In the weeks leading up to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and ever since tanks rolled over the border, an increase in anti-war, more specifically anti-Russian, and anti-Putin graffiti and street art has been produced.
This type of urban public art, collectively referred to as “Conflict Graffiti” was in many respects predictable, however the unique messages and images and where they have been placed were not.
When events, similar to the Russian incursion into Ukraine occur, we almost always see provocative graffiti, street art and similar kinds of public art.
Noteworthy is a substantial amount of graffiti and street art in Russia (on walls and in subway stations), in particular St. Petersburg and Moscow, where protests against the war has been heavy, is illegal, and has led to the arrest of countless numbers of people. Thus, in the Russian context engaging in graffiti and street art is not simply a passing critique of government policies and leaders, but it is a form of nonviolent resistance and a weapon of the weak.
What kinds of graffiti and street art have been produced ? Some of the slogans and phrases that have been painted on surfaces, both in English and Russian, all in capital letters, are as simple as “NO WAR” or “NO TO WAR.” Others include, “PRAY FOR UKRAINE,” along with images of people next to or colored in the pattern of the Ukrainian flag. Otherwise most wall writing seems to be directed towards Russia (e.g., “STOP RUSSIAN FASCISM”), or Vladimir Putin, the Russian leader in the form of “PUTIN WAR CRIMINAL,” “NO PUTIN NO CRY,” and “ADOLF PUTIN” comparing him to the universally despised former leader of Nazi Germany.
There are more colorful and detailed pieces of graffiti and street art with images vilifying Putin, by depicting him as Hitler or Voldemort from the Harry Potter stories. Also prominent on the streets in different locations are also more detailed mural like images of Ukrainians (e.g., Skakun, Polina, etc.) who have died at the hands of Russian soldiers. Many of the images use the Ukrainian flag as part of its color palate. The street art that has been produced includes stickers and flyers/wheat pastes that have appeared bearing many of these same phrases and images.
Meanwhile, it’s not just subterranean groups who are engaging in graffiti/street art, or borrowing its ethos. For example, in Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania, Remigijus Simasius, the mayor, enlisted the aid of a local graffiti writer to spray paint “Putin, the Hague is waiting for you,” on a bridge near the Russia embassy. We also saw a group of 70 artists in Germany who painted, “LET US BUILD BRIDGES,” on the surface of a bridge that is slated for demolition. These pieces are interesting and engaging, but unlike traditional graffiti and street art, they are not transgressive in nature.
As the invasion progresses there will be new subthemes that emerge that will provide the basis for new phrases and images that will appear both in the Ukraine and throughout the world.
However it’s equally important to remember that although graffiti and street art may be interesting, provocative, and educational, it’s going to take more than this type of political activity to bring an end to the brutality that is reigning upon Ukraine and its citizens.
Photo credit:
designwallah
“Путін іди на хуй” – “Putin idy na khuy”
“Putin, go fuck yourself”
Street art by @nick_sweetman @mr_tensoe2 @twice.born @workingspy3000
https://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/51926941391_e0944a48af_o-scaled.jpg5412560Jeffrey Ian Rosshttps://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/jeffrey-ian-ross-logo-04.pngJeffrey Ian Ross2022-03-10 19:25:562022-03-10 19:25:56Painting without permission: Graffiti & Street Art as a response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine
Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine is one of the most dominant international events of the past two weeks.
In addition to the death, destruction, and havoc that it’s causing, the conflict is predictably generating significant news and social media interest.
The news media has interviewed current and former politicians, retired four star generals, academics who are Russia and Ukraine specialists, former ambassadors to these countries, and current or previous National Security practitioners and experts.
But then there’s the social media circus.
Many people appear to have gone wild weighing in on all matters of import concerning the invasion, and have freely offered their opinion about who is really to blame, which side is currently winning, what the end game might look like, etc.,
Clearly the Russian invasion of Ukraine is not the first time that uninformed people freely offer their opinion. But the invention of different types of social media platforms and their increased use has transformed what used to be the annoying drunk at the end of the bar, or your crazy uncle spouting his conspiracy theory to an army of people operating in hyperdrive status.
But why do people freely offer their opinion on subjects they know nothing about?
