突发公共卫生事件中波兰医疗民粹主义的统治权主张

J. Rak
{"title":"突发公共卫生事件中波兰医疗民粹主义的统治权主张","authors":"J. Rak","doi":"10.55271/jps000111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to give insight into discursive means used by rulers in Poland to claim the right to rule during a public health emergency. Grounded in Johannes Gerschewski’s, Christian von Soest’s and Julia Grauvogel’s theory of legitimacy claims and Gideon Lasco’s theory of medical populism, the study identifies the evolution and characteristics of legitimacy claims at pandemic junctures critical to political regime stability. By using content and thematic analysis of news distributed by partisan media and tweets published by the most influential politicians of the ruling party, the study uncovers justifications for autocratic rule in Poland aimed at shaping elite cohesion, opposition activity, and the potential political support of the ruled. Legitimacy claims rested upon medical populism to a large extent since the latter provided semantic structures useful to account for the unprecedented extension of the ruling party’s power competencies and limitation of personal and civic freedoms. Moreover, while claims of dramatic restrictions and lockdowns marked the pandemic’s beginning, its further stages brought out a “vaccine messianism” and optimism related to crisis management performance.","PeriodicalId":250217,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Populism Studies","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Use of Medical Populism to Claim the Right to Rule in Poland during a Public Health Emergency\",\"authors\":\"J. Rak\",\"doi\":\"10.55271/jps000111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article aims to give insight into discursive means used by rulers in Poland to claim the right to rule during a public health emergency. Grounded in Johannes Gerschewski’s, Christian von Soest’s and Julia Grauvogel’s theory of legitimacy claims and Gideon Lasco’s theory of medical populism, the study identifies the evolution and characteristics of legitimacy claims at pandemic junctures critical to political regime stability. By using content and thematic analysis of news distributed by partisan media and tweets published by the most influential politicians of the ruling party, the study uncovers justifications for autocratic rule in Poland aimed at shaping elite cohesion, opposition activity, and the potential political support of the ruled. Legitimacy claims rested upon medical populism to a large extent since the latter provided semantic structures useful to account for the unprecedented extension of the ruling party’s power competencies and limitation of personal and civic freedoms. Moreover, while claims of dramatic restrictions and lockdowns marked the pandemic’s beginning, its further stages brought out a “vaccine messianism” and optimism related to crisis management performance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":250217,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Populism Studies\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Populism Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.55271/jps000111\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Populism Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55271/jps000111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在深入了解波兰统治者在突发公共卫生事件中主张统治权的话语手段。该研究以约翰内斯·格舍夫斯基、克里斯蒂安·冯·索斯特和朱莉娅·格劳沃格尔的合法性主张理论以及吉迪恩·拉斯科的医疗民粹主义理论为基础,确定了在对政治政权稳定至关重要的流行病时刻,合法性主张的演变和特征。通过对党派媒体发布的新闻和执政党最有影响力的政治家发布的推文进行内容和主题分析,该研究揭示了波兰专制统治的理由,旨在塑造精英凝聚力、反对派活动和被统治者的潜在政治支持。合法性主张在很大程度上依赖于医疗民粹主义,因为后者提供了有用的语义结构,可以解释执政党权力能力的空前扩张以及个人和公民自由的限制。此外,虽然大规模限制和封锁的说法标志着大流行的开始,但其后续阶段带来了“疫苗救世主主义”和与危机管理绩效有关的乐观情绪。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Use of Medical Populism to Claim the Right to Rule in Poland during a Public Health Emergency
This article aims to give insight into discursive means used by rulers in Poland to claim the right to rule during a public health emergency. Grounded in Johannes Gerschewski’s, Christian von Soest’s and Julia Grauvogel’s theory of legitimacy claims and Gideon Lasco’s theory of medical populism, the study identifies the evolution and characteristics of legitimacy claims at pandemic junctures critical to political regime stability. By using content and thematic analysis of news distributed by partisan media and tweets published by the most influential politicians of the ruling party, the study uncovers justifications for autocratic rule in Poland aimed at shaping elite cohesion, opposition activity, and the potential political support of the ruled. Legitimacy claims rested upon medical populism to a large extent since the latter provided semantic structures useful to account for the unprecedented extension of the ruling party’s power competencies and limitation of personal and civic freedoms. Moreover, while claims of dramatic restrictions and lockdowns marked the pandemic’s beginning, its further stages brought out a “vaccine messianism” and optimism related to crisis management performance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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