Fear is fast becoming - if it has not already become - a central object of analysis for understanding today's politics. As fear is, supposedly, increasingly saturating our everyday lives, politicians and political strategists of all ideological stripes are rediscovering that fear is a handy tool in influencing voters. Our argument, however, is that rather than simply seeing the most recent exercise of a "politics of fear," our contemporary moment is distinguished by the emergence of "fear as politics". The paper argues that rather than fear acting as an expedient but ad hoc political tool, it has become the de facto essence of politics. Fear now provides the impetus and reason for politics, substituting other sources of legitimation of power such as democracy, justice, and the common good. The argument of the authors is being developed in a three-step process. Firstly - the authors argue - fear has become a projection of the political will aiming at changing existing order - that is to say that fear becomes the main reason and main motive for institutional / social change domestically and internationally. Secondly, fear cements power relations by creating a new "political dogma", a supra-ideology of sorts that being trans-ideological in spectrum (that is to say, "fear" becomes enclosed in every current ideology from populism to neo-conservatism), and shapes and restricts social imagination and political action. Thirdly - authors continue - fear provides alternative legitimization of state authority and action (that is to say that fear provides justification and sense of purpose for those in power). The authors have provided a set of interlocked ideas to show that fear can be rationalized, operationalized, that it is imbedded into diversified social strata, included into mainstream politics, politically utilized and form a bedrock of the new regnum (with a rationality based on fear) by whoever play politics.
In Politics, one week can be a long time. The last couple of weeks in the Democratic Primary have dramatically changed the political landscape. Obama's "golden boy"image has suffered major setbacks and those asking for Hillary to quit now appear to have discovered a new "glow" surrounding her political persona.First there was that San Francisco speech in which Obama, with anthropological detachment, observed that he perfectly understood why people in mid-town America were "bitter" as their jobs "were being exported overseas" and as a consequence, were "clinging to their religion and their guns." This, together with other silly anecdotes during his campaign in Pennsylvania which purportedly showed a lack of connection with the common man (including his bad bowling scores, his discomfort in sitting around in a bar and sharing a beer with the locals, and his preference for arugula salad!), won him the label of elitist and out of touch with blue collar workers. These missteps were also well-exploited by Hillary Clinton, who in contrast with Obama, during the same campaigning route, portrayed herself as a "regular working gal", conquered the white blue-collar vote and did much better than expected in the wealthy Philadelphia suburbs. Thus, she won handily in Pennsylvania, and was able to extend the momentum gained in Ohio and Texas. Although it appears as a mathematical certainty that Obama will win the delegate count, she is still ahead in superdelegates, but, more importantly, Obama seems to be losing ground fast. If she wins Indiana and Obama gets North Carolina this coming Tuesday, the agony goes on.Bill Clinton is already talking about the popular vote (which Hillary is winning clearly if Florida votes count). That decision will most likely be made at the National Convention in August, if by then there is no declared winner.In the meantime, Obama has had to deal with the "Reverend problem", as Rev. Jeremiah Wright continued to damage his national image. When Barack denounced his anti-America sermons and declarations (the latest one being a claim that the US government had "invented the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color"), Wright replied that "he was a politician, and that is what politicians do," thus aiming at debunking the myth that Obama is a new type of leader, a Washington outsider. This led to Michelle Obama's appearances in CNN and NBC to try to damage control or, as she put it, to "define ourselves and not let other people define us." Her strong, intelligent and straightforward demeanor may have partially succeeded in restoring his image as a leader who is in it not for power but because he sincerely believes he can change the country; while she her certainty might have reassured followers, the Jeremiah Wright story will not go away so easily. How much this has hurt Obama's chances in the Primary still remains to be seen, but, more importantly, it may have inflicted a deadly wound to his national chances at the Presidency.Politics is a complex phenomenon and public opinion is fickle. Voters have little time to follow the vicissitudes of a campaign, to understand the nuances of ideas and policies, to make well-informed decisions on which candidate will better represent them. In fact, that is the main value of political parties: to help people make sense of politics. Their role is to offer clear and consistent policy positions so voters can make up their minds on which party better represents their values, needs and demands, to aggregate the vote and articulate voters interests. But they also must appeal to deeper feelings and emotions, and generate symbols of identification and allegiance, in order to mobilize people to participate.Several new phenomena are at play in this election and political strategists are bewildered by them. The first is the premise that we are beyond partisan politics and ideologies. This is Barack Obama's claim, that his style of "new politics" transcends ideological barriers and crosses over political parties. That there are no more "red