It’s hard to know for sure but I suspect that it has some do with some combination of
• An innate need to engage
• Loneliness
• Ease of access/minimal barriers to access social media
• The desire to build or maintain an audience
• Positive reinforcement of one shape or another
• Part of the propaganda/disinformation war
What’s wrong with this kind of behavior?
Although reading or watching this kind of rhetoric can initially be amusing, it can slowly change to being annoying.
For the poorly informed, or misinformed, this kind of opining may unnecessarily muddy the water and confuse those who are easily confused.
Even worse this kind of pontificating can contribute to the ongoing propaganda war, and encourage lots of undue fear, panic, or overreaction.
The fact that just because you have access to a microphone or megaphone does not mean that your opinion is just as valid (as in plausible) as someone else’s. That’s why we have experts.
On the other hand, when confronted with situations in which you have minimal expertise it’s important to understand this, to admit it, and if you believe that the situation calls for it, then you should educate yourself using respected sources.
Yes everyone has the right to free speech. They also have the right to be ignored.
Photo Credit: Ilmicrofono Oggiono
megaphone screaming
portrait of young man screaming with megaphone against a tropical background
https://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/31049242487_9140ca0db0_o.jpg607789Jeffrey Ian Rosshttps://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/jeffrey-ian-ross-logo-04.pngJeffrey Ian Ross2022-03-03 14:51:002022-12-15 12:21:41Just because you have access to a megaphone, doesn’t mean you need to use it
Earning a bachelor’s degree from an accredited university in the United States is, in many respects, no small feat.
This is especially true if you are the first person in your family to go to college, are a single mother, a foster child, are of limited financial means, and were formerly incarcerated or have a criminal conviction.
Even more challenging is when people with criminal records want to enter a graduate program to pursue a masters or a Ph.D. in criminology or criminal justice. Most people in this position are poorly equipped to make this kind of leap. Among numerous concerns is that many of these individuals have unrealistic expectations and are often poorly prepared for what awaits them.
Fortunately, members of the Convict Criminology network, including those who are part of the American Society of Criminology’s Division of Convict Criminology (DCC), are frequently approached both by instructors who reach out to us on behalf of their formerly incarcerated students, or students themselves requesting our assistance regarding getting into an appropriate graduate school and identifying whom among our colleagues might be good mentors. Our response is that we are here to help.
Convict Criminology was established in the mid 1990s, by scholars (mainly those who had earned a Ph.D. or were on their way to completing one), who were previously incarcerated, justice impacted/involved, and those who shared our central goals. CC’s primary mission is to elevate the convict voice that was frequently ignored or marginalized in scholarly research and policy circles. We also wanted to assist convicts and exconvicts in a mentoring capacity, and to weigh in on public policy decisions concerning the field of corrections by engaging in activism or policy work.
In many respects, providing advice to formerly incarcerated students about how to prepare for a graduate program, which ones to choose from, and which professor/s to work with (and whom they might want to avoid), is no different than what we would advise our typical students at the places we teach.
But the path for formerly incarcerated students wishing to pursue a masters or a doctorate in criminology/criminal justice is a little more complicated. Formerly incarcerated students have more challenges including selecting graduate programs that are truly ex-convict friendly, and finding appropriate mentors in that program.
We point out that just because some universities or university systems no longer require prospective students to check a box indicating that they were either convicted of a crime or formerly incarcerated (part of the ban the box movement), doesn’t mean it’s a good place to start and complete a post-baccalaureate degree.
Similarly, even though an academic department mentions on their web site that they are inclusionary, promote social justice, and have professors who specialize in areas of study that align with the student’s major interests, does not necessarily mean that they are good places for a formerly-incarcerated person to get an appropriate graduate education.
Moreover, although a graduate program may be easy to get into, be relatively frictionless to receive instruction, of access, and “affordable, as with some for-profit universities, these options are frequently inappropriate educational institutions as places to study and earn ones masters or doctoral degree.
There are countless other issues to keep in mind. For example, some formerly incarcerated individuals decide to apply to graduate school some years after they earned their bachelor’s degree. Thus, they may not know any of the professors in the program from which they graduated. Alternatively, their degree may not be in the fields of criminology or criminal justice, and could very well have been a professional degree (e.g., law). Thus the academic field of criminology and criminal justice seems attractive, but untested for them. One of the questions formerly incarcerated people inevitably ask is how open they should be about their criminal past; should they disclose it, if so, when should they disclose, to whom should they disclose, and how should they disclose? Sometimes this decision is made for them in the application process where they are asked if they have any prior criminal convictions.
