直面系统性危机:对大流行病紧急状态批评的分歧

Jonas Heller
{"title":"直面系统性危机:对大流行病紧急状态批评的分歧","authors":"Jonas Heller","doi":"10.1353/tae.2024.a932014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The article shows how criticism of states of emergency during the COVID-19 pandemic divides into two camps: one complaining about the restriction of democratic processes, the other about the restriction of individual rights. The analysis of this divide exposes the specificity of the pandemic crisis as one without an enemy and as systemic in character. It highlights three aspects of the crisis responses in Western societies: First, the transboundary nexus of (restricted) rights; second, the adherence to an implausible concept of enmity; third, the disjunction of democracy and rights in the context of an authoritarian understanding of freedom.","PeriodicalId":176857,"journal":{"name":"Theory & Event","volume":"71 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Facing the Systemic Crisis: The Divide in Criticism of the Pandemic State of Emergency\",\"authors\":\"Jonas Heller\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/tae.2024.a932014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract: The article shows how criticism of states of emergency during the COVID-19 pandemic divides into two camps: one complaining about the restriction of democratic processes, the other about the restriction of individual rights. The analysis of this divide exposes the specificity of the pandemic crisis as one without an enemy and as systemic in character. It highlights three aspects of the crisis responses in Western societies: First, the transboundary nexus of (restricted) rights; second, the adherence to an implausible concept of enmity; third, the disjunction of democracy and rights in the context of an authoritarian understanding of freedom.\",\"PeriodicalId\":176857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theory & Event\",\"volume\":\"71 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theory & Event\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/tae.2024.a932014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory & Event","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/tae.2024.a932014","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

摘要:文章展示了在 COVID-19 大流行期间对紧急状态的批评如何分为两个阵营:一个阵营抱怨民主进程受到限制,另一个阵营则抱怨个人权利受到限制。对这一分歧的分析揭示了大流行病危机的特殊性,即它是一场没有敌人的系统性危机。它强调了西方社会应对危机的三个方面:第一,(受限制的)权利的跨界联系;第二,坚持难以置信的敌意概念;第三,在对自由的专制理解中民主与权利的脱节。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Facing the Systemic Crisis: The Divide in Criticism of the Pandemic State of Emergency
Abstract: The article shows how criticism of states of emergency during the COVID-19 pandemic divides into two camps: one complaining about the restriction of democratic processes, the other about the restriction of individual rights. The analysis of this divide exposes the specificity of the pandemic crisis as one without an enemy and as systemic in character. It highlights three aspects of the crisis responses in Western societies: First, the transboundary nexus of (restricted) rights; second, the adherence to an implausible concept of enmity; third, the disjunction of democracy and rights in the context of an authoritarian understanding of freedom.
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