procedure compromises the validity of the psychoanalytic conclusions in at least two important ways. First, the analyst's theoretical orientations, expectations, and personal attitudes are likely to bias her or his observations. To avoid such bias, scientists take great pains in their studies to ensure that the researchers who actually collect the data do not have expectations about how a particular research participant will respond. An example is the "double blind" procedure used in many experiments. Such procedures have not been used in clinical psychoanalytic studies of homosexuality.
A second problem with psychoanalytic studies is that they have only examined homosexuals who were already under psychiatric care – in other words, homosexuals who were seeking treatment or therapy. Patients, however, cannot be assumed to be representative of the general population. Just as it would be inappropriate to draw conclusions about all heterosexuals based only on data from heterosexual psychiatric patients, we cannot generalize from observations of homosexual patients to the entire population of gay men and lesbians. 
 
Alfred Kinsey A more tolerant stance toward homosexuality was adopted by researchers from other disciplines. Zoologist and taxonomist Alfred C. Kinsey, in his groundbreaking empirical studies of sexual behavior among American adults, revealed that a significant number of his research participants reported h aving engaged in homosexual behavior to the point of orgasm after age 16 (Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948; Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, & Gebhard, 1953). Furthermore, Kinsey and his colleagues reported that 10% of the males in their sample and 2-6% of the females (depending on marital status) had been more or less exclusively homosexual in their behavior for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55. 

 A brief introduction to sampling Despite frequent extrapolations by modern commentators from Kinsey's data to the U.S. adult population, the representativeness of his nonprobability sample cannot be assessed (for methodological and statistical critiques, see Terman, 1948; Cochran, Mosteller, & Tukey, 1954; Wallis, 1949). Nevertheless, his work revealed that many more American adults than previously suspected had engaged in homosexual behavior or had experienced same-sex fantasies. This finding cast doubt on the widespread assumption that homosexuality was practiced only by a small number of social misfits.1 

 Comparative studies Other social science researchers also argued against the prevailing negative view of homosexuality. In a review of published scientific studies and archival data, Ford and Beach (1951) found that homosexual behavior was widespread among various nonhuman species and in a large number of human societies. They reported that homosexual behavior of some sort was considered normal and socially acceptable for at least some individuals in 64% of the 76 societies in their sample; in the remaining societies, adult homosexual activity was reported to be totally absent, rare, or carried on only in secrecy.
As with Kinsey, whether this proportion applies to all human societies cannot be known because a nonprobability sample was used. However, the findings of Ford and Beach demonstrate that homosexual behavior occurs in many societies and is not always condemned (see also Herdt, 1984; Williams, 1986). 
 
Military research Although dispassionate scientific research on whether homosexuality should be viewed as an illness was largely absent from the fields of psychiatry, psychology, and medicine during the first half of the twentieth century, some researchers remained unconvinced that all homosexual individuals were mentally ill or socially misfit. Berube (1990) reported the results of previously unpublished studies conducted by military physicians and researchers during World War II. These studies challenged the equation of homosexuality with psychopathology, as well as the stereotype that homosexual recruits could not be good soldiers.

A common conclusion in their wartime studies was that, in the words of Maj. Carl H. Jonas, who studied fifty-three white and seven black men at Camp Haan, California, "overt homosexuality occurs in a heterogeneous group of individuals." Dr. Clements Fry, director of the Yale University student clinic, and Edna Rostow, a social worker, who together studied the service records of 183 servicemen, discovered that there was no evidence to support the common belief that "homosexuality is uniformly correlated with specific personality traits" and concluded that generalizations about the homosexual personality "are not yet reliable."

.... Sometimes to their amazement, [researchers] described what they called the "well-adjusted homosexuals" who, in [William] Menninger's words, "concealed their homosexuality effectively and, at the same time, made creditable records for themselves in the service." Some researchers spoke in glowing terms of these men. "The homosexuals observed in the service," noted Navy doctors Greenspan and Campbell, "have been key men in responsible positions whose loss [by discharge] was acutely felt in their respective departments." They were "conscientious, reliable, well-integrated and abounding in emotional feeling and sincerity." In general, "the homosexual leads a useful productive life, conforming with all dictates of the community, except its sexual requirements" and was "neither a burden nor a detriment to society." Fry and Rostow reported that, based on evidence in service records, homosexuals were no better or worse than other soldiers and that many "performed well in various military jobs" including combat (Berube, 1990, pp. 170-171, footnotes omitted).

Today, a large body of published empirical research clearly refutes the notion that homosexuality per se is indicative of or correlated with psychopathology. One of the first and most famous published studies in this area was conducted by psychologist Evelyn Hooker. 
 
Hooker's study

 Hooker's (1957) study was innovative in several important respects. First, rather than simply accepting the predominant view of homosexuality as pathology, she posed the question of whether homosexuals and heterosexuals differed in their psychological adjustment. Second, rather than studying psychiatric patients, she recruited a sample of homosexual men who were functioning normally in society. Third, she employed a procedure that asked experts to rate the adjustment of men without prior knowledge of their sexual orientation. This method addressed an important source of bias that had vitiated so many previous studies of homosexuality. 

  Hooker administered three projective tests (the Rorschach, Thematic Apperception Test [TAT], and Make-A-Picture-Story [MAPS] Test) to 30 homosexual males and 30 heterosexual males recruited through community organizations. The two groups were matched for age, IQ, and education. None of the men were in therapy at the time of the study.
Unaware of each subject's sexual orientation, two independent Rorschach experts evaluated the men's overall adjustment using a 5-point scale. They classified two-thirds of the heterosexuals and two-thirds of the homosexuals in the three highest categories of adjustment. When asked to identify which Rorschach protocols were obtained from homosexuals, the experts could not distinguish respondents' sexual orientation at a level better than chance.

A third expert used the TAT and MAPS protocols to evaluate the psychological adjustment of the men. As with the Rorschach responses, the adjustment ratings of the homosexuals and heterosexuals did not differ significantly.

Hooker concluded from her data that homosexuality is not a clinical entity and that homosexuality is not inherently associated with psychopathology.