Because of our collective experience and our network, we generally know which universities, programs, and scholars are best suited for prospective formerly incarcerated graduate students. Not only do we suggest the person, but we often reach out to them, and sometimes make introductions.
One of the first questions we ask formerly incarcerated students interested in pursuing graduate school is why they want to make this kind of investment of resources? Many students, regardless of their background, have unrealistic ideas about the costs and benefits of a graduate school education. We also ask why they don’t want to do it at the place where they already earned their undergraduate degree. For some they want or need to spread their wings, including the possibility that the program from which they graduated/are graduating from may no longer serve them well, while others have alienated people at their home institution.
The CC network and the DCC believes in the power of mentorship. Thus, we help to put directly-impacted students in touch with supportive people in our network. We freely give our opinion(s) on respective programs, whom to work with, whom to avoid, and how to improve their chances of getting selected into a program, including whom to ask for letters of recommendation and what those letters should emphasize.
Graduate school, just like a bachelors can be a great experience for formerly incarcerated students. It may also be a pathway to open up more doors in terms of jobs and a career. This will insure that the person can put bread on the table, refrain from criminal activity, and create opportunities to engage in prosocial change.
Photo Credit: Alan Levine
Education is All
University of Manitoba
https://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/5069892924_a1646270ea_o.jpg11762304Jeffrey Ian Rosshttps://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/jeffrey-ian-ross-logo-04.pngJeffrey Ian Ross2022-02-25 04:00:322024-03-27 17:36:48Helping formerly incarcerated people get into respectable graduate programs in Criminology/Criminal Justice
Painting without permission: Graffiti & Street Art as a response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine
/by Jeffrey Ian RossIn the weeks leading up to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and ever since tanks rolled over the border, an increase in anti-war, more specifically anti-Russian, and anti-Putin graffiti and street art has been produced.
This type of urban public art, collectively referred to as “Conflict Graffiti” was in many respects predictable, however the unique messages and images and where they have been placed were not.
When events, similar to the Russian incursion into Ukraine occur, we almost always see provocative graffiti, street art and similar kinds of public art.
We experienced this when COVID-19 first appeared, Briana Taylor was shot by Lexington, Kentucky Police officers, George Floyd was killed by a Minneapolis police officer, and supporters of the Black Lives matter movement took to the streets during the spring of 2020.
No public surface seems untouched by anti-war, Russia, and Putin graffiti and street art, and the photographs of this work have been posted on almost all social media channels. Likewise some of this work has then been amplified by mainstream media news coverage.
Not only has anti-war, anti-Russian and anti-Putin graffiti and street art been seen in Ukraine, but we have witnessed this work in neighboring formerly eastern bloc countries (those geographically close to Russia – Romania, Poland, etc.), across the European Union, and as far away as Israel, the United States, Canada, and New Zealand.
Noteworthy is a substantial amount of graffiti and street art in Russia (on walls and in subway stations), in particular St. Petersburg and Moscow, where protests against the war has been heavy, is illegal, and has led to the arrest of countless numbers of people. Thus, in the Russian context engaging in graffiti and street art is not simply a passing critique of government policies and leaders, but it is a form of nonviolent resistance and a weapon of the weak.
What kinds of graffiti and street art have been produced ? Some of the slogans and phrases that have been painted on surfaces, both in English and Russian, all in capital letters, are as simple as “NO WAR” or “NO TO WAR.” Others include, “PRAY FOR UKRAINE,” along with images of people next to or colored in the pattern of the Ukrainian flag. Otherwise most wall writing seems to be directed towards Russia (e.g., “STOP RUSSIAN FASCISM”), or Vladimir Putin, the Russian leader in the form of “PUTIN WAR CRIMINAL,” “NO PUTIN NO CRY,” and “ADOLF PUTIN” comparing him to the universally despised former leader of Nazi Germany.
