TL;DR: The Iosepa Association Executive Board meeting of the Idaho State Historical Association as discussed by the authors was a heated discussion about a conflict they are having with the landowner, Chris Robinson of the Ensign Group.
Abstract: It is Tuesday night and I have just arrived at the Iosepa Association Executive Board meeting. When I arrive, the board members are already in a heated discussion about a conflict they are having with the landowner, Chris Robinson of the Ensign Group. The conflict is over the board’s desire to expand the footprint of the Iosepa Historical Site and the landowner’s determination to block all further expansion. At one point in the discussion, one of the board members pulls out a topographical map of Iosepa and the surrounding area while another clears off the table. They lay the map out on the table as we all gather around. Uncle Richard, a former Iosepa Association president traces the boundaries of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) parcels, then the boundaries of the Ensign Group properties, and then the area marked as part of the state historical site. They begin to strategize about how they could expand if either the BLM or the Ensign Group could be persuaded to “return” some of the land. Throughout the discussion the members repeat an impassioned declaration that this is “our” land and that both the Ensign Group and the BLM should return the land to “us.”
TL;DR: It is usually assumed that the flag debate of 1964 was about replacing an outmoded British vision of Canada with the distinctive Canadianism of the Maple Leaf as mentioned in this paper, but the debate was not between "British" and "Canadian", but between rival interpretations of Canadianism.
Abstract: It is usually assumed that the flag debate of 1964 was about replacing an outmoded British vision of Canada with the distinctive Canadianism of the Maple Leaf. In fact, the debate was not between "British" and "Canadian," but between rival interpretations of Canadianism. Britishness and Canadianness were interpenetrated in both flags. Even if the overt Britishness of the Red Ensign was downgraded, the new flag was a less dramatic break with the past than is commonly thought. If it was not explicitly British in appearance, the new flag remained the product of a British world. In its design and implementation by a small Anglo-Celtic cadre in the government—with the country deeply divided and non-British groups largely sidelined—the Maple Leaf is, in some ways, the legacy of a very British coup. On pense generalement que le debat sur le drapeau de 1964 portait sur le remplacement d'une vision britannique demodee du Canada par l'element canadien distinct que represente la feuille d'erable. En fait, ce debat ne reposait pas sur une rivalite britannique/ canadienne mais plutot sur des interpretations rivales du canadianisme. L'element britannique et l'element canadien furent superposes dans les deux drapeaux. Meme si l'element britannique manifeste du pavillon rouge fut minimise, le nouveau drapeau n'etait pas aussi different de l'ancien drapeau que l'on a tendance a le croire. S'il n'avait pas une apparence explicitement britannique, le nouveau drapeau demeurait le produit d'un monde britannique. Dans sa conception et sa mise en œuvre par un petit groupe anglo-celte du gouvernement—avec un pays tres divise et les groupes non britanniques generalement mis de cote—la feuille d'erable est, de plusieurs facons, le patrimoine d'un coup d'etat tres britannique.
TL;DR: An apterous ensign wasp, Papatuka alamunyiga Deans gen. nov, from Kenya is described and illustrated and its potential relationship to other evaniid genera is discussed.
Abstract: An apterous ensign wasp, Papatuka alamunyiga Deans gen. nov., sp. nov., from Kenya is described and illustrated. A diagnosis differentiating P. alamunyiga from other apterous ensign wasps is provided as well as a discussion of its potential relationship to other evaniid genera.