Suchergebnisse

Dansk Folkeparti har i større udstrækning end andre partier anvendt pressemeddelelser som led i deres kommunikation. Samtidig har deres pressemeddelelser været af en anden karakter end de øvrige partiers. Med udgangspunkt i George Lakoffs teori om moralpolitik og med anvendelse af en Toulmin-inspireret argumentationsanalyse analyseres partiets pressemeddelelser fra en tilfældigt valgt måned i 2010. Analysen viser, at pressemeddelelserne udtrykker meget tydelige positioner med baggrund i moralske standpunkter. Politiske modsætninger behandles som moralske, men der er ikke tale om, at man på populistisk vis vender kappen efter vinden. Tværtimod er der tale om et særdeles homogent syn på politik som moral. På den baggrund diskuteres Lees-Marshments skelnen mellem markeds-, salgs- og produktorienterede partier, og konklusionen er, at man kan se Dansk Folkeparti som et salgsorienteret parti, som anvender pressemeddelelserne som et (billigt) middel for at nå ud til vælgerne. ; Dansk Folkeparti (the Danish People's Party) uses press releases to a much larger extent than any other Danish party. But they also use them in a different way. Through an analysis of press releases from a randomly chosen month in 2010, this article discusses the party's use of press releases not only as a source of information about the party's political initiatives but as a way of doing what George Lakoff has called Moral Politics. The use of press releases is then discussed in relation to the distinction presented by Lees-Marshement between product oriented, sales oriented and market oriented parties. The conclusion is that Dansk Folkeparti use the press releases as a part of their political marketing, but that the party due to its moral politics has to be classified as a sales oriented party.

Denne artikel foretager en diskursanalyse af en række centrale tekster fra partierne Nye Borgerlige og Dansk Folkeparti med fokus på disses brug af den populistiske figur hjertelandet: Et narrativ om det altid allerede tabte eller truede harmoniske fællesskab, der skal forsvares imod folkets fjender. Det konkluder-es, at idéen om hjertelandet er stærkt til stede i partiernes respektive diskurser, og at det i Nye Borgerliges diskurs i lige høj grad trues af de fremmede og eliten, mens det i Dansk Folkepartis diskurs mest trues af de fremmede, og antagonismen til eliten er nedtonet. ; This paper analyzes a series of central texts from the Danish parties The New Right and the Danish People's Party with emphasis on their use of the populist figure of the heartland: A narrative about the always already lost or threatened harmonic community that needs to be protected against enemies of the people. The paper concludes that the idea of the heartland is strongly present in the discourses of both parties, and that in The New Right's discourse the heartland is equally threated by foreigners and the elite, while in the discourse of the Danish People's Party it is mostly threatened by immigrants whereas the antagonism to the elite is downplayed.

eGovernment and autoritative public data in Denmark are still mainly focused on the landside of Danmark. But the need of eloborating the coordinating effort of administration at sea is recognised and the development of maritime eGovernment is happening within the next years. This paper discusses the data involved in this administration and focuses on the need for understanding the function and hence value of data. Some maritime data are dealing with accurate placements of objects, and as a tricky part some are dealing with floating placement. Other data are handling non-visible areas in terms of zoning, e.g. planning and interest areas and finally some data are representation of legislation, whether it is rights or restrictions. These different data are not always usable in the same manner. This paper investigates the correlation between spatial data and legislation. Experience from many years of land administration can be used as part of this discussion as well as the conclusions from this paper can be discussion as input to the ongoing development on land.

eGovernment and autoritative public data in Denmark are still mainly focused on the landside of Danmark. But the need of eloborating the coordinating effort of administration at sea is recognised and the development of maritime eGovernment is happening within the next years. This paper discusses the data involved in this administration and focuses on the need for understanding the function and hence value of data. Some maritime data are dealing with accurate placements of objects, and as a tricky part some are dealing with floating placement. Other data are handling non-visible areas in terms of zoning, e.g. planning and interest areas and finally some data are representation of legislation, whether it is rights or restrictions. These different data are not always usable in the same manner. This paper investigates the correlation between spatial data and legislation. Experience from many years of land administration can be used as part of this discussion as well as the conclusions from this paper can be discussion as input to the ongoing development on land.