There are more colorful and detailed pieces of graffiti and street art with images vilifying Putin, by depicting him as Hitler or Voldemort from the Harry Potter stories. Also prominent on the streets in different locations are also more detailed mural like images of Ukrainians (e.g., Skakun, Polina, etc.) who have died at the hands of Russian soldiers. Many of the images use the Ukrainian flag as part of its color palate. The street art that has been produced includes stickers and flyers/wheat pastes that have appeared bearing many of these same phrases and images.
Meanwhile, it’s not just subterranean groups who are engaging in graffiti/street art, or borrowing its ethos. For example, in Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania, Remigijus Simasius, the mayor, enlisted the aid of a local graffiti writer to spray paint “Putin, the Hague is waiting for you,” on a bridge near the Russia embassy. We also saw a group of 70 artists in Germany who painted, “LET US BUILD BRIDGES,” on the surface of a bridge that is slated for demolition. These pieces are interesting and engaging, but unlike traditional graffiti and street art, they are not transgressive in nature.
As the invasion progresses there will be new subthemes that emerge that will provide the basis for new phrases and images that will appear both in the Ukraine and throughout the world.
However it’s equally important to remember that although graffiti and street art may be interesting, provocative, and educational, it’s going to take more than this type of political activity to bring an end to the brutality that is reigning upon Ukraine and its citizens.
Photo credit:
designwallah
“Путін іди на хуй” – “Putin idy na khuy”
“Putin, go fuck yourself”
Street art by @nick_sweetman @mr_tensoe2 @twice.born @workingspy3000
Just because you have access to a megaphone, doesn’t mean you need to use it
/by Jeffrey Ian RossRussia’s invasion of the Ukraine is one of the most dominant international events of the past two weeks.
In addition to the death, destruction, and havoc that it’s causing, the conflict is predictably generating significant news and social media interest.
The news media has interviewed current and former politicians, retired four star generals, academics who are Russia and Ukraine specialists, former ambassadors to these countries, and current or previous National Security practitioners and experts.
But then there’s the social media circus.
Many people appear to have gone wild weighing in on all matters of import concerning the invasion, and have freely offered their opinion about who is really to blame, which side is currently winning, what the end game might look like, etc.,
This opining, pontificating, and bloviating has taken place even when people are misinformed, the evidence upon which their opinions are based is circumspect, and the logic that they use to make their arguments are flawed. All information does not fit nicely into a little box. And points are often cherry picked without examining counterarguments.
Clearly the Russian invasion of Ukraine is not the first time that uninformed people freely offer their opinion. But the invention of different types of social media platforms and their increased use has transformed what used to be the annoying drunk at the end of the bar, or your crazy uncle spouting his conspiracy theory to an army of people operating in hyperdrive status.
But why do people freely offer their opinion on subjects they know nothing about?
It’s hard to know for sure but I suspect that it has some do with some combination of
• An innate need to engage
• Loneliness
• Ease of access/minimal barriers to access social media
• The desire to build or maintain an audience
• Positive reinforcement of one shape or another
• Part of the propaganda/disinformation war
What’s wrong with this kind of behavior?
Although reading or watching this kind of rhetoric can initially be amusing, it can slowly change to being annoying.
For the poorly informed, or misinformed, this kind of opining may unnecessarily muddy the water and confuse those who are easily confused.
Even worse this kind of pontificating can contribute to the ongoing propaganda war, and encourage lots of undue fear, panic, or overreaction.
The fact that just because you have access to a microphone or megaphone does not mean that your opinion is just as valid (as in plausible) as someone else’s. That’s why we have experts.
On the other hand, when confronted with situations in which you have minimal expertise it’s important to understand this, to admit it, and if you believe that the situation calls for it, then you should educate yourself using respected sources.
Yes everyone has the right to free speech. They also have the right to be ignored.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/insight-is-2020/201712/why-people-give-unsolicited-advice-though-no-one-listens
Photo Credit: Ilmicrofono Oggiono
megaphone screaming
portrait of young man screaming with megaphone against a tropical background
Helping formerly incarcerated people get into respectable graduate programs in Criminology/Criminal Justice
/by Jeffrey Ian RossEarning a bachelor’s degree from an accredited university in the United States is, in many respects, no small feat.
