民族与家庭:德国另类修辞中的国家社会主义遗产与性别概念

IF 0.3 3区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY
I. Heinemann
{"title":"民族与家庭:德国另类修辞中的国家社会主义遗产与性别概念","authors":"I. Heinemann","doi":"10.1177/16118944221110713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article analyses how the Alternative for Germany (AfD) conflated images of the traditional family with the nation and a racially-defined notion of ‘Volk’, consciously repackaging terms from the 1930s for current political use. Taking a comparative and historical perspective, the article situates the family rhetoric and policies of the AfD in the historical debates on family, reproduction, and women that characterized Germany from the post-war period to the early 21st century. Exploring how the AfD sought to portray and regulate women's roles and reproductive decision-making, the article argues that the party sought to produce an authentic take on family and gender politics, the racism of which went practically unchallenged. It presents four analytical dimensions to grasp the specific biologist family-centrism and anti-gender approach of the AfD in comparison to National Socialism family rhetoric and policies. Sources come from official party platforms, less formal speeches and social media content of party representatives, newspaper coverage and reports by the German Intelligence Service, Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz.","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Volk and Family: National Socialist Legacies and Gender Concepts in the Rhetoric of the Alternative for Germany\",\"authors\":\"I. Heinemann\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/16118944221110713\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article analyses how the Alternative for Germany (AfD) conflated images of the traditional family with the nation and a racially-defined notion of ‘Volk’, consciously repackaging terms from the 1930s for current political use. Taking a comparative and historical perspective, the article situates the family rhetoric and policies of the AfD in the historical debates on family, reproduction, and women that characterized Germany from the post-war period to the early 21st century. Exploring how the AfD sought to portray and regulate women's roles and reproductive decision-making, the article argues that the party sought to produce an authentic take on family and gender politics, the racism of which went practically unchallenged. It presents four analytical dimensions to grasp the specific biologist family-centrism and anti-gender approach of the AfD in comparison to National Socialism family rhetoric and policies. Sources come from official party platforms, less formal speeches and social media content of party representatives, newspaper coverage and reports by the German Intelligence Service, Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44275,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Modern European History\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Modern European History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221110713\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Modern European History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221110713","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文章分析了德国另类选择党(AfD)如何将传统家庭与国家的形象以及种族定义的“Volk”概念混为一谈,有意识地重新包装20世纪30年代的术语,以供当前政治使用。本文从比较和历史的角度,将AfD的家庭修辞和政策置于战后至21世纪初德国特有的关于家庭、生育和妇女的历史辩论中。文章探讨了AfD如何试图描绘和规范妇女的角色和生殖决策,认为该党试图对家庭和性别政治产生真实的看法,而这方面的种族主义几乎没有受到质疑。与国家社会主义家庭言论和政策相比,它提出了四个分析维度来把握AfD的特定生物学家家庭中心主义和反性别方法。消息来源于政党官方平台、党代表不太正式的演讲和社交媒体内容、报纸报道和德国情报局的报告。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Volk and Family: National Socialist Legacies and Gender Concepts in the Rhetoric of the Alternative for Germany
The article analyses how the Alternative for Germany (AfD) conflated images of the traditional family with the nation and a racially-defined notion of ‘Volk’, consciously repackaging terms from the 1930s for current political use. Taking a comparative and historical perspective, the article situates the family rhetoric and policies of the AfD in the historical debates on family, reproduction, and women that characterized Germany from the post-war period to the early 21st century. Exploring how the AfD sought to portray and regulate women's roles and reproductive decision-making, the article argues that the party sought to produce an authentic take on family and gender politics, the racism of which went practically unchallenged. It presents four analytical dimensions to grasp the specific biologist family-centrism and anti-gender approach of the AfD in comparison to National Socialism family rhetoric and policies. Sources come from official party platforms, less formal speeches and social media content of party representatives, newspaper coverage and reports by the German Intelligence Service, Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz.
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
×
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