Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory最新文献

{"title":"Democratic Alarmism: Coherent Notion or Contradiction in Terms?","authors":"James S. Pearson","doi":"10.1111/1467-8675.12808","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.12808","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Political agents are alarmist when they exaggerate or confabulate serious threats to the commonweal. Leaders typically engage in alarmism—which I will be treating as synonymous with “fearmongering” and “scaremongering”—to elicit fear in the public and thereby modulate its behavior and beliefs. For instance, a government might inflate the risks associated with climate change to sway public opinion and secure a mandate for ecological policy reforms. A raft of theorists from across the political spectrum take alarmism to be a <i>necessary</i> feature of any functioning democracy, that is, necessary for the preservation and well-being of the polity. This is somewhat surprising given that alarmism appears to be starkly undemocratic, specifically insofar as it contravenes the principle of collective self-determination. Alarmism prima facie violates this principle because it involves deception and emotional manipulation. People cannot be said to be choosing for themselves when they deliberate under the influence of panic and misinformation. Mearsheimer (<span>2011</span>, 55) has gone so far as to describe the practice as “antidemocratic at its core.” But if alarmism is politically necessary, then this would create a deep tension between the basic value commitments that condition democracy and the real political practice of regimes that self-identify as democratic. Yet, almost none of the democratic theorists who posit alarmism as a necessity acknowledge this tension, let alone explore how it might be resolved.1 The following study therefore examines the conflict between alarmism and democracy, and then sketches how in some cases we might be able to pacify this antagonism. I reject Mearsheimer's claim that alarmism is intrinsically undemocratic, arguing instead that under certain conditions, the practice can be rendered broadly consistent with a democratic commitment to collective self-determination.</p><p>I begin by drawing some relevant distinctions between different types of alarmism (Section 2). This clarifies the specific form of alarmism that I will be arguing has democratic potential. In Section 3, I then outline why many commentators consider alarmism to be a political necessity. In Section 4, I assess the arguments in favor of Mearsheimer's view that political alarmism is <i>inherently</i> undemocratic. These boil down to the objection that deception and emotional manipulation—both of which are integral to alarmism—apparently contravene the democratic principle of collective self-determination. In the final section (Section 5), however, I argue that if the right forms of community consent are obtained, alarmism does not necessarily violate the principle of collective self-determination. This section also considers the institutional pathways by which this consent might be secured. Since the required institutions, though not currently in place, seem to be perfectly feasible, I conclude that democratic alarmism is a coherent notion.</p><p>The <","PeriodicalId":51578,"journal":{"name":"Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory","volume":"33 2","pages":"163-173"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8675.12808","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148202916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reconsidering Instrumentality, From Mechanical Causality to Overdetermination and Political Articulation","authors":"Abdellatif Atif","doi":"10.1111/1467-8675.70017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.70017","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper challenges the dominant epistimologies in understanding instrumentality through an inspiration from the theoretical works of the Essex School, initiated by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe. A central tenet of this approach is that the relationship of epistemology to ontology is not neutral or divorced. Epistemologically, empirical claims about instrumentality can be assessed as true or false. However, as Glynos and Howarth (<span>2007</span>: 7) would argue, such claims inevitably disclose an underlying ontological dimension that their proponents may not recognize. As Heidegger similarly demonstrated, technology—closely linked to instrumentality—is never pragmatically neutral but consistently exhibits a particular mode of understanding the world: “The essence of technology is by no means anything technological” (<span>1977</span>: 4).</p><p>Departing from this principle, this contribution investigates mechanical causality as the dominant epistemology in understanding instrumentality. Originating in natural sciences, it reduces social and political phenomena to technical cause–and-effect relations, stripping them, among many aspects, of their complexities. This epistemology is so pervasive that even critical efforts to debunk how technology or instrumentalities reduce the world to a resource to be exploited often remain confined within the very logic they seek to resist—framing their critique through the same cause–and-effect models they aim to deconstruct. A more transformative approach would require moving beyond these epistemological assumptions altogether, rather than remaining trapped within their conceptual boundaries and limits.