阿拉伯之春是后伊斯兰时代吗?

IF 0.6 Q4 SOCIOLOGY
Kenneth R Vaughan, P. Froese, Chase Lonas
{"title":"阿拉伯之春是后伊斯兰时代吗?","authors":"Kenneth R Vaughan, P. Froese, Chase Lonas","doi":"10.1163/15691330-bja10052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Scholars continue to debate political motives behind the Arab Spring – a debate that centers on the compatibility of democratic and Islamist preferences. Some frame the protests as a boon for democracy and prudential needs of citizens. Others report an Islamist turn against secular autocracies. Here, the authors argue that this framing relies on outdated civilizational narratives and that democratic, Islamist, and prudential concerns present concurrently in the Arab Spring. Using the Arab Democracy Barometer, the authors investigate public opinion in Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia, to estimate evaluations of the Arab Spring. Democratically oriented Egyptians and Libyans were more favorable toward the events, while Tunisians with Islamists preferences were more optimistic. The authors find little evidence of tensions between Islamism and democracy. This is particularly salient when evaluating attitudes about the Arab Spring. The authors argue that the Arab Spring constitutes a “post-Islamist” movement, one which integrates democratic and Islamist preferences into a revolutionary framework.","PeriodicalId":46584,"journal":{"name":"COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Was the Arab Spring a Post-Islamist Moment?\",\"authors\":\"Kenneth R Vaughan, P. Froese, Chase Lonas\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15691330-bja10052\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Scholars continue to debate political motives behind the Arab Spring – a debate that centers on the compatibility of democratic and Islamist preferences. Some frame the protests as a boon for democracy and prudential needs of citizens. Others report an Islamist turn against secular autocracies. Here, the authors argue that this framing relies on outdated civilizational narratives and that democratic, Islamist, and prudential concerns present concurrently in the Arab Spring. Using the Arab Democracy Barometer, the authors investigate public opinion in Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia, to estimate evaluations of the Arab Spring. Democratically oriented Egyptians and Libyans were more favorable toward the events, while Tunisians with Islamists preferences were more optimistic. The authors find little evidence of tensions between Islamism and democracy. This is particularly salient when evaluating attitudes about the Arab Spring. The authors argue that the Arab Spring constitutes a “post-Islamist” movement, one which integrates democratic and Islamist preferences into a revolutionary framework.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15691330-bja10052\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15691330-bja10052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学者们继续就“阿拉伯之春”背后的政治动机展开辩论,这场辩论的核心是民主和伊斯兰偏好的兼容性。一些人认为抗议活动是民主的福音,也是公民谨慎的需要。另一些人则报告说,这是伊斯兰主义者反对世俗独裁政权的转变。在这里,作者认为,这种框架依赖于过时的文明叙事,民主、伊斯兰和审慎的关注同时出现在阿拉伯之春中。利用阿拉伯民主晴雨表,作者调查了埃及、利比亚和突尼斯的公众舆论,以估计对阿拉伯之春的评价。倾向于民主的埃及人和利比亚人对这些事件更有利,而倾向于伊斯兰主义的突尼斯人则更为乐观。作者没有发现伊斯兰主义和民主之间存在紧张关系的证据。在评估人们对阿拉伯之春的态度时,这一点尤为突出。作者认为,阿拉伯之春构成了一场“后伊斯兰主义”运动,它将民主和伊斯兰主义的偏好整合到一个革命框架中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Was the Arab Spring a Post-Islamist Moment?
Scholars continue to debate political motives behind the Arab Spring – a debate that centers on the compatibility of democratic and Islamist preferences. Some frame the protests as a boon for democracy and prudential needs of citizens. Others report an Islamist turn against secular autocracies. Here, the authors argue that this framing relies on outdated civilizational narratives and that democratic, Islamist, and prudential concerns present concurrently in the Arab Spring. Using the Arab Democracy Barometer, the authors investigate public opinion in Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia, to estimate evaluations of the Arab Spring. Democratically oriented Egyptians and Libyans were more favorable toward the events, while Tunisians with Islamists preferences were more optimistic. The authors find little evidence of tensions between Islamism and democracy. This is particularly salient when evaluating attitudes about the Arab Spring. The authors argue that the Arab Spring constitutes a “post-Islamist” movement, one which integrates democratic and Islamist preferences into a revolutionary framework.
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
0.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Comparative Sociology is a quarterly international scholarly journal dedicated to advancing comparative sociological analyses of societies and cultures, institutions and organizations, groups and collectivities, networks and interactions. All submissions for articles are peer-reviewed double-blind. The journal publishes book reviews and theoretical presentations, conceptual analyses and empirical findings at all levels of comparative sociological analysis, from global and cultural to ethnographic and interactionist. Submissions are welcome not only from sociologists but also political scientists, legal scholars, economists, anthropologists and others.
×
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