Hooker's findings have since been replicated by many other investigators using a variety of research methods. Freedman (1971), for example, used Hooker's basic design to study lesbian and heterosexual women. Instead of projective tests, he administered objectively-scored personality tests to the women. His conclusions were similar to those of Hooker.

Although some investigations published since Hooker's study have claimed to support the view of homosexuality as pathological, they have been methodologically weak. Many used only clinical or incarcerated samples, for example, from which generalizations to the population at large are not possible. Others failed to safeguard the data collection procedures from possible biases by the investigators – for example, a man's psychological functioning would be evaluated by his own psychoanalyst, who was simultaneously treating him for his homosexuality.

Some studies found differences between homosexual and heterosexual respondents, and then assumed that those differences indicated pathology in the homosexuals. For example, heterosexual and homosexual respondents might report different kinds of childhood experiences or family relationships. It would then be assumed that the patterns reported by the homosexuals indicated pathology, even though there were no differences in psychological functioning between the two groups. 
 
The weight of evidence In a review of published studies comparing homosexual and heterosexual samples on psychological tests, Gonsiorek (1982) found that, although some differences have been observed in test results between homosexuals and heterosexuals, both groups consistently score within the normal range. Gonsiorek concluded that "Homosexuality in and of itself is unrelated to psychological disturbance or maladjustment. Homosexuals as a group are not more psychologically disturbed on account of their homosexuality" (Gonsiorek, 1982, p. 74; see also reviews by Gonsiorek, 1991; Hart, Roback, Tittler, Weitz, Walston & McKee, 1978; Riess, 1980).

Confronted with overwhelming empirical evidence and changing cultural views of homosexuality, psychiatrists and psychologists radically altered their views, beginning in the 1970s. 
 
Removal from the DSM In 1973, the weight of empirical data, coupled with changing social norms and the development of a politically active gay community in the United States, led the Board of Directors of the American Psychiatric Association to removehomosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Some psychiatrists who fiercely opposed their action subsequently circulated a petition calling for a vote on the issue by the Association's membership. That vote was held in 1974, and the Board's decision was ratified.

Subsequently, a new diagnosis, ego-dystonic homosexuality, was created for the DSM's third edition in 1980. Ego dystonic homosexuality was indicated by: (1) a persistent lack of heterosexual arousal, which the patient experienced as interfering with initiation or maintenance of wanted heterosexual relationships, and (2) persistent distress from a sustained pattern of unwanted homosexual arousal.

This new diagnostic category, however, was criticized by mental health professionals on numerous grounds. It was viewed by many as a political compromise to appease those psychiatrists – mainly psychoanalysts – who still considered homosexuality a pathology. Others questioned the appropriateness of having a separate diagnosis that described the content of an individual's dysphoria. They argued that the psychological problems related to ego-dystonic homosexuality could be treated as well by other general diagnostic categories, and that the existence of the diagnosis perpetuated antigay stigma.

Moreover, widespread prejudice against homosexuality in the United States meant that many people who are homosexual go through an initial phase in which their homosexuality could be considered ego dystonic. According to the American Psychiatric Association, "Fears and misunderstandings about homosexuality are widespread.... [and] present daunting challenges to the development and maintenance of a positive self-image in gay, lesbian and bisexual persons and often to their families as well."

In 1986, the diagnosis was removed entirely from the DSM. The only vestige of ego dystonic homosexuality in the revised DSM-III occurred under Sexual Disorders Not Otherwise Specified, which included persistent and marked distress about one's sexual orientation (American Psychiatric Association, 1987; see Bayer, 1987, for an account of the events leading up to the 1973 and 1986 decisions). 
 
Text of APA resolutions The American Psychological Association (APA) promptly endorsed the psychiatrists' actions, and has since worked intensively to eradicate the stigma historically associated with a homosexual orientation (APA, 1975; 1987). 

 Conclusion Some psychologists and psychiatrists still hold negative personal attitudes toward homosexuality. However, empirical evidence and professional norms do not support the idea that homosexuality is a form of mental illness or is inherently linked to psychopathology.
The foregoing should not be construed as an argument that sexual minority individuals are free from mental illness and psychological distress. Indeed, given the stresses created by sexual stigma and prejudice, it would be surprising if some of them did not manifest psychological problems (Meyer, 2003). The data from some studies suggest that, although most sexual minority individuals are well adjusted, nonheterosexuals may be at somewhat heightened risk for depression, anxiety, and related problems, compared to exclusive heterosexuals (Cochran & Mays, 2006).

Unfortunately, because of the way they were originally designed, most of these studies do not yield information about whether and to what extent such risks might be greater for various subgroups within the sexual minority population (e.g., individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexualversus those who do not; bisexuals versus lesbians and gay men). In future research, it will be important to compare different sexual minority groups in order to understand how so many individuals withstand the stresses imposed by sexual prejudice, and to identify effective strategies for treating those with psychological problems.
  
Note 
 
 1.Although Kinsey's studies are often cited as documenting that 10% of the U.S. population is gay, Kinsey did not categorize his research participants according to sexual orientation. Instead, he chose to emphasize sexual behavior and fantasy. In addition, because Kinsey did not collect his data from a probability sample, valid inferences cannot be made from them to the larger population.

For a discussion of how the Kinsey data came to be widely understood as supporting the ten percent figure, see Voeller (1990). Support for the ten percent figure was also provided by Paul Gebhard (director of the Kinsey Institute) in a 1977 memo to the National Gay Task Force.

All surveys are likely to underestimate the actual prevalence of homosexuality because, fearing discrimination and stigma, many gay respondents are reluctant to tell a stranger (even anonymously) that they are homosexual (e.g., Villarroel et al., 2006). Recognizing this limitation, most research with probability samples suggests that at least 3-6% of the US adult male population is homosexual, with somewhat fewer females (Fay, Turner, Klassen, & Gagnon, 1989; Hatfield, 1989; Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994; Lever & Kanouse, 1996; Rogers & Turner, 1991).

