残酷的力量治理:尽管在菲律宾新冠肺炎大流行期间政策失败,但公众仍予以批准

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES
M. Thompson
{"title":"残酷的力量治理:尽管在菲律宾新冠肺炎大流行期间政策失败,但公众仍予以批准","authors":"M. Thompson","doi":"10.1177/18681034221092453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed enormous governance deficits globally. Several populist strongmen practiced “medical populism” – ignoring scientific advice, proffering denials, and blaming others. More technocratic leaders recognised its severity, implementing strict lockdowns. But some failed to adopt more flexible restrictions once testing improved due to local enforcement difficulties, termed “blunt force regulation.” Although neither a pandemic denialist nor an obtuse technocrat, Philippine president Rodrigo R. Duterte's response combined aspects of both approaches with blame shifting and one-size-fits-all lockdowns while also securitising the crisis. Utilising methods developed during his bloody “war on drugs,” Duterte imposed a heavily militarised approach, scapegoated supposedly disobedient Filipinos (pasaway) and bullied local politicians. While the Philippines has been among the worst pandemic performers globally, Duterte's approval ratings remained robust. It is argued “brute force governance” undermined the dynamics of accountability, enabling him to win public approval despite policy failure.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"41 1","pages":"399 - 421"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Brute Force Governance: Public Approval Despite Policy Failure During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Philippines\",\"authors\":\"M. Thompson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/18681034221092453\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed enormous governance deficits globally. Several populist strongmen practiced “medical populism” – ignoring scientific advice, proffering denials, and blaming others. More technocratic leaders recognised its severity, implementing strict lockdowns. But some failed to adopt more flexible restrictions once testing improved due to local enforcement difficulties, termed “blunt force regulation.” Although neither a pandemic denialist nor an obtuse technocrat, Philippine president Rodrigo R. Duterte's response combined aspects of both approaches with blame shifting and one-size-fits-all lockdowns while also securitising the crisis. Utilising methods developed during his bloody “war on drugs,” Duterte imposed a heavily militarised approach, scapegoated supposedly disobedient Filipinos (pasaway) and bullied local politicians. While the Philippines has been among the worst pandemic performers globally, Duterte's approval ratings remained robust. It is argued “brute force governance” undermined the dynamics of accountability, enabling him to win public approval despite policy failure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15424,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"399 - 421\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034221092453\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034221092453","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

新冠肺炎疫情暴露了全球巨大的治理赤字。一些民粹主义强人实行“医学民粹主义”——无视科学建议,否认,指责他人。更多的技术官僚领导人认识到了它的严重性,实施了严格的封锁。但由于当地的执法困难,一旦检测得到改善,一些人就没有采取更灵活的限制措施,称之为“钝器监管”。尽管菲律宾总统罗德里戈·R·杜特尔特既不是否认疫情的人,也不是迟钝的技术官僚,但他的回应将这两种方法的各个方面结合起来,即推卸责任和一刀切的封锁,同时也使危机安全化。杜特尔特利用他血腥的“禁毒战争”中发展起来的方法,实施了一种高度军事化的做法,将据称不听话的菲律宾人(pasaway)当作替罪羊,并欺负当地政客。尽管菲律宾是全球疫情表现最差的国家之一,但杜特尔特的支持率仍然很高。有人认为,“暴力治理”破坏了问责制的动力,使他能够在政策失败的情况下赢得公众的认可。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Brute Force Governance: Public Approval Despite Policy Failure During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Philippines
The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed enormous governance deficits globally. Several populist strongmen practiced “medical populism” – ignoring scientific advice, proffering denials, and blaming others. More technocratic leaders recognised its severity, implementing strict lockdowns. But some failed to adopt more flexible restrictions once testing improved due to local enforcement difficulties, termed “blunt force regulation.” Although neither a pandemic denialist nor an obtuse technocrat, Philippine president Rodrigo R. Duterte's response combined aspects of both approaches with blame shifting and one-size-fits-all lockdowns while also securitising the crisis. Utilising methods developed during his bloody “war on drugs,” Duterte imposed a heavily militarised approach, scapegoated supposedly disobedient Filipinos (pasaway) and bullied local politicians. While the Philippines has been among the worst pandemic performers globally, Duterte's approval ratings remained robust. It is argued “brute force governance” undermined the dynamics of accountability, enabling him to win public approval despite policy failure.
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
Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs
Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, published by the GIGA Institute of Asian Studies (IAS) in Hamburg, is an internationally refereed journal. The publication focuses on current developments in international relations, politics, economics, society, education, environment and law in Southeast Asia. The topics covered should not only be oriented towards specialists in Southeast Asian affairs, but should also be of relevance to readers with a practical interest in the region. For more than three decades, the Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs (formerly Südostasien aktuell) has regularly provided – six times per year and in German - insightful and in-depth analyses of current issues in political, social and economic life; culture; and development in Southeast Asia. It continues to be devoted to the transfer of scholarly insights to a wider audience and is the leading academic journal devoted exclusively to this region. Interested readers can access the abstracts and tables of contents of earlier issues of the journal via the webpage http://www.giga-hamburg.de/de/publikationen/archiv.
×
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