states" and "blue states", just people with similar problems. That he can appeal to people everywhere and from all political convictions by focusing on their individual values, needs and demands. That the old divides, namely, Market versus State, Private versus Public, Rich versus Poor, White versus Black, don't apply anymore. He posits that those frameworks are the wrong questions to ask, he talks about the new politics of unity, and he reassures them that he will rule for all. And his historical example is Ronald Reagan, who won over to his side the "Reagan Democrats". Regardless of the fact that this is the wrong analogy (that could be the subject of a different article), the main problem is that perhaps at this point in time, post-ideological politics may not be good politics, and will not win the election. He concedes important ideological points that should instead be argued. This is what has given Hillary the momentum: she went back to basics, and is speaking to each group directly, stating her "bread and butter policies first" positions in clear, pragmatic terms. Her upbeat, clear-eyed mood is more appealing to many than his "egg-head", post-modern intellectual analysis. That is why he has the PhDs and she has the blue collar vote.The next problem that bemuses political thinkers is the fact that, at a time when Bush's approval ratings are the lowest in the history of Gallup (27% on job performance, 21% on the economy), John Mc Cain continues to run very close to his Democratic rivals (Obama leads him 46% to 43% and Clinton 45% to 44%). When voters are asked which party they would prefer to win the election, over 44 per cent say Democratic. Of Independents (one third of the electorate, which will have the decisive vote) two-to-one prefer Democrats. So why is John Mc Cain still doing so well? The answer can be found is his likability and his proven independence from the party in several instances during his Senate career. In an extremely skillful slalom motion, he has been able to first win back the conservative majority of the Republican party by supporting the troop surge in Iraq and gaining a bland Bush endorsement (no easy feat given his positions on immigration, campaign-finance reform and his criticism of the way the war in Iraq was executed, and then succeeded in moving away from Bush as fast as possible, visiting New Orleans and portraying himself as a caring protector of the poor.Although voters disagree with him on main issues, such as staying in Iraq for as long as it takes, they trust him, his sincerity, his patriotism and his values. His age does not appear to be a problem. But this dichotomy between lack of support for the party and favorable ratings for the candidate could be interpreted as another indication that parties are in demise. But the paradox here is that this decline in party allegiance is not for the post-modern reasons we have pointed out above (demise of ideologies of Left and Right, emergence of a range of post-material political issues such as the environment, consumer rights, and lifestyle choices). Instead, here we are confronted with an older type of politics, one that precededideologies, namely a more personalistic style of politics, based on primordial feelings about leaders who embody the Rousseauan will of the people. This is much more likely to be found in European "continental" and Latin American political cultures than in the Anglo-Saxon ones, where modern mass based representative parties were invented.If modern democracy in inconceivable without political parties, as Shattschneider and Schumpeter concluded, will charisma alone be enough to carry representative government forward? And, if the Primary goes his way, will the charisma of a Washington outsider and political dreamer trump the one of a down to earth Senator of Arizona? Will the issue of race play a role in the national election? Faced with the choice of a black candidate with admirable academic credentials but unproven political record running for the favorite party, and a white patriot representing a highly discredited party, who will Americans vote for? Political analysts and historians will have to wait at least until this November to sort all this out. Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science and Geography Director, ODU Model United Nations Program Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia
En este artículo analizo seis ejemplos distintos por épocas y procedencia sociocultural de mezclas entre la publicidad y la política. Tres casos en los que tres sujetos políticos (Zapatero, ABC, Partido Comunista Italiano) emplean la publicidad en sus discursos políticos para alcanzar sus fines socio-discursivos, y tres casos en los que tres sujetos comerciales (Quilmes, Axe, M&M's) emplean la política en sus discursos publicitarios para alcanzar sus fines socio-discursivos. Mediante el análisis de estos seis casos pretendo demostrar que, aunque tengan lugar «préstamos cruzados» entre estos dos dominios semióticos y sociales, la relación entre la política y la publicidad está lejos de ser simétrica, siendo el publicitario un discurso totalizante, que fagocita el discurso político, como muchos otros, banalizándolo. ; In this paper I will analyze six cases of mix between politics and advertising. In the first three examples three political subjects (Zapatero, ABC, Partido Comunista Italiano) employs advertising in their political discourse in order to achieve their social and discursive ends. In the last three examples, three commercial subjects (Quilmes, Axe, M&M's) employs politics in their commercial discourse in order to achieve their social and discursive ends. Through the analysis of these six cases, I will show that, even if reciprocal borrowings exist between these two semiotic and social domains, the relation between Politics and Advertising is not symmetrical. Actually the advertising discourse phagocytes political discourse (as many other ones), banalizing it.