Ken Curtis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ken Curtis (July 2, 1916 – April 28, 1991) was an American singer and actor best known for his role as Festus Haggen on the long-runningCBS western television series Gunsmoke.

Biography[edit]

Early years[edit]

Though born Curtis Wain Gates in Lamar in Prowers County in southeastern Colorado, Curtis was reared west of there in Las Animas, the seat of Bent County. His father, Dan Gates, was the Bent Countysheriff.[1] The family lived above the jail and his mother, Nellie Sneed Gates, cooked for the prisoners. The jail is now located for historical preservation purposes on the grounds of the Bent County courthouse in Las Animas.

Curtis played quarterback for his high school football team. During World War II, Curtis served in the United States Army. (1943-1945) [2]

Curtis attended Colorado College to study Medicine.[3]

Career[edit]

Curtis was a singer before moving into acting[4] and combined both careers once he entered films, performing with the popular Sons of the Pioneers from 1949 to 1953 as well as singing with the Tommy Dorsey band. Curtis replaced Frank Sinatra as vocalist for the Dorsey band. He was with the Dorsey band in 1941, prior to Sinatra's departure, and may have served simply as insurance against Sinatra's likely defection. Dick Haymes contractually replaced Sinatra, in 1942. Curtis then joined Shep Fields and His New Music, an all-reeds band that dispensed with a brass section.

Columbia Pictures signed Curtis to a contract in 1945. He starred in a series of musical westerns[5] with The Hoosier Hot Shots, playing singing-cowboy romantic leads. For much of 1948, Curtis was a featured singer and host of the long-running country music radio program WWVA Jamboree.

Ken Curtis joined the Sons of the Pioneers (the foremost western vocal group in history) as a lead singer from 1949 to 1952. Ken's big hits with the group included "Room Full of Roses" and "(Ghost) Riders in the Sky".

Through his first marriage, Curtis was a son-in-law of director John Ford. Curtis teamed with Ford and John Wayne inRio Grande,[citation needed] The Quiet Man, The Wings of Eagles, The Searchers, The Horse Soldiers, The Alamo andHow The West Was Won. Curtis also joined Ford, along with Henry Fonda, James Cagney, William Powell, and Jack Lemmon in the comedy Navy classic Mister Roberts. He was featured in all three of the only films produced byCornelius Vanderbilt Whitney's C. V. Whitney Pictures: The Searchers (1956); The Missouri Traveler (1958) withBrandon deWilde and Lee Marvin; and The Young Land (1959) with Patrick Wayne and Dennis Hopper. 5 Steps to Danger (1957 film) (uncredited) as FBI Agent Jim Anderson. Curtis also produced two extremely low-budget monster films, The Killer Shrews and The Giant Gila Monster.

Curtis guest-starred five times on the TV Series Western Have Gun Will Travel. He also guest-starred as circus performer Tim Durant on an episode of Perry Mason, "The Case of the Clumsy Clown", which aired on November 5, 1960. He then co-starred with Larry Pennell in the 1961–1963 syndicated television series Ripcord, a half-hour drama about a skydiving service company. Curtis played the role of "Jim Buckley" and Pennell was "Ted McKeever." The series helped generate interest in the sport of parachuting.

Gunsmoke[edit]

Curtis remains best known for his role as Festus, the scruffy, cantankerous, illiterate office and jail custodian in Gunsmoke. While Marshal Matt Dillon had a total of five helpers over two decades, Festus held the role the longest (11 years), in 239 episodes, and was the most colorful. Festus was patterned after "Cedar Jack", a man from Curtis' Las Animas childhood. Cedar Jack, who lived about forty miles out of town, made a living cutting cedar fence posts. Curtis observed the many times Jack would come to Las Animas, where he would usually end up drunk and in jail. Festus' character was known, in part, for his nasally, twangy, rural accent which Curtis developed for the role, but which did not reflect Curtis' actual voice.

Besides engaging in the usual personal appearances most television stars undertake to promote their program, Curtis also traveled around the country performing a western-themed stage show at fairs, rodeos and other venues when Gunsmoke wasn't in production, and even for some years after the show was canceled.

In two episodes of Gunsmoke, Carroll O'Connor was a guest-star; years later Curtis guest-starred as a retired police detective on O'Connor's NBC program In the Heat of the Night. He voiced Nutsy the vulture in Disney's 1973 animated film Robin Hood. In 1983 he returned to television in the short-lived western series The Yellow Rose.

Last years[edit]

In 1981, Curtis was inducted into the Western Performers Hall of Fame at the National Cowboy & Western Heritage Museum in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

Curtis' last acting role was as the aging cattle rancher "Seaborn Tay" in the television production Conagher (1991), by western author Louis L'Amour. Sam Elliott starred in the lead role, and Curtis' Gunsmoke costar Buck Taylor (Newly O'Brien) played a bad man in the same film. Buck Taylor's father, Dub Taylor, had a minor role in the film. Taylor joined the Gunsmoke cast in 1967, superseding the previous deputy, Thaddeus "Thad" Greenwood, played by Roger Ewing.

A statue of Ken Curtis as Festus can be found at 430 Pollasky Avenue in Clovis, California in Fresno County in front of the Educational Employees Credit Union. In his later years, Curtis resided in Clovis.[6]

Death[edit]

Curtis died in his sleep of natural causes in Fresno, California.[7] He was cremated, and his ashes were scattered in the Colorado flatlands.

