“蛋糕主义”的起源:英国智库关于归还主权及其对英国脱欧战略的影响的辩论

IF 4.6 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Andrew Glencross
{"title":"“蛋糕主义”的起源:英国智库关于归还主权及其对英国脱欧战略的影响的辩论","authors":"Andrew Glencross","doi":"10.1080/13501763.2022.2072371","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article uncovers the origins of ‘cakeism’ i.e., the notion the UK could keep certain EU benefits or not suffer costs after Brexit. The analysis demonstrates how the assumptions behind cakeism originated after 1992 in policy circles associated with the Conservative Party. They argued that a free-trade alternative to the EU was easy to put in place by simply disaggregating preferred elements of the single market from supranationalism. A Westminster-centric perspective also meant these proto-Brexiters were unable to countenance any potential domestic disruption caused by leaving the EU. During May’s Brexit negotiations, European Research Group MPs resorted to cakeist arguments that reprised the same assumptions about international trade and the unitary nature of the UK state articulated well before 2016. Cakeist ideas helped scupper May’s customs plan and paved the way for Johnson’s free trade deal, thereby demonstrating the enduring influence of the early think-tank debate on leaving the EU.","PeriodicalId":51362,"journal":{"name":"Journal of European Public Policy","volume":"30 1","pages":"995 - 1012"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The origins of ‘cakeism’: the British think tank debate over repatriating sovereignty and its impact on the UK’s Brexit strategy\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Glencross\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13501763.2022.2072371\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article uncovers the origins of ‘cakeism’ i.e., the notion the UK could keep certain EU benefits or not suffer costs after Brexit. The analysis demonstrates how the assumptions behind cakeism originated after 1992 in policy circles associated with the Conservative Party. They argued that a free-trade alternative to the EU was easy to put in place by simply disaggregating preferred elements of the single market from supranationalism. A Westminster-centric perspective also meant these proto-Brexiters were unable to countenance any potential domestic disruption caused by leaving the EU. During May’s Brexit negotiations, European Research Group MPs resorted to cakeist arguments that reprised the same assumptions about international trade and the unitary nature of the UK state articulated well before 2016. Cakeist ideas helped scupper May’s customs plan and paved the way for Johnson’s free trade deal, thereby demonstrating the enduring influence of the early think-tank debate on leaving the EU.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51362,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of European Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"995 - 1012\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of European Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2022.2072371\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"Journal of European Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2022.2072371","RegionNum":1,"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: 5

摘要

摘要本文揭示了“蛋糕主义”的起源,即英国脱欧后可以保留某些欧盟利益或不承担成本。该分析表明,蛋糕主义背后的假设是如何在1992年后起源于与保守党有关的政策圈的。他们认为,通过简单地将单一市场的偏好元素与超民族主义相分离,很容易建立一个替代欧盟的自由贸易方案。以威斯敏斯特为中心的观点也意味着这些原脱欧派无法支持脱欧造成的任何潜在国内混乱。在5月份的脱欧谈判中,欧洲研究小组的议员们诉诸于结块主义的论点,重复了早在2016年之前就阐述的关于国际贸易和英国国家统一性质的相同假设。Cakeist的想法破坏了梅的海关计划,并为约翰逊的自由贸易协议铺平了道路,从而表明了早期智囊团关于脱欧的辩论的持久影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The origins of ‘cakeism’: the British think tank debate over repatriating sovereignty and its impact on the UK’s Brexit strategy
ABSTRACT This article uncovers the origins of ‘cakeism’ i.e., the notion the UK could keep certain EU benefits or not suffer costs after Brexit. The analysis demonstrates how the assumptions behind cakeism originated after 1992 in policy circles associated with the Conservative Party. They argued that a free-trade alternative to the EU was easy to put in place by simply disaggregating preferred elements of the single market from supranationalism. A Westminster-centric perspective also meant these proto-Brexiters were unable to countenance any potential domestic disruption caused by leaving the EU. During May’s Brexit negotiations, European Research Group MPs resorted to cakeist arguments that reprised the same assumptions about international trade and the unitary nature of the UK state articulated well before 2016. Cakeist ideas helped scupper May’s customs plan and paved the way for Johnson’s free trade deal, thereby demonstrating the enduring influence of the early think-tank debate on leaving the EU.
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
8.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
83
期刊介绍: The primary aim of the Journal of European Public Policy is to provide a comprehensive and definitive source of analytical, theoretical and methodological articles in the field of European public policy. Focusing on the dynamics of public policy in Europe, the journal encourages a wide range of social science approaches, both qualitative and quantitative. JEPP defines European public policy widely and welcomes innovative ideas and approaches. The main areas covered by the Journal are as follows: •Theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of public policy in Europe and elsewhere •National public policy developments and processes in Europe •Comparative studies of public policy within Europe
×
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