BILATERAL RELATIONS ON THE MEND: Transforming the Mosaic of Opportunities into Policies of Stability and Reconciliation between Afghanistan & PakistanBilateral reconciliation and trust building between Afghanistan and Pakistan require determined individuals who will prioritize identification of workable solutions to regional instability.This report summarizes recommendations on how to approach such solutions. The recommendations emerged during two rounds of track-II dialogue – one in Kabul in May, and one in Islamabad in September, 2017 - between influential individuals from Afghanistan and Pakistan, organized by the Royal Danish Defence College (RDDC) and the Regional Peace Institute (RPI).In addition to discussing a host of other issues, the two rounds of the conference generated ideas and innovative suggestions on how to deal with peace negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban, the future of Western engagement in Afghanistan, ways to resolve the Afghan refugee crisis and increasing the volume of trade between Pakistan and Afghanistan.The constructive and innovative development of recommendations during both rounds went beyond initial expectations in terms of volume and quality. However, generating innovative policy recommendations, by itself, is insufficient without their effective implementation.This report can be viewed as a mosaic of ideas and opportunities to enter a path of reconciliation and stability. If implemented, these ideas and recommendations can lead to addressing the outstanding issues between Afghanistan & Pakistan.By presenting this mosaic of progress, this report, and the authors behind it aspire to contribute in a meaningful manner to mending the existing relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Doomsdays preachers suggested that Brexit and Trump would mean the end of the liberal world order as we know it and thus the end of the EU. The research presented here suggests the opposite. Not only have Europeans turned their back to populism by voting yes to reforms and pro-EU-parties and governments in different member states over the past months, but Brexit and Trump also seems to have given a complete new momentum to the European project. This article demonstrates why Brexit cannot be generalized to the rest of the continent but is the result of a complicated and special British conception of what it means to be a sovereign state in the 21st century. Moreover and paradoxically, surveys show that the greatest fear among Europeans today is not more European integration but right wing populism and European Disunion.

This study takes a novel approach to the study of threatening communications by arguing that they can be characterized as a genre – a genre that generally carries strong connotations of intimidation, fear, aggression, power, and coercion. We combine the theoretical framework of Rhetorical Genre Studies (RGS) with results from theoretical and empirical analyses of threats to arrive at a more comprehensive perspective of threats. Since threats do not form part of any regular curriculum of genres, we designed a survey to test how recognizable they are. While scholars on threats describe threatening communications as remarkably varied in form and contextual features, the majority of our respondents categorized test items as threats without prompts of any kind, indicating that threats are a recognizable genre. We propose that threatening communications belong to a wider category of illicit genres: i.e. genres that generally disrupt and upset society and commonly affect their targets negatively. The uptakes of illicit genres are very different from those of other genres, as the users of the genres often actively avoid naming them, making uptake communities significant shapers of illicit genres. The present study contributes to research on threatening communications, since genre theory sheds light on important situational factors affecting the interpretation of a text as a threat – this is a particularly contentious question when it comes to threats that are indirectly phrased. The study also contributes to genre theory by pointing to new territory for genre scholars to examine, namely illicit genres. Studies of illicit genres also have wider, societal benefits as they shed light on different kinds of problematic rhetorical behavior that are generally considered destructive