混乱和打击:1916-2015年英国议会阴谋言论的定量分析

Andrew McKenzie-McHarg, R. Fredheim
{"title":"混乱和打击:1916-2015年英国议会阴谋言论的定量分析","authors":"Andrew McKenzie-McHarg, R. Fredheim","doi":"10.17863/CAM.12804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTIn view of the negative connotations associated with conspiracy theories, what have been the effects of the term's entry into popular vocabulary in the second half of the twentieth century? Has the ascendancy of the term “conspiracy theory” been correlated with a reluctance to allege conspiracy? In this article, the authors use Hansard, the record of British parliamentary debates, as a source of empirical data in demonstrating a significant and steady reduction in the number of conspiracy claims advanced in parliament; a pattern consistent with the broader marginalization of conspiracy rhetoric. This trend was reinforced by a trope that established itself in the 1980s and juxtaposed “conspiracies” with “cock-ups.” The British expression “cock-up” denotes a blunder or act of incompetence. In the second part of this article, the authors argue that the preference for “cock-up theories” over “conspiracy theories” reflects how a policy geared towards privatization and deregulation tended to characteriz...","PeriodicalId":154465,"journal":{"name":"Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cock-ups and slap-downs: A quantitative analysis of conspiracy rhetoric in the British Parliament 1916–2015\",\"authors\":\"Andrew McKenzie-McHarg, R. Fredheim\",\"doi\":\"10.17863/CAM.12804\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTIn view of the negative connotations associated with conspiracy theories, what have been the effects of the term's entry into popular vocabulary in the second half of the twentieth century? Has the ascendancy of the term “conspiracy theory” been correlated with a reluctance to allege conspiracy? In this article, the authors use Hansard, the record of British parliamentary debates, as a source of empirical data in demonstrating a significant and steady reduction in the number of conspiracy claims advanced in parliament; a pattern consistent with the broader marginalization of conspiracy rhetoric. This trend was reinforced by a trope that established itself in the 1980s and juxtaposed “conspiracies” with “cock-ups.” The British expression “cock-up” denotes a blunder or act of incompetence. In the second part of this article, the authors argue that the preference for “cock-up theories” over “conspiracy theories” reflects how a policy geared towards privatization and deregulation tended to characteriz...\",\"PeriodicalId\":154465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-05-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.12804\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.12804","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

摘要:从阴谋论的负面含义来看,这个词在20世纪下半叶进入大众词汇后产生了什么影响?“阴谋论”一词的盛行是否与不愿宣称阴谋有关?在本文中,作者使用英国议会辩论记录《议事录》作为经验数据来源,证明议会中提出的阴谋主张数量显著而稳定地减少;这种模式与阴谋论的广泛边缘化是一致的。20世纪80年代形成的一种比喻强化了这一趋势,并将“阴谋”与“混乱”相提并论。英国表达“cock-up”指的是失误或无能的行为。在本文的第二部分,作者认为“混乱理论”对“阴谋论”的偏好反映了面向私有化和放松管制的政策如何倾向于描述……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cock-ups and slap-downs: A quantitative analysis of conspiracy rhetoric in the British Parliament 1916–2015
ABSTRACTIn view of the negative connotations associated with conspiracy theories, what have been the effects of the term's entry into popular vocabulary in the second half of the twentieth century? Has the ascendancy of the term “conspiracy theory” been correlated with a reluctance to allege conspiracy? In this article, the authors use Hansard, the record of British parliamentary debates, as a source of empirical data in demonstrating a significant and steady reduction in the number of conspiracy claims advanced in parliament; a pattern consistent with the broader marginalization of conspiracy rhetoric. This trend was reinforced by a trope that established itself in the 1980s and juxtaposed “conspiracies” with “cock-ups.” The British expression “cock-up” denotes a blunder or act of incompetence. In the second part of this article, the authors argue that the preference for “cock-up theories” over “conspiracy theories” reflects how a policy geared towards privatization and deregulation tended to characteriz...
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