Politics constitutes a central issue of Spinoza's philosophy to such extentthat his real philosophy is claimed to be his metaphysics. In this paper, our purposeis developing a presentation on his main political approach, which is a kind ofsynthesis of his political thinking, focusing on his audacious interpretation ofdemocracy as a legitimate and possible government for multitude. ; La política constituye un tema central en la filosofía de Spinoza, alpunto que se ha llegado a sostener que su verdadera política es su metafísica.Nuestro propósito en este escrito es desarrollar una exposición comentada de susprincipales planteamientos políticos, una especie de síntesis de su ideario político,enfatizando su audaz interpretación de la democracia como gobierno legítimo yposible de la multitud.
This is our second issue dedicated to the topic "Art and Politics" and it would be worth asking ourselves Why two numbers on a subject that is on everyone's lips? -Academically it is treated daily and appears recurrently in newspapers, magazines and newscasts. The truth is that art generates needs, shapes communities and societies, shapes behaviors, gives status, constitutes identity and even highlights virtues and could propitiate that some truths not so real in the collective imagination, are transformed into inventions or chimeras. Also, it is true that the influence of the mass media is present in the taste shown by communities for art and artists. Today for example: the artist, the title of the work and the justification or support that is made of it, can be more important than the work. If we add to this what is in the offices, it is where mass media decide on what art to promote and promote and what works to ignore or ignore, we would have to affirm that in the contemporaneity the link between art and politics it goes beyond a formal relationship and becomes a form of power. ; Este es nuestro segundo número dedicado al tema "Arte y Política" y valdría la pena preguntarnos¿por qué dos números sobre un tema que está en boca de todo el mundo? Académicamente se trata a diario y aparece recurrentemente en periódicos, revistas y noticieros-. Lo cierto es, que el arte genera necesidades, conforma comunidades y sociedades,moldea conductas, da status, constituye identidad e incluso destaca virtudes y pude propiciar que algunas verdades no tan reales en el imaginario colectivo, se trasformen en invenciones o quimeras. También, es cierto que la influencia de los medios masivos de comunicación está presente en el gusto que demuestran las comunidades por el arte y los artistas. Hoy en día por ejemplo:el artista, el título de la obra y la justificación o sustentación que se haga de ella, pueden ser más importantes que la obra. Si a esto agregamos que es en las oficinas es donde los mas media deciden sobre que arte promocionar e impulsar y que obras desconocer o ignorar, tendríamos que afirmar que en la contemporaneidad el vínculo entre arte y política va más allá de una relación formal y se convierte en una forma de poder.
This essay argues that Hume's political and historical thought is well read as skeptical and skeptical in a way that roots it deeply in the Hellenistic traditions of both Pyrrhonian and Academical thought. It deploys skeptical instruments to undermine political rationalism as well as theologically and metaphysically political ideologies. (1) Hume's is politics of opinion (doxa) and (2) appearance (phainomena). It labors to oppose faction and enthusiasm and generate (3) suspension (epochê), (4) balance (isosthenia), (5) tranquility (ataraxia), and (6) moderation (metriopatheia, moderatio). Because Hume advocate the use of reflectively generated but epistemically and metaphysically suspensive general rules, his political thought is not intrinsically conservative. While it valorizes stability and peace, Humean politics accepts a contested and open-ended (zetesis) political order, one that requires continuous maintenance and revision but does not pretend to any ultimate or final progress or end.
ReseñaTítulo: The Politics of Political Science: Re-Writing Latin American ExperiencesAutor: Paulo RaveccaAño de publicación: 2019Edición: PrimeraPáginas: 292ISBN: 978 0815363088Editorial: Routledge La Política de la Ciencia Política de Paulo Ravecca ofrece un magnífico análisis sobre varios puntos fundamentales dentro de la institucionalización de la ciencia política y su epistemología. El libro de Ravecca es, en esencia, novedoso tanto en los temas que aborda como en su aproximación metodológica: un análisis comparado que triangula con investigación autoetnográfica, una forma poco convencional en la investigación social.
