A Second Cold War? Explaining Changes in the American Discourse on China: Evidence from the Presidential Debates (1960-2020).

IF 4.6 1区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES
Ion Marandici
{"title":"A Second Cold War? Explaining Changes in the American Discourse on China: Evidence from the Presidential Debates (1960-2020).","authors":"Ion Marandici","doi":"10.1007/s11366-023-09857-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When and how do the American political elites react discursively to China as a rising power? Do they depict it as an economic or military risk? What role do discursive references to China play in the US populist discourses? Relying on the thematic and critical discourse analysis of all the American presidential debates, this article explores the way US politicians portray China throughout three eras marked by distinct global power configurations. Several types of discourses have been identified. In contrast to the belligerent rhetoric of the early Cold War, when China was framed as a major military threat, after 2004, presidential candidates started referring to Beijing as an economic rival. By 2008, the emerging bipartisan consensus centered on China as mainly a trade competitor. By contrast, populist narratives in 2016 and 2020 stood out because they included emotional appeals and inflated the risks of the Sino-American rivalry to mobilize voters. In doing so, the populists sought to forge coalitions in favor of protectionist policies among those voters, who were employed in manufacturing sectors facing growing international competition. The anti-China mentions reached a peak during the 2020 debates amidst the pandemic when the populist candidate used biased language, relying on tropes resembling the 19th century racist \"yellow peril\" rhetoric.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11366-023-09857-z.</p>","PeriodicalId":46205,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10173219/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chinese Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-023-09857-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When and how do the American political elites react discursively to China as a rising power? Do they depict it as an economic or military risk? What role do discursive references to China play in the US populist discourses? Relying on the thematic and critical discourse analysis of all the American presidential debates, this article explores the way US politicians portray China throughout three eras marked by distinct global power configurations. Several types of discourses have been identified. In contrast to the belligerent rhetoric of the early Cold War, when China was framed as a major military threat, after 2004, presidential candidates started referring to Beijing as an economic rival. By 2008, the emerging bipartisan consensus centered on China as mainly a trade competitor. By contrast, populist narratives in 2016 and 2020 stood out because they included emotional appeals and inflated the risks of the Sino-American rivalry to mobilize voters. In doing so, the populists sought to forge coalitions in favor of protectionist policies among those voters, who were employed in manufacturing sectors facing growing international competition. The anti-China mentions reached a peak during the 2020 debates amidst the pandemic when the populist candidate used biased language, relying on tropes resembling the 19th century racist "yellow peril" rhetoric.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11366-023-09857-z.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

第二次冷战?解释美国对华话语的变化:来自总统辩论的证据(1960-2020)。
美国政治精英对中国作为一个正在崛起的大国的随意反应是什么时候以及如何的?他们将其描述为经济风险还是军事风险?在美国民粹主义话语中,对中国的随意提及扮演了什么角色?本文通过对所有美国总统辩论的主题和批判性话语分析,探讨了美国政治家在三个以不同全球权力格局为标志的时代对中国的描绘。已经确定了几种类型的话语。与冷战初期的好战言论形成鲜明对比的是,2004年后,总统候选人开始将北京称为经济对手,当时中国被视为主要军事威胁。到2008年,两党达成的共识主要集中在中国作为贸易竞争对手。相比之下,2016年和2020年的民粹主义叙事之所以引人注目,是因为它们包含了情感诉求,并夸大了中美竞争的风险,以动员选民。在这样做的过程中,民粹主义者试图在这些选民中建立有利于保护主义政策的联盟,这些选民受雇于面临日益激烈的国际竞争的制造业。在2020年疫情期间的辩论中,反华言论达到了顶峰,当时这位民粹主义候选人使用了带有偏见的语言,使用了类似19世纪种族主义“黄祸”言论的比喻。补充信息:在线版本包含补充材料,请访问10.1007/s11366-023-09857-z。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
27.30%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Journal of Chinese Political Science (JCPS) is a refereed academic journal that publishes theoretical, policy, and empirical research articles on Chinese politics across the whole spectrum of political science, with emphasis on Chinese domestic politics and foreign policy in comparative perspectives. However, JCPS also welcomes manuscripts on different aspects of contemporary China when these relate closely to Chinese politics, political economy, political culture, reform and opening, development, the military, law and legal system, foreign relations, and other important issues of political significance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信