or even dangerous. ; Denne artikel anlægger et nyt perspektiv på studiet af sproglige trusler ved at argumentere for at de kan karakteriseres som en genre – en genre der generelt giver stærke konnotationer til intimidering, frygt, aggression, magt og tvang. Vi kombinerer Retoriske Genrestudiers (RGS) teoretiske ramme med resultater fra teoretiske og empiriske analyser af trusler for at nå frem til en mere nuanceret og fyldestgørende forståelse af trusler. Sproglige trusler er som udgangspunkt ikke at finde i gængse oversigter over genrer, og man lærer heller ikke om dem i skolen. Derfor designede vi et spørgeskema der skulle teste hvor genkendelige trusler egentlig er. Selvom trusselsforskere rapporterer at trusler har en bemærkelsesværdig variation i deres formmæssige og kontekstuelle træk, kategoriserede størstedelen af vores respondenter testemnerne som trusler, på trods af at de ikke fik præsenteret nogen tekstuel, kontekstuel eller layoutmæssig ramme for fortolkningen. Dette indikerer at truslen er en genkendelig genre. Vi argumenterer for at truslen hører under en bredere kategori af illegitime genrer: genrer der generelt set har skadelige eller ubehagelige konsekvenser for samfundet, og som almindeligvis påvirker deres ofre negativt. Den måde illegitime genrer tages op på i samfundet, deres uptake, adskiller sig meget fra hvordan andre genrer tages op. De der benytter illegitime genrer, undgår ofte aktivt at navn-give dem, hvilket indebærer at de grupper der reagerer på illegitime genrer, på ganske betydelig vis er med til at definere dem. Dette studie bidrager til forskning i sproglige trusler, idet genreteori kaster lys over vigtige situationelle faktorer der påvirker fortolkningen af en tekst som en trussel – dette er et særligt omstridt spørgsmål i forhold til trusler der er indirekte formuleret. Studiet bidrager også til genreteori ved at pege på et nyt område genreforskere kan undersøge, nemlig illegitime genrer. Undersøgelser af illegitime genrer har også bredere samfundsmæssig relevans da de belyser forskellige slags problematisk, retorisk opførsel der kan have destruktive konsekvenser for det enkelte menneske og for den demokratiske samfundsorden bredt set. ; Denne artikel anlægger et nyt perspektiv på studiet af sproglige trusler ved at argumentere for at de kan karakteriseres som en genre – en genre der generelt giver stærke konnotationer til intimidering, frygt, aggression, magt og tvang. Vi kombinerer Retoriske Genrestudiers (RGS) teoretiske ramme med resultater fra teoretiske og empiriske analyser af trusler for at nå frem til en mere nuanceret og fyldestgørende forståelse af trusler. Sproglige trusler er som udgangspunkt ikke at finde i gængse oversigter over genrer, og man lærer heller ikke om dem i skolen. Derfor designede vi et spørgeskema der skulle teste hvor genkendelige trusler egentlig er. Selvom trusselsforskere rapporterer at trusler har en bemærkelsesværdig variation i deres formmæssige og kontekstuelle træk, kategoriserede størstedelen af vores respondenter testemnerne som trusler, på trods af at de ikke fik præsenteret nogen tekstuel, kontekstuel eller layoutmæssig ramme for fortolkningen. Dette indikerer at truslen er en genkendelig genre. Vi argumenterer for at truslen hører under en bredere kategori af illegitime genrer: genrer der generelt set har skadelige eller ubehagelige konsekvenser for samfundet, og som almindeligvis påvirker deres ofre negativt. Den måde illegitime genrer tages op på i samfundet, deres uptake, adskiller sig meget fra hvordan andre genrer tages op. De der benytter illegitime genrer, undgår ofte aktivt at navn-give dem, hvilket indebærer at de grupper der reagerer på illegitime genrer, på ganske betydelig vis er med til at definere dem. Dette studie bidrager til forskning i sproglige trusler, idet genreteori kaster lys over vigtige situationelle faktorer der påvirker fortolkningen af en tekst som en trussel – dette er et særligt omstridt spørgsmål i forhold til trusler der er indirekte formuleret. Studiet bidrager også til genreteori ved at pege på et nyt område genreforskere kan undersøge, nemlig illegitime genrer. Undersøgelser af illegitime genrer har også bredere samfundsmæssig relevans da de belyser forskellige slags problematisk, retorisk opførsel der kan have destruktive konsekvenser for det enkelte menneske og for den demokratiske samfundsorden bredt set.