</p><p>This contribution argues that mechanical causality tends to obscure the multiplicity of ways in which instrumentality constitutes both its subject and object—if such a distinction can even be maintained. Hence, it is questionable whether a strict cause–and-effect reading is essential to all instrumentalities, particularly when analyzing social and political phenomena. Therefore, we need to offer an alternative to both the positivist ontologies that ground mechanical causality and the anti-positivist frameworks that reject all causality whatsoever. The key to this goal is emphasizing the contingency of political meanings and the role of antagonism in constituiting social practices. The works of Laclau and Mouffe inspire this alternative, and populism, one of their central research themes, can be a field to develop and test an alternative explanation of instrumentality.</p><p>Populism is often reduced explicitly or implicitly by political and social sciences to a sort of instrumental reason discourse. Similarly, although Laclau and Mouffe firmly reject hard positivism, even the one of critical theory that they share several features with, it would be interesting to check if their reading of populism itself echoes an instrumental reasoning. The paper raises a critical question, which I also ask els","PeriodicalId":51578,"journal":{"name":"Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory","volume":"33 2","pages":"194-201"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8675.70017","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148203091","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Towards Climate Gnosticism: Environmental Pessimism, the Modern Demiurge, and Defending Doomism","authors":"Joe P. L. Davidson","doi":"10.1111/1467-8675.70039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.70039","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51578,"journal":{"name":"Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory","volume":"33 2","pages":"263-273"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148202924","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"On the Feminine Character: Adorno's Critique of Gender and Capitalism","authors":"Surti Singh","doi":"10.1111/1467-8675.70038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.70038","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51578,"journal":{"name":"Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory","volume":"33 2","pages":"213-221"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148203077","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Capital's Grave: Neofeudalism and the New Class Struggle","authors":"Viktoria Huegel","doi":"10.1111/1467-8675.70040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.70040","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51578,"journal":{"name":"Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory","volume":"33 2","pages":"297-299"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148203083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Regressing to Nature: Culture Industry and Fascism in Times of Ecological Crisis","authors":"Heiko Stubenrauch","doi":"10.1111/1467-8675.70035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.70035","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Over the past decade, mounting evidence suggests the climate crisis is moving toward an authoritarian—or even fascist—future. Rather than cooperatively addressing the causes of global climate change, many wealthy nations are protecting themselves from its consequences in increasingly brutal ways (such as border closures or military interventions to secure resources) in order to safeguard their privileges built on unsustainable exploitation of nature (Klein <span>2019</span>; Blumenfeld <span>2022</span>). Across many regions, right-wing, authoritarian, and antidemocratic parties are coming to power, denying climate change while glorifying fossil fuels as a symbol of national strength (Malm and The Zetkin Collective <span>2021</span>). Some individuals celebrate environmental destruction in private (e.g., through so-called “rolling coal”) and passionately hold on to climate-damaging lifestyles (Daggett <span>2018</span>).</p><p>At this historic moment, I propose to revisit Horkheimer and Adorno's <i>Dialectic of Enlightenment</i> and suggest a distinctly new way of employing it to comprehend the climate crisis. In the 1980s and 1990s, the work experienced its first wave of reception within ecological theories. Back then, discussions centered on the motif of a <i>distancing or even separating from nature</i>, as illustrated through the figure of Odysseus. Horkheimer and Adorno argue that during the process of civilization, people undergo both an affective and cognitive distancing from nature in order to dominate it (Horkheimer and Adorno <span>2002</span> [1944], pp. 1–62). Ecofeminist scholars such as Ariel Salleh and Val Plumwood took up this idea, interpreting the modern (patriarchal) subject's detached relationship with the world as a central condition of the ecological crisis (Salleh <span>1981, 2017</span> [1997]; Plumwood <span>1993</span>).1</p><p>In this article, I aim to engage with the <i>Dialectic of Enlightenment</i> from a different angle and draw on its second key motif for interpreting the climate crisis2: not the distancing of humans from nature, but their potentially fascistic “regression to nature” (Horkheimer and Adorno <span>2002</span> [1944], p. 138). The <i>Dialectic of Enlightenment</i> not only addresses how people, during the process of civilization, distance themselves from nature in order to control it, but also how those groups possessing the technological means to do so accumulate enormous <i>social</i> power. According to Horkheimer and Adorno, these groups began, over the course of the twentieth century, to secure their power in ever more subtle ways. In particular, they did so by offering alienated subjects promises that purported to overcome their estranged relationship with nature. Yet, rather