Filmography[edit]

Rio Grande - Donnelly - Regimental Singer (uncredited) (1950)
The Quiet Man - Dermot Fahy (uncredited) (1952)
The Searchers - Charlie McCorry (1956)
The Wings of Eagles - John Dale Price (1957)
Escort West - Trooper Burch (1958)
The Horse Soldiers - Cpl. Wilkie (1959)
The Killer Shrews - Jerry Farrell (1959)
The Alamo - Capt. Almeron Dickinson (1960)
Two Rode West - Greeley Clegg (1961)
How the West Was Won - Cpl. Ben (uncredited) (1962)
Cheyenne Autumn - Joe (1964)
Robin Hood - Nutsy - A Vulture (voice) (1973)
Conagher - TV movie - Seaborn Tay, Cattle Rancher (1991)
Television[edit]
The Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp - Episode - Warpath - Major Hendericks (uncredited) (1957)
Gunsmoke - 304 episodes - Festus (1959-1975)
Have Gun Will Travel - episode - Love's Young Dream - Monk (1960)
Wagon Train - episode - The Horace Best Story - Pappy Lightfoot (1960)
Wagon Train - episode - The Colter Craven Story - Kyle Cleatus(1960)
Perry Mason - episode - The Case of the Clumsy Clown - Tim Durant (1960
Sea Hunt -episode - The Octopus Story - Dean (1961)
Death Valley Days - Graydon's Charge - Graydon (1964)
The Life and Times of Grizzly Adams - Episode - Once Upon a Starry Night (1978)
Vega$ - Episode - Death Mountain - Digger Dennison (1979)
How the West Was Won - TV Mini-Series - Episode - Hillary - Sheriff Orville Gant (1979)
The Yellow Rose - 22 episodes - Hoyt Coryell (1983-1984)
Airwolf - Episode - Wildfire - Cecil Carnes Sr. (1986)
In the Heat of the Night - Episode - December Days - Tom McCauley (1990)

References[edit]

1. Jump up^ [1] "Ken Curtis's father was sheriff of Bent County, Colorado," GunsmokeNet.com.
2. Jump up^ [2] "Ken Curtis played quarterback for his high school football team," GunsmokeNet.com.
3. Jump up^ http://www.nytimes.com/movies/person/16294/Ken-Curtis.
4. Jump up^ [3] "Ken Curtis had a great singing voice," GunsmokeNet.com.
5. Jump up^ [4] "Ken Curtis appeared in a number of cheesy movies," GunsmokeNet.com.
6. Jump up^ [5] "Ken Curtis statue," GunsmokeNet.com
7. Jump up^ [6] Ken Curtis Obituary, LA Times, GunsmokeNet.com

Broken Windows Policing


http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/nyc-congressman-says-outdated-broken-windows-policing-factor-eric-garner-death/

PBS Newshour
The Rundown

NYC Congressman says outdated ‘broken windows’ policing a factor in Eric Garner death


U.S. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries says New York City’s “broken windows” policy contributed to Eric Garner’s death.

Many have credited the targeting of minor offenses, like turnstile jumping and “squeegee men” in the 1990s, for New York City’s turnaround two decades ago from a city riddled with crime to one where it’s safe to walk the streets.
But in light of the death of Eric Garner, an unarmed black man who died after being put in a chokehold by a police officer, some officials are rethinking that approach, known as the “broken windows” policy.
“That philosophy may have made sense 20 years ago when crime was extremely high, but the windows in New York City are largely together, and have been repaired,” Congressman Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) told PBS NewsHour a day after a grand jury in Staten Island chose not to indict officer Daniel Pantaleo.
“And so there’s no reason to engage in the same aggressive approach that had taken place in the past.”
Pantaleo and other officers attempted to arrest Garner for allegedly selling illegal cigarettes on the street. Jeffries contends 
that their aggressive handling of the minor offense led to Garner’s death.
Researchers at the National Bureau of Economic Research found “that the ‘broken windows’ approach does not deter as much crime as some advocates argue, but it does have an effect, particularly on robbery and motor vehicle theft.”
The policy was instituted under Republican Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who has defended the grand jury’s decision and attacked current Democratic Mayor Bill de Blasio, who was an aide under Mayor David Dinkins, who preceded Giuliani.
“One of the things the mayor and [civil rights activist Al] Sharpton and the others are doing, they are tearing down respect for a criminal justice system that goes back to England in the 11th century,” Giuliani said in an appearance on Fox News Thursday.
He added that de Blasio, with speeches like the one he delivered Wednesday in which he empathized with G
arner and his family and drew a connection to his own son Dante who is biracial, “helps to create this atmosphere of protest and sometimes even violence. First of all, there was no racism in this case. If this man were a white man resisting arrest at the same size, the same thing would happen. If I recall correctly there was an African American sergeant on the scene observing, in charge of the entire situation, never did anything to stop it.”
“We’ve got to get at the broader problems,” the congressman said, “the broader disease, the broader cancer that is leading to these types of encounters.”



Broken windows theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The broken windows theory is a criminological theory of the norm-setting and signaling effect of urban disorder and vandalism on additional crime and anti-social behavior. The theory states that maintaining and monitoring urban environments to prevent small crimes such as vandalism, public drinking and toll-jumping helps to create an atmosphere of order and lawfulness, thereby preventing more serious crimes from happening.
The theory was introduced in a 1982 article by social scientistsJames Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling.[1] Since then it has been subject to great debate both within the social sciences and the public sphere. The theory has been used as a motivation for several reforms in criminal policy, including the controversial mass use of "stop, question, and frisk" by the New York City Police Department.
Drawbacks in practice[edit]
A low-level intervention of police in neighborhoods has been considered problematic. Accordingly, Gary Stewart writes that "The central drawback of the approaches advanced by Wilson, Kelling, and Kennedy rests in their shared blindness to the potentially harmful impact of broad police discretion on minority communities."[37][page needed] This was seen by the authors, who worried that people would be arrested "for the 'crime' of being undesirable". According to Stewart, arguments for low-level police intervention, including the broken windows hypothesis, often act "as cover for racist behavior".[37][page needed]
The application of the broken windows theory in aggressive policing policies, such as William J. Bratton's zero-tolerance policy, has been shown to criminalize the poor and homeless. This is because the physical signs that characterize a neighborhood with the “disorder” that broken windows policing targets correlate with the socio-economic conditions of its inhabitants. Many of the acts that are considered legal, but “disorderly” are often targeted in public settings and are not targeted when conducted in private. Therefore, those without access to a private space are often criminalized. Critics such as Robert J. Sampson and Stephen Raudenbush of Harvard University see the application of the broken windows theory in policing as a war against the poor as opposed to a war against more serious crimes.[38][page needed]
In Dorothy Roberts' article, "Foreword: Race, Vagueness, and the Social Meaning of Order Maintenance and Policing," she focuses on problems of the application of the broken windows theory that lead to the criminalization of communities of color, who are typically disfranchised.[39] She underscores the dangers of vaguely written ordinances that allows for law enforcers to determine who engages in disorderly acts, which in turn produce a racially skewed outcome in crime statistics.[40]
According to Bruce D. Johnson, Andrew Golub, and James McCabe, the application of the broken windows theory in policing and policy-making can result in development projects that decrease physical disorder but promote undesiredgentrification. Often, when a city is “improved” in this way, the development of an area can cause the cost of living to rise higher than residents can afford, thus forcing low income people, often minorities, out of the area. As the space changes, middle- and upper class, often white, people begin to move into the area, resulting in the gentrification of urban, low income areas. The local residents are affected negatively by this application of the broken windows theory, ending up evicted from their homes as if their presence indirectly contributed to the area’s problem of “physical disorder”.[39]
In popular press[edit]
In the best-seller More Guns, Less Crime (University of Chicago Press, 2000), economist John Lott, Jr. examined the use of the broken windows approach as well as community- and problem-oriented policing programs in cities over 10,000 in population over two decades. He found that the impacts of these policing policies were not very consistent across different types of crime. Lott's book has been subject to criticism, though other groups support Lott's conclusions.
In the best-seller Freakonomics, economist Steven D. Levitt and co-author Stephen J. Dubner both confirm and cast doubt on the notion that the broken windows theory was responsible for New York's drop in crime, arguing "the reality that the pool of potential criminals had dramatically shrunk", an alternative that Levitt had attributed in the Quarterly Journal of Economics to the legalization of abortion with Roe v. Wade, a decrease in the number of delinquents in the population-at-large one generation later.[41]





