Suchergebnisse

A growing literature demonstrates that ideology shapes international relations. But just how does ideology have its effect? This article develops an integrated model of mediators and moderators of the impact of ideology on foreign policy. Specifically, it hypothesizes that ideologically motivated perceptions of threat and national power sequentially mediate the impact of individual-level ideologies on foreign policy preferences, and that in/out-group social categorization processes moderate the relationship. We interrogate these propositions with three plausibility probe case studies. The conclusion discusses which aspects of the model were best supported by the plausibility probes—and suggests hypotheses for future causal testing.

The deterioration of Sino–South Korean relations following the attacks on the Cheonan and on Yonpyong Island in 2010 has again raised the question of Chinese intentions in the Korean peninsula. In this article, I explore Chinese netizen views of the two Koreas. Qualitative and quantitative evidence (in the form of a large-scale national Internet survey) provide convergent evidence that while Chinese netizens feel coolly toward both Koreas, they think and feel about them in very different ways. Chinese netizens appear to be profoundly disillusioned with a North Korea that refuses to adopt Chinese-style "reform and opening," which only reminds them of their poor and authoritarian past. However, recent high-profile historical and cultural disputes appear to have led to widespread Chinese dismay and even anger toward South Korea as well, which is perceived to be poaching on China's proud cultural heritage. These attitudes toward Korea are reflective of evolving Chinese understandings of what it means to be Chinese in the twenty-first century.

The recent upsurge of anti-Japanese sentiment in China should not be reduced to elite instrumentality, the Chinese Communist Party merely fomenting nationalism to legitimize its rule. Anti-Japanese sentiment in China today has deeper popular roots in evolving narratives about China's national past & in debates over the very meaning of being "Chinese" at the dawn of the 21st century. These popular sentiments, furthermore, are increasingly constraining China's elite as they seek to make China's Japan policy. Adapted from the source document.

Introduction: Ideology and American foreign policy -- I. Concepts -- Liberals, conservatives, and foreign affairs -- Beyond red and blue: four dimensions of American ideology -- The moral foundations of ideology and international attitudes -- The foreign policy orientations of liberals and conservatives: internationalism, realism/idealism, and nationalism -- Partisan elites and global attitudes: ideology in social context -- II. Cases -- Latin America: liberal and conservative moralities of immigration and foreign aid -- Europe: socialist France, Mother England, Brother Germany, and the E.U. antichrist -- The Middle East: Christian Zionism, the Israel lobby, and the Holy Land -- East Asia: Red China, free Asia, and the Yellow Peril -- International organizations and treaties: blue helmets, black helicopters, and satanic serpents -- Conclusion: Ideology -- why politics does not end at water's edge.

ObjectiveThis study revisits the idea that the American public is moderate or nonideological. In this longstanding view, only informed elites maintain consistent ideologies that constrain their political attitudes and behaviors; the mass public is driven instead by partisan identities that they are socialized into. The study explores whether the public's liberal‐to‐conservative self‐placement is temporally stable, and whether it is predictive of political attitudes when pit against partisanship.MethodsThe study examines data from the 2010 American National Election Survey and the 2008–2012 General Social Survey longitudinal panel.ResultsThe American public today maintains coherent and consistent ideologies that systematically divide them in their sociopolitical attitudes and policy preferences.ConclusionWhile partisanship is a powerful top‐down driver of the American public's attitudes and policy preferences toward overtly partisan issues and behaviors like Obamacare and voting, on broader sociopolitical issues like abortion, ideology is a powerful bottom‐up driver of attitudes.