than reconciling people with nature, these false promises serve to dominate them. Horkheimer and Adorno point to the culture industry as a paradigmatic form of this domination, where alienated subjects are promised a rec","PeriodicalId":51578,"journal":{"name":"Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory","volume":"33 2","pages":"254-262"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8675.70035","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148203107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Policing the Environmental Crisis: Climate Protest, the State, and Law and Order","authors":"Oscar Talbot","doi":"10.1111/1467-8675.70045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.70045","url":null,"abstract":"<p>On July 18, 2024, five members of the group JSO were sentenced to jail for taking part in a conspiracy that involved a “sophisticated plan to disrupt traffic,” according to the presiding HHJ Hehir (R v Hallam and Ors <span>2024</span>, §2). The judge noted that preparation for the protest had been significant, even involving legal counsel, and that the financial consequences of their blockade of the main motorway surrounding London had been around £1 million in policing costs and over 120 hours of traffic disruption over a 4-day period. HHJ Hehir gave examples of those effects—someone on the way to a funeral, workers who “were late to work and had to work extra hours without pay to make up the time,” and “perhaps ironically given the cause [the defendants] espouse” someone giving evidence in Parliament for an environmental inquiry (R v Hallam and Ors <span>2024</span>, §7). An important part of the evidence against the defendants came from a Zoom call collected by an incognito journalist for <i>The Sun</i> newspaper, which was then handed to the police. In his sentencing, the judge advised that significant custodial sentences should be handed out, given the scale of the intended harm and the likelihood of re-offending by the defendants. “The principle of deterrence is both of particular relevance and importance in the context of a pressing social need to protect the public and to prevent social unrest arising from illegal activity” (R v Hallam and Ors <span>2024</span>, §47). Roger Hallam, the founder of both JSO and Extinction Rebellion, was sentenced to 5 years in prison. The four other defendants were sentenced to 4 years each. These are thought to be the longest ever sentences for nonviolent protest in British legal history, prompting the UN Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders, Michel Forst, to comment that it was a “dark day for peaceful environmental protest” or “anyone concerned with the exercise of their fundamental freedoms,” calling the sentences a dangerous precedent that were in violation of the duties of the state to international law (Forst <span>2024</span>, 1).</p><p>Although HHJ Hehir's comments sought to contextualize these sentences, they should be understood as part of the escalating process of criminalization that has targeted all protest, catalyzed by relatively intense and long-running actions from groups or movements like Black Lives Matter, Extinction Rebellion, Insulate Britain, JSO, Sisters Uncut, the Kill the Bill protests, and Palestine Action since around 2019. These sentences are the result of an intensification of coercive state power that uses criminalization to counter caused by deep-seated political crisis and the resulting social anxieties. Two paradigmatic examples of this legislation are the Police, Crime, and Sentencing Act (PCSA) of 2022 and the Public Order Act 2023 (POA), which both gave extensive new powers to the police to curtail protest and expression. Berglund has argued that the shift t","PeriodicalId":51578,"journal":{"name":"Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory","volume":"33 2","pages":"274-284"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8675.70045","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148202917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Refusing to Listen: Receptive Audiences and the Political Authority of Speech in Hobbes, Locke, and Mill","authors":"Thomas Henry Owings","doi":"10.1111/1467-8675.70008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.70008","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In the middle of the summer of 2020, a group of journalists, academics, and self-styled thought leaders signed the now-infamous free speech letter in <i>Harper's Magazine</i>. The letter proclaimed a new epidemic: “a new set of moral attitudes and political commitments that tend to weaken our norms of open date and toleration.” Such forces of “illiberalism” were constraining the “free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society.” To oppose this rising tide of so-called <i>cancel culture</i>, the signatories insisted that all ideas, including bad ideas, deserve “exposure, argument, and persuasion” rather than “trying to silence or wish them away.”1 More recently, a number of universities faced condemnation for tolerating displays of antisemitism. Contrary to the earlier claims of <i>Harper</i>’s that we need more free speech on campus, think pieces and media personalities condemned anti-genocide protests as the wrong kind of speech. Most people broadly accept that free speech is a democratic value and good for democracy. But those signatories of <i>Harper</i>’s letter in the summer of 2020 and the more recent outcry against antisemitism both suggest that campus activists are practicing the value of free speech incorrectly. What is it about the liberal democratic notion of speech that seeks, on the one hand, to encourage a proliferation of some speech while, on the other hand, to limit other speech? What discursive legacy gives the current pejorative heirs of “political correctness”—“cancel culture,” “woke,” and “DEI”—their political salience in maintaining the boundaries of democratic speech?