Recent trends towards openness and technical connectivity have offered the ability to drive massive social and economic change; however they demand a redefinition of relationships. We have observed a move from a polarized world where companies operate in economic markets while governments drive social progress, to an interconnected, networked world of shared resources and co-creation. One of the trends driving this change is open government data. This paper presents a framework of four value generating mechanisms from use of OGD. The framework makes it easier to compare and communicate different pathways to value generation, while highlighting the current tensions between the private/public and economic/social domains. Our proposition is that these tensions bring about possibilites for synergies and value enhancement.

Recent trends towards openness and technical connectivity have offered the ability to drive massive social and economic change; however they demand a redefinition of relationships. We have observed a move from a polarized world where companies operate in economic markets while governments drive social progress, to an interconnected, networked world of shared resources and co-creation. One of the trends driving this change is open government data. This paper presents a framework of four value generating mechanisms from use of OGD. The framework makes it easier to compare and communicate different pathways to value generation, while highlighting the current tensions between the private/public and economic/social domains. Our proposition is that these tensions bring about possibilites for synergies and value enhancement.

This report is based on the seminar: "Mutual Trust Building and Reconciliation in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Beyond" organized by the Royal Danish Defence College in Copenhagen, October 2016. The report includes perspectives by the speakers of the seminar and their attribution to understand the external and internal factors affecting the security situation, thereby attempting to explain the current low level of trust between Afghanistan and Pakistan. All these perspectives present an intriguing puzzle that seeks to identify present challenges and opportunities on the table for both states. By identifying areas of common ground or perceived common obstacles, the report addresses initiatives and processes that could be applied in igniting paths of reconciliation between Afghanistan and Pakistan. ; This report is based on the seminar: "Mutual Trust Building and Reconciliation in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Beyond" organized by the Royal Danish Defence College in Copenhagen, October 2016. The report includes perspectives by the speakers of the seminar and their attribution to understand the external and internal factors affecting the security situation, thereby attempting to explain the current low level of trust between Afghanistan and Pakistan. All these perspectives present an intriguing puzzle that seeks to identify present challenges and opportunities on the table for both states. By identifying areas of common ground or perceived common obstacles, the report addresses initiatives and processes that could be applied in igniting paths of reconciliation between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In this chapter we outline the Danish and Scandinavian experiences with coalition governments and coalition governance. We do so by first briefly describing the historical path that has led to the political system we see working today in these countries. Then we tell about the political culture and institutional factors that lead to coalition governments. In the third section, we look at the nature of political agreements. We discuss the preconditions for coalition governments or coalition governance and its pros and cons. We focus on the trade-offs between including different interests into legislative coalitions and the possible lack of clarity of responsibility or of party identity that this inclusion entails. ; In this chapter we outline the Danish and Scandinavian experiences with coalition governments and coalition governance. We do so by first briefly describing the historical path that has led to the political system we see working today in these countries. Then we tell about the political culture and institutional factors that lead to coalition governments. In the third section, we look at the nature of political agreements. We discuss the preconditions for coalition governments or coalition governance and its pros and cons. We focus on the trade-offs between including different interests into legislative coalitions and the possible lack of clarity of responsibility or of party identity that this inclusion entails.

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1405.

ParlaMint 2.1 is a multilingual set of 17 comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after November 1st 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1431.

"10 years after NATO Membership. An Anniversary in the Shadow of a Crisis", indeholder artikler fra politiske aktører, diplomater og forskere, der alle bidrog til til konferencen af samme navn, hvor den 10-året for baltisk medlemskab af NATO var omdrejningspunktet. Udover den danske forsvarsminister, er den estiske og litauiske forsvarsminister og NATO's vicegeneralsekretær blandt bidragyderne. Konferencens formål var at fejre, inddrage og diskutere 10 års forsvarspolitisk NATO-samarbejde i Østersøområdet. Den internationale udvikling i Europa betød at konferencens dagsorden i stedet for kom til at stå i skyggen af krisen i Ukraine, og det anspændte europæiske forhold til Rusland. Dette afspejledes ikke kun på selve konferencen, men har også sat et dybt fodaftryk på publikationen, der dels belyser det forsvarspolitiske samarbejde mellem Danmark og de baltiske stater, dels tegner et billede af hvordan den russiske aggression på Krimhalvøen blev italesat af de repræsenterede landes Forsvarsministre samt fra hovedkvarteret i NATO. Konferencen blev afholdt tidligere i år i København, og var et resultat af et tæt samarbejde mellem Forsvarsakademiet, Forsvarsministeriet og ambassadørerne for Estland, Letland og Litauen i Danmark. ; Since the recognition of their independence in 1921, the three Baltic States Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have enjoyed a special status in Danish foreign policy that has continued into present-day times. Being one of the few countries that never officially recognized the Soviet annexation in 1940, Denmark became an early advocate in relation to Baltic membership of NATO in the wake of the Cold War. Defence cooperation, such as the joint contribution to the missions in the Balkans in the early 1990s, as well as the present air policing mission, first initiated in 2004, has been an important part of the political relationship. A conference celebrating and evaluating the first ten years of NATO membership was quite naturally a high-level event to be placed in Copenhagen. As progress with planning the conference proceeded, the international security community suddenly faced a crisis in Crimea, when separatists, with Russian support, gradually took control of the Crimean Peninsula. In only 24 days, what had initially been demonstrations and protests evolved into a complete Russian annexation, through a very dubious local democratic election, where independence from Ukraine, as well as affi liation to Russia, was declared with 96% of voters in favor of joining Russia. These events naturally had a massive impact on this conference, which resulted in an anniversary in the shadow of a crisis. This turn of events forced a new discussion upon the member states of NATO: What is the main purpose of the Alliance? This question became a focal point for the conference, as well as the articles presented here.

This brief synthesises the IECEU project's most essential findings on the effectiveness of European Union (EU) missions in four Africa countries: Libya, South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the Central African Republic (CAR). It describes the main elements and impact of the EU missions in these countries, identifies key strategic and operational shortfalls and offers recommendations on how the EU can improve its effectiveness in future conflict prevention and crisis management missions. The EU missions investigated differ in scale, length, objective, budget, priority and context. However, the EU missions presented in this brief share the main characteristic that they have all been deployed under the union's Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP)2 with the explicit intent of improving the overall security situation and addressing conflicts in Africa. This brief will start by providing a short overview of each case, describing the conflict(s), security situation, mission objectives and obstacles. In this way, it compares the overall effectiveness of EU operational conflict prevention across the four African countries and discusses what lessons can be learned from them. The brief does not include all factors needed to answer thisquestion, but highlights the IECEU project's most significant findings in these cases.