http://cebcp.org/

What is Broken Windows Policing?

The broken windows model of policing was first described in 1982 in a seminal article by Wilson and Kelling. Briefly, the model focuses on the importance of disorder (e.g. broken windows) in generating and sustaining more serious crime. Disorder is not directly linked to serious crime; instead, disorder leads to increased fear and withdrawal from residents, which then allows more serious crime to move in because of decreased levels of informal social control. The police can play a key role in disrupting this process. If they focus in on disorder and less serious crime in neighborhoods that have not yet been overtaken by serious crime, they can help reduce fear and resident withdrawal. Promoting higher levels of informal social control will help residents themselves take control of their neighborhood and prevent serious crime from infiltrating.
What is the Evidence on Broken Windows Policing?
 
The broken windows model as applied to policing has been difficult to evaluate for a number of reasons. First, agencies have applied broken windows policing in a variety of ways, some more closely following the Wilson and Kelling (1982) model than others. Perhaps the most prominent adoption of a broken windows approach to crime and disorder has occurred in New York City. In other agencies though, broken windows policing has been synonymous with zero tolerance policing, in which disorder is aggressively policed and all violators are ticketed or arrested. The broken windows approach is far more nuanced than zero tolerance allows, at least according to Kelling and Coles (1996) and so it would seem unfair to evaluate its effectiveness based on the effectiveness of aggressive arrest-based approaches that eliminate officer discretion. Thus, one problem may be that police departments are not really using broken windows policing when they claim to be.
 
A second concern is how to properly measure broken windows treatment. The most frequent indicator of broken windows policing has been misdemeanor arrests, in part because these data are readily available. Arrests alone, however, do not fully capture an approach that Kelling and Coles (1996) describe as explicitly involving community outreach and officer discretion. Officers must decide whether an arrest is appropriate and many police stops and encounters with citizens in broken windows policing do not end in arrest. As opposed to a zero-tolerance policy focused only on arresting all minor offenders, Kelling and Coles (1996) describe a more community-oriented approach to partnering with residents and community groups to tackle disorder collectively in a way that still respects the civil liberties of offenders. Whether the NYPD was able to adopt this model successfully remains up for debate but it does suggest that the intervention is complex and difficult to evaluate.
 
Third, the broken windows model suggests a long term indirect link between disorder enforcement and a reduction in serious crime and so existing evaluations may not be appropriately evaluating broken windows interventions. If there is a link between disorder enforcement and reduction in serious crime generated by increased informal social control from residents, we would expect it would take some time for these levels of social control in the community to increase. Policing studies usually use short-follow up periods and so may not capture these changing neighborhood dynamics.
 
There is also no consensus on the existence of a link between disorder and crime, and how to properly measure such a link if it does indeed exist. For example, Skogan’s (1990) research in six cities did suggest a relationship between disorder and later serious crime, but Harcourt (2001) suggested in a re-analysis of Skogan’s (1990) data that there was no significant relationship between disorder and serious crime. Hence, there is no clear answer as to the link between crime and disorder and whether existing research supports or refutes broken windows theory.
 

What is the Evidence on Broken Windows Policing?
 
The broken windows model as applied to policing has been difficult to evaluate for a number of reasons. First, agencies have applied broken windows policing in a variety of ways, some more closely following the Wilson and Kelling (1982) model than others. Perhaps the most prominent adoption of a broken windows approach to crime and disorder has occurred in New York City. In other agencies though, broken windows policing has been synonymous with zero tolerance policing, in which disorder is aggressively policed and all violators are ticketed or arrested. The broken windows approach is far more nuanced than zero tolerance allows, at least according to Kelling and Coles (1996) and so it would seem unfair to evaluate its effectiveness based on the effectiveness of aggressive arrest-based approaches that eliminate officer discretion. Thus, one problem may be that police departments are not really using broken windows policing when they claim to be.
 
A second concern is how to properly measure broken windows treatment. The most frequent indicator of broken windows policing has been misdemeanor arrests, in part because these data are readily available. Arrests alone, however, do not fully capture an approach that Kelling and Coles (1996) describe as explicitly involving community outreach and officer discretion. Officers must decide whether an arrest is appropriate and many police stops and encounters with citizens in broken windows policing do not end in arrest. As opposed to a zero-tolerance policy focused only on arresting all minor offenders, Kelling and Coles (1996) describe a more community-oriented approach to partnering with residents and community groups to tackle disorder collectively in a way that still respects the civil liberties of offenders. Whether the NYPD was able to adopt this model successfully remains up for debate but it does suggest that the intervention is complex and difficult to evaluate.
 
