Suchergebnisse

Formålet med denne boken er å analysere nyere norsk politisk historie fra et valg-. og velgerperspektiv. Bokens to første deler tar for seg sentrale utviklingstrekk hos velgere og politiske institusjoner i Norge siden 1945, mens bokens tredje del beskriver noen utvalgte hendelser som har formet den politiske utviklingen. Del 1 kaster lys over norsk politisk historie fra et velgerperspektiv. Kapitlene tar for seg sentrale utviklingstrekk hos norske velgere langs seks dimensjoner: velgeres dagsorden, politiske holdninger, sosiale bakgrunn, tilknytning til partiene, valgdeltakelse og tillit til det politiske systemet. Del 2 tar for seg de politiske institusjonene som velgerne bemyndiger: Stortinget, regjeringen og partiene; samt institusjonene som utgjør rammen som de demokratiske valgene skjer innenfor: valgordningen og mediene. De to første delene av boken er forfattet av noen av de fremste norske forskerne på hvert av disse områdene. I del 3 fortelles ulike deler av norsk etterkrigshistorie av politikere som selv var en del av historien. Kapitlene er skrevet av Kjell Magne Bondevik, Kristin Clemet, Anne Enger, Carl I. Hagen, Kristin Halvorsen, Rasmus Hansson og Tove Strand. Hvert av bidragene kaster nytt lys over og gir et personlig perspektiv på norsk politisk historie

Abstract: 'Have we ever been European?' Everyday reflections from Russia on the gender and sexuality 'culture wars'Drawing on long-term ethnographic fieldwork in European Russia, Jeremy Morris examines everyday attitudes to homosexuality in Russia, and the linkage to an understanding of terpimost (or 'tolerantnost') – 'tolerance' – as an insincere 'Euro-American' attitude. In this companion-piece to work focusing on male homophobia and conservative attitudes to childrearing (Morris & Garibyan, 2021), the focus is on how women describe their experience of same-sex relations and their heteronormative attitudes towards what they understand as 'non-normative' sexuality. Whereas the influence of Russia's state-led policy of conservatism is reflected in everyday talk – especially in relation to the idea that Euro-American values of permissiveness and 'tolerance' are misplaced – the findings reveal more nuanced ideas 'from below' about cultural differences between Russia and the putatively 'other' Europe. The article further notes the volatility and variance in survey methods that seek to measure 'intolerance' and cultural difference. They can exacerbate what, as Katherina Wiedlack and others have pointed out, is a colonial and orientalizing discourse that features an 'enlightened' West and a 'passive, backward' East. This article shows how 'intolerance' and acceptance of non-normative sexuality in Russia do not differ greatly from the situation in comparable societies of the global North.

Abstract: EU Actorness in the South Caucasus: Possibilities and LimitationsDespite significant institutional changes and refinements since its creation in 2004, the ENP (European Neighborhood Policy) remains a major tool available to the EU for providing incentives for reform and stability in non-member states through the diffusion of its norms and rules. Earlier studies, drawing on the Europeanization conceptual framework, have been mostly concerned about how and by which mechanisms compliance with EU rules takes place, rather than focusing on whether and to what extent it occurs. By contrast, this article assesses the actorness of the EU in three countries of the South Caucasus (Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan), viewing actorness as composed of three dimensions – capability, opportunity, and presence – enabling and constraining the aspirations of the EU to be an international actor in the South Caucasus.

The amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation adoped after a 2020 referendum included a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. This is a recent manifestation of the turn to 'traditional values' in Russian politics and society, the best-known expression of which is the 2013 ban on 'propaganda for non-traditional sexual orientation'. This development cannot be understood as solely reflecting 'traditional' attitudes of the Russian population, nor as a backlash against LGBTQ activism. The turn to 'traditional values' must be considered in the context of a global pattern of increased pro-family mobilization, which opposes LGBTQ rights, feminism and the alleged undermining of gender as biologically determined and strictly binary – described by researchers as 'anti-gender mobilization'. Traditionalist politics in Russia should be analysed in a transnational and international perspective, but conservative mobilization is not a monolithic phenomenon. Using the concept of 'discourse coalition' developed by Maarten Hajer, I show how the identification of shared storylines enables a range of actors to act in similar ways, sometimes coordinating their actions, despite ideological, religious or strategic disagreements, on the domestic as well as the global arena.

Abstract in English"That kind of mother": Stigmatisation by the Russian child protection servicesHow does stigma influence the extent to which the child protection services in Russia undertake preventative work with vulnerable families in order to avoid taking the child out the family? Based on an analysis of previous research and my own fieldwork from St. Petersburg and Moscow, I note the gap between expectations towards vulnerable families, and their actual living conditions and potential for meeting these expectations. This gap results in a stigmatising categorisation of families who find themselves marginalised as neblagopolutsjnye – socially disadvantaged. Although Russia's officially 'family-oriented' child protection system is expected to base its work on objective methods, stigmatisation influences the decisions of social workers, making the system risk-oriented in practice. This is due to little or inadequate specialised education among social workers, resulting in the strong presence of the human factor: subjective, non-professional evaluations are made. With scant intersectional cooperation among state actors, there is little space to counteract or modify subjective evaluations. Thus, stigmatisation serves to limit the extent to which vulnerable families in Russia receive help, thus creating and upholding 'social orphanhood'.