五个国家极右翼动员的制度和话语机会

IF 1.3 2区 社会学 Q3 SOCIOLOGY
Marco Giugni, R. Koopmans, F. Passy, P. Statham
{"title":"五个国家极右翼动员的制度和话语机会","authors":"Marco Giugni, R. Koopmans, F. Passy, P. Statham","doi":"10.17813/MAIQ.10.1.N40611874K23L1V7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Inspired by spatial theories of political behavior and by work on the impact of immigration on national identity, in this article we propose an explanation of the extreme right’s claim making based on the interplay of three factors: national models of citizenship, the dynamics of political alignments and party competition, and the strategic/organizational repertoires of the extreme right, in particular the electoral strength of extreme-right parties. Confronting a number of hypotheses derived from this theoretical framework with original data on the extreme right’s claim making in five European countries (the Netherlands, Britain, France, Germany, and Switzerland), we show how political-institutional and cultural-discursive opportunities account for differences in the extent, forms, and content of xenophobic and extreme-right claim making. Our study shows that national configurations of citizenship affect in significant ways the mobilization of the extreme right, both directly and indirectly. More precisely, our two-country comparison confirms the hypothesis that the claim making of the extreme right depends on a specific political opportunity structure formed by the combination of discursive opportunities deriving from the prevailing model of citizenship and by the political space made available by mainstream parties for far-right mobilization.","PeriodicalId":47309,"journal":{"name":"Mobilization","volume":"10 1","pages":"145-162"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2005-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.17813/MAIQ.10.1.N40611874K23L1V7","citationCount":"83","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Institutional and Discursive Opportunities for Extreme-Right Mobilization in Five Countries\",\"authors\":\"Marco Giugni, R. Koopmans, F. Passy, P. Statham\",\"doi\":\"10.17813/MAIQ.10.1.N40611874K23L1V7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Inspired by spatial theories of political behavior and by work on the impact of immigration on national identity, in this article we propose an explanation of the extreme right’s claim making based on the interplay of three factors: national models of citizenship, the dynamics of political alignments and party competition, and the strategic/organizational repertoires of the extreme right, in particular the electoral strength of extreme-right parties. Confronting a number of hypotheses derived from this theoretical framework with original data on the extreme right’s claim making in five European countries (the Netherlands, Britain, France, Germany, and Switzerland), we show how political-institutional and cultural-discursive opportunities account for differences in the extent, forms, and content of xenophobic and extreme-right claim making. Our study shows that national configurations of citizenship affect in significant ways the mobilization of the extreme right, both directly and indirectly. More precisely, our two-country comparison confirms the hypothesis that the claim making of the extreme right depends on a specific political opportunity structure formed by the combination of discursive opportunities deriving from the prevailing model of citizenship and by the political space made available by mainstream parties for far-right mobilization.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47309,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mobilization\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"145-162\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.17813/MAIQ.10.1.N40611874K23L1V7\",\"citationCount\":\"83\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mobilization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17813/MAIQ.10.1.N40611874K23L1V7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mobilization","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17813/MAIQ.10.1.N40611874K23L1V7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 83

摘要

受政治行为的空间理论和移民对国家认同的影响研究的启发,本文提出了一种基于三个因素相互作用的极右翼主张的解释:公民身份的国家模式、政治联盟和政党竞争的动态、以及极右翼的战略/组织技能,特别是极右翼政党的选举实力。面对从这一理论框架中衍生出来的一些假设,以及五个欧洲国家(荷兰、英国、法国、德国和瑞士)的极右翼主张的原始数据,我们展示了政治制度和文化话语机会如何解释仇外和极右翼主张的程度、形式和内容的差异。我们的研究表明,公民身份的国家配置在很大程度上直接或间接地影响着极右翼的动员。更准确地说,我们的两国比较证实了一个假设,即极右翼的主张取决于一种特定的政治机会结构,这种结构是由来自主流公民模式的话语机会和主流政党为极右翼动员提供的政治空间相结合形成的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Institutional and Discursive Opportunities for Extreme-Right Mobilization in Five Countries
Inspired by spatial theories of political behavior and by work on the impact of immigration on national identity, in this article we propose an explanation of the extreme right’s claim making based on the interplay of three factors: national models of citizenship, the dynamics of political alignments and party competition, and the strategic/organizational repertoires of the extreme right, in particular the electoral strength of extreme-right parties. Confronting a number of hypotheses derived from this theoretical framework with original data on the extreme right’s claim making in five European countries (the Netherlands, Britain, France, Germany, and Switzerland), we show how political-institutional and cultural-discursive opportunities account for differences in the extent, forms, and content of xenophobic and extreme-right claim making. Our study shows that national configurations of citizenship affect in significant ways the mobilization of the extreme right, both directly and indirectly. More precisely, our two-country comparison confirms the hypothesis that the claim making of the extreme right depends on a specific political opportunity structure formed by the combination of discursive opportunities deriving from the prevailing model of citizenship and by the political space made available by mainstream parties for far-right mobilization.
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
Mobilization
Mobilization SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Mobilization: An International Quarterly is the premier journal of research specializing in social movements, protests, insurgencies, revolutions, and other forms of contentious politics. Mobilization was first published in 1996 to fill the need for a scholarly review of research that focused exclusively with social movements, protest and collective action. Mobilization is fully peer-reviewed and widely indexed. A 2003 study, when Mobilization was published semiannually, showed that its citation index rate was 1.286, which placed it among the top ten sociology journals. Today, Mobilization is published four times a year, in March, June, September, and December. The editorial board is composed of thirty internationally recognized scholars from political science, sociology and social psychology. The goal of Mobilization is to provide a forum for global, scholarly dialogue. It is currently distributed to the top international research libraries and read by the most engaged scholars in the field. We hope that through its wide distribution, different research strategies and theoretical/conceptual approaches will be shared among the global community of social movement scholars, encouraging a collaborative process that will further the development of a cumulative social science.
×
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