Third, the broken windows model suggests a long term indirect link between disorder enforcement and a reduction in serious crime and so existing evaluations may not be appropriately evaluating broken windows interventions. If there is a link between disorder enforcement and reduction in serious crime generated by increased informal social control from residents, we would expect it would take some time for these levels of social control in the community to increase. Policing studies usually use short-follow up periods and so may not capture these changing neighborhood dynamics.
 
There is also no consensus on the existence of a link between disorder and crime, and how to properly measure such a link if it does indeed exist. For example, Skogan’s (1990) research in six cities did suggest a relationship between disorder and later serious crime, but Harcourt (2001) suggested in a re-analysis of Skogan’s (1990) data that there was no significant relationship between disorder and serious crime. Hence, there is no clear answer as to the link between crime and disorder and whether existing research supports or refutes broken windows theory.
 
There is much debate over the impact of New York policing tactics on reductions on crime and disorder in the 1990s. Broken windows policing alone did not bring down the crime rates (Eck & Maguire, 2000), but it is also likely that the police played some role. Estimates of the size of this role have ranged from large (Bratton & Knobler, 1998, Kelling & Sousa, 2001) to significant but smaller (Messner et al., 2007; Rosenfeld et al., 2007) to non-existent (Harcourt & Ludwig, 2006).
 
Tackling disorder has frequently been a tactic chosen by police in crime hot spots. For example, in the Braga et al. (1999) problem-oriented policing hot spots study in Jersey City, NJ, officers used aggressive order maintenance as a strategy to reduce violent crime and results suggested significant positive results. Thus, we suspect that the tactics common in broken windows policing will be most successful when combined with knowledge about the small geographic areas where crime is highly concentrated.

Center For Evidence-Based Crime Policy

The Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy (CEBCP), housed within the Department of Criminology, Law and Society at George Mason University, seeks to make scientific research a key component in decisions about crime and justice policies. The CEBCP carries out this mission by advancing rigorous studies in criminal justice and criminology through research-practice collaborations, and proactively serving as an informational and translational link to practitioners and the policy community. CEBCP was founded in 2008 and is the home of Translational Criminology.
Commitment to Research Excellence:
The CEBCP is committed to Mason’s vision - to be a place of consequential research. We engage in primary research on criminological and criminal justice issues, evaluations of justice interventions, and studies of knowledge translation. Of special interest to the center are:
using experimental and other rigorous methods to evaluate justice programs;
a place-based focus on explaining crime and developing criminal justice interventions;
developing translation tools to improve communication between research and practice;
building collaboration with practitioners; and
actively seeking avenues to disseminate information to the public.



Translational Criminology Magazine
CEBCP publishes our magazine, TRANSLATIONAL CRIMINOLOGY twice each year. Our magazine seeks to advance the overall goal of the CEBCP by illustrating examples of how research is converted into criminal justice practice.
Below are all past issues of the magazine as well as the Center’s newsletters from its early years. Features in each magazine are usually by invitation, although we always welcome suggestions and ideas from practitioner-researcher teams who would like to showcase their efforts. To open Translational Criminology in magazine view, set the viewing preferences of your Adobe Reader to “two-page scrolling”.



Division Of Experimental Criminology
The Division of Experimental Criminology (DEC) is one of 8 divisions in the American Society of Criminology. The DEC seeks to promote and improve the use and development of experimental evidence and methods in the advancement of criminological theory and evidence-based crime policy.
The DEC recognizes outstanding achievements iin experimental criminology through the Jerry Lee Lifetime Achievement Award, the Award for Outstanding Experimental Field Trial, and the Student Paper Award.
 
The Academy of Experimental Criminology
The Academy of Experimental Criminology (AEC) was founded in 1998 in order to recognize criminologists who have successfully led randomized, controlled, field experiments in criminology.
The AEC recognizes outstanding achievements in experimental criminology through election of Fellows and Honorary Fellows as well as the Joan McCord 
Award and the Young Experimental Scholar Award.
DEC-AEC Memorandum of Understanding
 
Recent publications by DEC members related to experiments:
Maimon, D., M. Alper, M. Cukeir, and B. Sobesto. (2014). Restrictive deterrent effects of a warning banner in an attacked computer system. Criminology, 52, 33-59.
Mazerolle, L., S. Bennett, J. Davis, E. Sargeant, and M. Manning. (2013). Procedural justice and police legitimacy: a systematic review of the research evidence. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 9(3), 245-274. 
Prendergast, M.L., F.S. Pearson, D. Podus, Z.K. Hamilton, and L. Greenwell. (2013). The Andrews’ principles of risk, needs, and responsivity as applied in drug treatment programs: meta-analysis of crime and drug use outcomes. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 9(3),275-300.




http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2014/12/broken_windows_policing_doesn_t_work_it_also_may_have_killed_eric_garner.html

Broken Windows Policing Doesn’t Work
It also may have killed Eric Garner.
By Justin Peters
DEC. 3 2014 

Photograph – In the ’90s, NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton presided over a surge in petty-crime law enforcement on the theory that vigorously enforcing the small laws in some way dissuades or prevents people from breaking the big ones. There’s little evidence that theory is correct.