This is especially true if you are the first person in your family to go to college, are a single mother, a foster child, are of limited financial means, and were formerly incarcerated or have a criminal conviction.
Even more challenging is when people with criminal records want to enter a graduate program to pursue a masters or a Ph.D. in criminology or criminal justice. Most people in this position are poorly equipped to make this kind of leap. Among numerous concerns is that many of these individuals have unrealistic expectations and are often poorly prepared for what awaits them.
Fortunately, members of the Convict Criminology network, including those who are part of the American Society of Criminology’s Division of Convict Criminology (DCC), are frequently approached both by instructors who reach out to us on behalf of their formerly incarcerated students, or students themselves requesting our assistance regarding getting into an appropriate graduate school and identifying whom among our colleagues might be good mentors. Our response is that we are here to help.
Convict Criminology was established in the mid 1990s, by scholars (mainly those who had earned a Ph.D. or were on their way to completing one), who were previously incarcerated, justice impacted/involved, and those who shared our central goals. CC’s primary mission is to elevate the convict voice that was frequently ignored or marginalized in scholarly research and policy circles. We also wanted to assist convicts and exconvicts in a mentoring capacity, and to weigh in on public policy decisions concerning the field of corrections by engaging in activism or policy work.
In many respects, providing advice to formerly incarcerated students about how to prepare for a graduate program, which ones to choose from, and which professor/s to work with (and whom they might want to avoid), is no different than what we would advise our typical students at the places we teach.
But the path for formerly incarcerated students wishing to pursue a masters or a doctorate in criminology/criminal justice is a little more complicated. Formerly incarcerated students have more challenges including selecting graduate programs that are truly ex-convict friendly, and finding appropriate mentors in that program.
We point out that just because some universities or university systems no longer require prospective students to check a box indicating that they were either convicted of a crime or formerly incarcerated (part of the ban the box movement), doesn’t mean it’s a good place to start and complete a post-baccalaureate degree.
Similarly, even though an academic department mentions on their web site that they are inclusionary, promote social justice, and have professors who specialize in areas of study that align with the student’s major interests, does not necessarily mean that they are good places for a formerly-incarcerated person to get an appropriate graduate education.
Moreover, although a graduate program may be easy to get into, be relatively frictionless to receive instruction, of access, and “affordable, as with some for-profit universities, these options are frequently inappropriate educational institutions as places to study and earn ones masters or doctoral degree.
There are countless other issues to keep in mind. For example, some formerly incarcerated individuals decide to apply to graduate school some years after they earned their bachelor’s degree. Thus, they may not know any of the professors in the program from which they graduated. Alternatively, their degree may not be in the fields of criminology or criminal justice, and could very well have been a professional degree (e.g., law). Thus the academic field of criminology and criminal justice seems attractive, but untested for them. One of the questions formerly incarcerated people inevitably ask is how open they should be about their criminal past; should they disclose it, if so, when should they disclose, to whom should they disclose, and how should they disclose? Sometimes this decision is made for them in the application process where they are asked if they have any prior criminal convictions.
Because of our collective experience and our network, we generally know which universities, programs, and scholars are best suited for prospective formerly incarcerated graduate students. Not only do we suggest the person, but we often reach out to them, and sometimes make introductions.
One of the first questions we ask formerly incarcerated students interested in pursuing graduate school is why they want to make this kind of investment of resources? Many students, regardless of their background, have unrealistic ideas about the costs and benefits of a graduate school education. We also ask why they don’t want to do it at the place where they already earned their undergraduate degree. For some they want or need to spread their wings, including the possibility that the program from which they graduated/are graduating from may no longer serve them well, while others have alienated people at their home institution.
The CC network and the DCC believes in the power of mentorship. Thus, we help to put directly-impacted students in touch with supportive people in our network. We freely give our opinion(s) on respective programs, whom to work with, whom to avoid, and how to improve their chances of getting selected into a program, including whom to ask for letters of recommendation and what those letters should emphasize.
Graduate school, just like a bachelors can be a great experience for formerly incarcerated students. It may also be a pathway to open up more doors in terms of jobs and a career. This will insure that the person can put bread on the table, refrain from criminal activity, and create opportunities to engage in prosocial change.
Photo Credit: Alan Levine
Education is All
University of Manitoba