</p><p>In looking at the demographics for whom these phrases are most valuable, we can glean an anti-egalitarian tendency in their invocations. To “cancel” does not mean “to silence.” Neither recent anti-Trans legislation in the United States nor opposition to queer book displays in public libraries has meaningfully been perceived as attempts to “cancel.” Relatedly, anti-Zionist Jews engaged in opposing the foreign policy situation in Gaza are also not legibly targets of “being canceled” when city councils and boards of trustees institutionally pressure them into silence. Instead, “canceling” seems only to occur when speech derived from traditional hierarchies and sources of authority is challenged. Refusing to host anti-abortion Christians is to “silence” them (Bruce <span>2021</span>). To refuse an audience to trans-exclusionary feminists is to reject “civilized debate.”2 It is rejecting both the free market of ideas and “standards of moral judgement” to not hear out “an argument” against “same-sex marriage or transgenderism” (Arkes <span>2018</span>). Tradition is entitled to free speech; challengers are not. The liberal democratic imaginary of speech lends itself to the preservation of hierarchies even while it theoretically insists on the power of critique.</p><p>Herein, I want to frame <i>respect for traditional authority</i>","PeriodicalId":51578,"journal":{"name":"Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory","volume":"33 2","pages":"174-184"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8675.70008","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148203071","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Toward a Critique of Critique: Paradoxes of Byung-Chul Han and the Dialectic of Despair and Possibility","authors":"İbrahim Berkan Karataş","doi":"10.1111/1467-8675.70007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.70007","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Byung-Chul Han has emerged as one of the most notable figures in contemporary philosophy, with a prolific output of essayistic books diagnosing the socio-political and cultural ramifications today. Since the publication of <i>Die Müdigkeitsgesellschaft</i> (<i>The Burnout Society</i>), Han's ([2010] <span>2015a</span>) reflections, particularly on digital capitalism, neoliberal subjectivity, and the loss of “otherness,” have gained a wide readership. Over the past decade, he has published roughly 20 books—typically slim volumes, each centered on a single evocative concept—constituting a remarkably consistent body of work. Though often associated with the Frankfurt School due to his critique of the cultural, psychological, and epistemic effects of late capitalism, this affiliation captures only one dimension of his thought. Han's intellectual roots lie equally in Hegel, Heidegger, and Zen traditions—sources shaping his “mood-thinking” through notions like tiredness, boredom, and passivity (Knepper et al. <span>2024</span>). Rather than fitting squarely within dialectical or materialist models, Han's framework is <i>hybrid</i> and syncretic. This explains why Knepper et al. (<span>2024</span>: 10) align him more with North American democratic theorists—such as Dallmayr, Connolly, Brown, Butler, and West—than with Frankfurtian critical theory (see Knepper et al. <span>2024</span>: 59–63). In this regard, his <i>ambiguous status</i> as “unique within critical theory” might be captured through “five ways of reading Han” (Wyllie and Knepper <span>2024</span>: 74–75): as cosmopolitan, contemplative, social critic, media theorist, and philosopher of beauty. Such breadth signals Han's orientation toward a cross-cultural, non-doctrinaire intellectual terrain.</p><p>From The Transparency Society ([2012] <span>2015b</span>) and Psychopolitics ([2014] <span>2017a</span>) to The Disappearance of Rituals ([2019] <span>2020</span>), <i>The Crisis of Narration</i> ([2023] <span>2024a</span>), and <i>The Spirit of Hope</i> ([2024] <span>2024b</span>), Han's works diagnose a distinctive modality of neoliberal power: one that no longer represses through external prohibitions but governs through imperatives of self-optimization, transparency, and affective productivity. In doing so, he has positioned himself as a diagnostician of our times, issuing stark warnings about the erosion of fundamental human capacities like contemplation, relational depth, and political resistance. In his terms, Han explicitly distinguishes this mode of domination from internalization, which he defines narrowly as the absorption of negative constraints and interdictions. “Positive compulsion”—the drive to achieve, to enhance, to perform—is for Han categorically distinct from internalization (Han <span>2017a</span>: 14–15). While his distinction between prohibition and compulsion is central to his framework, it warrants reconsideration. A shift from the source to the function of compulsio","PeriodicalId":51578,"journal":{"name":"Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory","volume":"33 2","pages":"222-233"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8675.70007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148203085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Marx's Ethical Vision","authors":"Karen Ng","doi":"10.1111/1467-8675.70055","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.70055","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51578,"journal":{"name":"Constellations-An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory","volume":"33 2","pages":"303-305"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148202989","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}