On July 17, 2014, an unarmed 43-year-old black man named Eric Garner was standing near the Staten Island Ferry dock when he was approached by several police officers. The cops suspected that Garner was selling untaxed cigarettes. A struggle ensued, and an officer named Daniel Pantaleo put Garner in a chokehold. Garner died, and the New York City medical examiner eventually ruled it a homicide. But on Wednesday afternoon, a Staten Island grand jury declined to indict Pantaleo.
Why was Garner approached at all? Because of the emphasis on “broken windows policing” under NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton. As Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s police commissioner in the 1990s, Bratton presided over a surge in petty-crime law enforcement, on the theory that vigorously enforcing the small laws in some way dissuades or prevents people from breaking the big ones. There’s little evidence that theory is correct. Nevertheless, mayor-elect Bill de Blasio brought Bratton back as New York’s police commissioner last December. Bratton’s return meant the return of broken windows policing. “If you take care of the little things, then you can prevent a lot of the big things,” Bratton said in March, spouting the broken windows gospel. It’s that philosophy as much as anything else is to blame for Eric Garner’s death.
Bratton was a popular figure during the Giuliani era because crime rates fell on his watch. While observers were quick to credit his policies for that decline, there’s no reason to think the drop in violent crime had anything to do with broken windows or Bratton’s vaunted Compstat, a computer program that tracks crime statistics citywide.
 
The drop in New York’s violent crime rate, then and now, is consistent with a broader nationwide trend. Rates of violent crime have steadily declined nationwide over the past two decades, and nobody is really sure why. The best argument I’ve seen suggests that violent crime began to fall around the same time that the crack boom started to wane in the early 1990s. The rates have been dropping across the country since then.
We do know that the declines in violent crime in New York have been comparable to declines in cities that didn’t use Compstat or broken windows. As criminologist Richard Rosenfeld put it in a 2002 paper, “homicide rates also have decreased sharply in cities that did not noticeably alter their policing policies, such as Los Angeles, or that instituted very different changes from those in New York, such as San Diego.” The takeaway: Crime just keeps going down everywhere. Nobody is sure why.
In New York, broken windows has replaced stop-and-frisk as the controversial police tactic du jour. During his 2012 campaign, de Blasio pledged to rein in theineffective and racist stop-and-frisk policies of Michael Bloomberg, and he has followed through on that promise. Meanwhile, de Blasio’s Republican mayoral opponent, Joseph Lhota, made the supposed glories of stop-and-frisk the centerpiece of his own doomed campaign. Lhota blasted de Blasio’s “recklessly dangerous agenda on crime,” and predicted that abandoning stop-and-frisk would turn New York City into something like the hellscape depicted ininThe Warriors, with gangs and street punks running roughshod over police officers.
This hasn’t happened. In a recent press conference, de Blasio and Bratton announced that violent crime rates are poised for historic lows in 2014. The New York Times reports that robberies and grand larcenies have both declinedsince 2013. The city’s homicide count sits at 290 as of Dec. 1, which puts New York on pace to beat last year’s record low homicide count of 335. And all this in a year when the New York Police Department is poised to log fewer than 50,000 stop-and-frisk incidents—a figure nearly 10 times lower than it was at New York’s stopping-and-frisking peak. Take that, Joe Lhota!
But this shouldn’t be surprising. Under the Bloomberg administration, hundreds of thousands of people were detained by police each year via the department’s stop-and-frisk program. Close to 90 percent of those people were released without charges after the stopping officers found nothing illegal. Whatever effect stop-and-frisk may have had as a deterrent was likely offset by the fact that it taught innocent people to fear and avoid the police. Stopping people who are doing nothing wrong on the grounds that they look vaguely suspicious only serves to alienate cops from the communities they’re supposed to serve.
With the decline of stop-and-frisk and the return of broken windows, the NYPD has traded one dubious tactic for another. When Bratton was appointed in December 2013, de Blasio positioned him as the opposite of his predecessor as police commissioner, Ray Kelly, saying in a press conference that “public safety and respect for the public aren’t contradictory ideas.” Bratton, for his part, promised policies of “mutual respect and mutual trust,” and vowed that “I will get it right in this city once more”—implying, of course, that he had gotten it right the first time. Three months later, the New York Times reported that arrests of subway panhandlers had tripled since Bratton took over, and that there had been “a noticeable spike in arrests for low-level violations in public housing developments.”
This renewed emphasis on misdemeanor “quality of life” arrests has sparked renewed criticisms from community members who are tired of being hassled. These criticisms spiked after Garner’s death in July. Six members of New York’s congressional delegation sent Attorney General Eric Holder a letter noting that “Mr. Garner’s death has taken place in the context of a broken windows policing strategy that appears to target communities of color for the enforcement of minor violations and low-level offenses.”
Two weeks after Garner’s death, de Blasio held a press conference to address these criticisms and defend broken windows. “Breaking a law is breaking a law, and it has to be addressed,” said de Blasio.
That’s nonsense. The cornerstone of effective policing is discretion. If the cops enforced every single law on the books in every single precinct at all hours of the day, New York City would become a police state. Is that what de Blasio and Bratton want?
For mayors and police commissioners, being “tough on crime” means actively implementing some specific policy. But given that violent crime seems to be declining on its own regardless of what they do, there’s a case to be made that de Blasio and Bratton are only making things worse. Here’s a suggestion for a new policing policy for New York City: First, do no harm.
Justin Peters is a writer for Slate. He is working on a book about Aaron Swartz, copyright, and the rise of “free culture.” Email him at justintrevett@fastmail.fm.




http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2014/12/edward_banfield_the_racist_classist_origins_of_broken_windows_policing.html

Loose Cigarettes Today, Civil Unrest Tomorrow
The racist, classist origins of broken windows policing.
By Justin Peters
December 5, 2014


Photograph – Two boys look out of a subway car after performing a rap for passengers on Aug. 13, 2014 in New York City. As part of his controversial “broken windows” policing policy, NYPD Commissioner William Bratton has officers crack down on subway performers.

Broken windows policing is back in New York City, and it may have killed Eric Garner. “Broken windows” is an order-maintenance strategy that encourages cops to enforce quality-of-life laws on the grounds that, essentially, nits breed lice. It presumes that a disorderly environment where small laws are broken with impunity leads to bigger problems. This is the mindset that led the police to approach Garner for allegedly selling untaxed cigarettes: loose cigarettes today, civil unrest tomorrow.
Though NYPD Commissioner William Bratton is a big proponent of broken windows policing, there’s no evidence that the policy is effective in reducing violent crime. At the same time, the effects of order-maintenance policing are felt disproportionately by members of minority groups. In August, responding to critics’ claims that these policies unfairly target people of color, Bratton told the Associated Press that “it's not an intentional focus on minorities. It's a focus on behavior.” Bratton added, “We are not a racist organization—not at all.”
Maybe Bratton is right. But even if broken windows isn't explicitly racist, it's inherently classist, and the two are close enough as to be functionally indistinguishable.
 
