不确定时代的国家-社会关系:巴西和阿根廷的社会运动策略、观念竞争和疫情

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
R. Abers, Federico M. Rossi, Marisa von Bülow
{"title":"不确定时代的国家-社会关系:巴西和阿根廷的社会运动策略、观念竞争和疫情","authors":"R. Abers, Federico M. Rossi, Marisa von Bülow","doi":"10.1177/0192512121993713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article compares how COVID-19 affected state–society relations differently in two relatively similar countries: Brazil and Argentina. Bringing together social movement theories and ideational institutionalism, we argue that variation in responses to the COVID-19 pandemic is explained by the different roles played by social movements inside and outside government and by contrasting ideational disputes. The extreme uncertainty introduced by the pandemic generated intense contestation about the meaning of the crisis and how to resolve it. In Brazil, progressive social movements not only were excluded from the government coalition, but also had to combat a powerful discourse that denied the existence of a crisis altogether. Such denialism did not flourish in the same way in Argentina, where progressive social movements were part of national government processes. The result was that in Argentina, movement–government dynamics revolved around constructing long-term policy proposals, whereas in Brazil movements focused on short-term emergency responses.","PeriodicalId":47785,"journal":{"name":"International Political Science Review","volume":"42 1","pages":"333 - 349"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0192512121993713","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"State–society relations in uncertain times: Social movement strategies, ideational contestation and the pandemic in Brazil and Argentina\",\"authors\":\"R. Abers, Federico M. Rossi, Marisa von Bülow\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0192512121993713\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article compares how COVID-19 affected state–society relations differently in two relatively similar countries: Brazil and Argentina. Bringing together social movement theories and ideational institutionalism, we argue that variation in responses to the COVID-19 pandemic is explained by the different roles played by social movements inside and outside government and by contrasting ideational disputes. The extreme uncertainty introduced by the pandemic generated intense contestation about the meaning of the crisis and how to resolve it. In Brazil, progressive social movements not only were excluded from the government coalition, but also had to combat a powerful discourse that denied the existence of a crisis altogether. Such denialism did not flourish in the same way in Argentina, where progressive social movements were part of national government processes. The result was that in Argentina, movement–government dynamics revolved around constructing long-term policy proposals, whereas in Brazil movements focused on short-term emergency responses.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47785,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Political Science Review\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"333 - 349\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0192512121993713\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Political Science Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512121993713\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Political Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512121993713","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

本文比较了新冠肺炎对巴西和阿根廷这两个相对相似的国家的国家社会关系的不同影响。我们将社会运动理论和概念制度主义结合起来,认为应对新冠肺炎大流行的变化是由政府内外的社会运动所扮演的不同角色以及概念争议的对比来解释的。新冠疫情带来的极端不确定性引发了人们对危机含义以及如何解决危机的激烈争论。在巴西,进步社会运动不仅被排除在政府联盟之外,还不得不与完全否认危机存在的强大话语作斗争。这种否认主义在阿根廷并没有以同样的方式蓬勃发展,那里的进步社会运动是国家政府进程的一部分。结果是,在阿根廷,运动-政府的动态围绕着制定长期政策建议,而在巴西,运动则侧重于短期应急响应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
State–society relations in uncertain times: Social movement strategies, ideational contestation and the pandemic in Brazil and Argentina
This article compares how COVID-19 affected state–society relations differently in two relatively similar countries: Brazil and Argentina. Bringing together social movement theories and ideational institutionalism, we argue that variation in responses to the COVID-19 pandemic is explained by the different roles played by social movements inside and outside government and by contrasting ideational disputes. The extreme uncertainty introduced by the pandemic generated intense contestation about the meaning of the crisis and how to resolve it. In Brazil, progressive social movements not only were excluded from the government coalition, but also had to combat a powerful discourse that denied the existence of a crisis altogether. Such denialism did not flourish in the same way in Argentina, where progressive social movements were part of national government processes. The result was that in Argentina, movement–government dynamics revolved around constructing long-term policy proposals, whereas in Brazil movements focused on short-term emergency responses.
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
5.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: IPSR is committed to publishing material that makes a significant contribution to international political science. It seeks to meet the needs of political scientists throughout the world who are interested in studying political phenomena in the contemporary context of increasing international interdependence and global change. IPSR reflects the aims and intellectual tradition of its parent body, the International Political Science Association: to foster the creation and dissemination of rigorous political inquiry free of subdisciplinary or other orthodoxy.
×
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