The broken windows theory was first articulated in a 1982 Atlantic articleby George L. Kelling and James Q. Wilson, who argued that “disorder and crime are usually inextricably linked, in a kind of developmental sequence.” That idea is rooted in the work of a midcentury political scientist named Edward Banfield. (Wilson studied under Banfield at the University of Chicago.) Banfield specialized in refuting the main tenet of modern liberalism, the idea that the state should take an active role in improving the lives of its most vulnerable residents. Banfield contended that state intervention could only make things worse. 
In his 1970 book The Unheavenly City and a revised edition titled The UnheavenlyCity Revisited, Banfield addressed the era’s so-called urban crisis: high crime rates, riots, white flight. Liberalism was to blame, Banfield argued—or, at the very least, liberal policies would never help fix the crisis. The Great Society initiatives of the Johnson era had just served to widen class divisions and to encourage members of the lower classes to blame others for their plight, thus fostering feelings of resentment and entitlement.
The idea that lower-class men are inherently dangerous and untrustworthy is at the root of broken windows policing.
Banfield argued that class divisions were based less on finances than on one’s life outlook and capacity for long-range thought. Members of the upper class were future-oriented, and, thus, able to postpone short-term pleasures for longer-term rewards. Members of the lower classes—urban blacks, in large part—lived from moment to moment, and acted out of a desire for instant gratification. They were also unambitious, “radically improvident,” antisocial, and prone to mental illness. Their problems were a matter of pathology, not racial prejudice (which Banfield argued was on the wane).
“The implication that lower-class culture is pathological seems fully warranted,” said Banfield. Thus, he argued, rather than waste time and public money implementing policies based on the false notion that all men were created equal, better to just face facts and acknowledge the natural divisions that exist. Members of the lower classes should leave school in ninth grade, to get a jump on a lifetime of manual labor. The minimum wage should be repealed to encourage employers to create more jobs for “low-value labor.” The state should give “intensive birth-control guidance to the incompetent poor.” And the police should feel free to crack down on young lower-class men.
Like many people, Banfield believed the urban unrest of the late 1960s had been stoked by matters of civil rights. But Banfield believed the problem was that the lower classes had too many of them. Criminal behavior was human nature—or, rather, in the nature of a specific subset of lower-class humans. “So long as there are large concentrations of boys and young men of the lower classes on the streets, rampages and forays are to be expected,” Banfield wrote. The clear solution was to remove these lower-class youths from the streets posthaste.
“There are individuals whose propensity to crime is so high that no set of incentives that it is feasible to offer to the whole population would influence their behavior,” Banfield wrote. The most effective way to prevent violent crime in cities, Banfield theorized, would therefore be to pre-emptively abridge the freedom of the “mostly young, lower-class males” who were likely to commit crimes in the future. What’s that? You say that “abridging the freedom of persons who have not committed crimes is incompatible with the principles of free society”? Well, said Banfield, “so, also, is the presence in free society of persons who, if their freedom is not abridged, would use it to inflict serious injuries on others.”
This is basically the plot of Minority Report and countless other dystopian fictions: empowering law enforcement to arrest or otherwise disappear individuals whose continued freedom threatens the stability of the state. These policies might play well in science fiction or Soviet Russia. But this is America, and, in America, pre-emptive incarceration is a political nonstarter. The principle behind this idea, however, is at the root of broken windows policing: the idea that lower-class men are inherently dangerous and untrustworthy and are likely to commit crimes in the future even if they’re not doing so today. To put it another way, there are times where “the essential welfare of individuals must be sacrificed for the good health of society,” as Banfield wrote.
In their 1982 Atlantic article, titled “Broken Windows,” Kelling and Wilson argued that community safety can be negatively affected by a surfeit of “disreputable or obstreperous or unpredictable people: panhandlers, drunks, addicts, rowdy teenagers, prostitutes, loiterers, the mentally disturbed.” A preponderance of lower-class layabouts makes a neighborhood feel unsafe to its law-abiding residents; these residents hunker down or disassociate or move away, and soon the neighborhood actually becomes unsafe. Better, then, to stop this process before it starts, and to target minor deviant behaviors before they become something worse.
This theory encourages the police to conflate supposed cultural deviance with criminal deviance, to assume that a “disreputable or obstreperous” demeanor indicates some more destructive pathology. Kelling and Wilson cited the example of one effective Newark, New Jersey, police officer who had the habit of “taking informal or extralegal steps to help protect what the neighborhood had decided was the appropriate level of public order.” In other words, he targeted those who deviate from behavioral norms—norms that are defined by the dominant social class, of course. And while Banfield insisted that he was not making a racial argument—that there were lower-class whites as well as lower-class blacks—the fact is that class status correlates to socio-economic status, and urban poverty is minority poverty. No need for code words here: In modern America, “lower class” basically means “black.” “Disreputable or obstreperous or unpredictable”—that also means “black.”
In their Atlantic article, Kelling and Wilson recognized the racial implications of order policing. “How do we ensure, in short, that the police do not become the agents of neighborhood bigotry?” they asked, before essentially shrugging and moving on. “We can offer no wholly satisfactory answer to this important question.” Oh, well—hopefully everything will work itself out.
More than 30 years later, the answer seems clear to me: Broken windows willalways become an agent of neighborhood bigotry, because broken windows encourages cops to define lower-class men as basically another species and to make ad hoc cultural judgments the linchpin of crime prevention strategies. This is how looking different transforms into looking dangerous. This is how Eric Garner dies, mumbling “I can’t breathe,” held in a chokehold by a white police officer who works for a department led by a man who believes that if “you take care of the little things, then you can prevent a lot of the big things.” This is how you get thousands of marchers in the streets of New York City. Loose cigarettes today. Civil unrest tomorrow.