Fake news, Post-Truth are now entries into the ordinary language of contemporary politics to denote - with anxiety and concern - the definitive rupture of the relationship between truth and politics. A relationship that has never been idyllic and that cannot be, constitutively, idyllic, but which now seems to have reached a point of no return. Glossing the reflections of Hannah Arendt in Truth and Politics and pointing out two areas of "political licence" - that is, two areas where, inevitably, politics cannot be judged on parameters of truth - this contribution aims to treat the weakness of shared truths not as a cause of the crisis of democracies, but as a symptom of a more radical problem, an extreme subjectivism that leads to loneliness and intolerance towards any relationship based on trust. ; Fake news, Post-Truth son palabras que han entrado en el lenguaje ordinario de la política contemporánea para denotar -con ansiedad y preocupación- la ruptura definitiva de la relación entre verdad y política. Una relación que nunca ha sido idílica y que constitucionalmente no puede serlo, pero que ahora parece haber llegado a un punto sin retorno. Glosando las reflexiones de Hannah Arendt en Verdad y Política y señalando dos áreas de «licencia política» - es decir, en las que, inevitablemente, la política no puede juzgarse en función de los parámetros de verdad -, esta contribución pretende tratar la debilidad de las verdades compartidas no como la causa de la crisis de las democracias, sino como un síntoma de un problema más radical, un subjetivismo extremo que desemboca en soledad e intolerancia hacia cualquier relación de confianza.
In the article the mechanisms of legal regulation of French language are analyzed. Particular attention is paid to politicians in France, as initiators and developers of regulations in support of national language. Speech portraits of representatives of French political elite are considered,politiciansviolations of standardliterary French are identified. ; В статье анализируются механизмы законодательного регулирования французского языка. Особое внимание уделяется политическим деятелям Франции, выступающим инициаторами и разработчиками нормативных актов в поддержку национального языка. Рассматривается речевой портрет представителей французской политической элиты, выявляются случаи нарушения политиками литературной нормы французского языка.
Mobility and politics are strongly linked. This paper shows an analysis of their relationships and the conditions of politics in our time. It has four sections. First, we speak about relations between mobility and politics. In second place we ask ourselves about the limits of mobile and fluid characterization of our time, and the political virtuality of the exit, exodus and nomadism. In the third section we develop a detailed description of mobility as police governance and we justify its biopolitical character. And finally, in conclusion, we complete our reflections about the possibilities and limits of politics today.Today the space is nothing other than the space of circulation. Politics consists in transforming this space of "moving-along" into a space for the appearance of a political subject. In this way we propose thinking about politics like dwell or inhabit. Inhabiting would transform the circulation into places to show the subjetive capacity for politics. Inhabiting would be to build a place and a time for politics ; Movilidad y política están estrechamente vinculadas. Este trabajo tiene como objetivo desplegar un análisis sobre sus relaciones para poder aportar algunas reflexiones sobre las condiciones y posibilidades de la política en nuestro tiempo. Está estructurado en cuatro apartados. En el primero presentamos de qué modo se entrelazan hoy movilidad y política. En el segundo, dos interrogantes, uno sobre los límites de la caracterización móvil y fluida de nuestro tiempo, y otro sobre la virtualidad política de la fuga, el éxodo y la deserción. En el tercer apartado desarrollamos una descripción detallada de la movilidad como régimen de gobierno policial y justificamos su carácter biopolítico. Y en el cuarto y ultimo, a modo de conclusión, completamos nuestras reflexiones sobre las posibilidades y límites de la política hoy en día para finalizar proponiendo la figura de habitar para pensar la política hoy en día frente al imperativo contemporáneo a circular.Hoy no podemos depositar toda nuestra confianza política en el éxodo y la fuga que ya no hacen excepción a lo que hay. Tenemos que incorporar imaginarios y prácticas de que sin reproducir las formas rígidas de la vieja política sí nos permitan hacer pensables y construir alternativas de vida política (algo más) estables y duraderas.Si, en relación a la movilidad, lo que está prohibido es no circular, quedarse, estar, proponemos pensar la política desde la figura de habitar. Habitar consistiría en transformar los modos de circulación en lugares de producción y manifestación de esa capacidad subjetiva en la que todos nos podemos reconocer como iguales, la propia capacidad de la política. Habitar sería entonces hacer un lugar y un tiempo para la política.
The work aims to investigate the constitution of love as a discursive sociological object. This point of view has its theoretical framework in the theories of M. Bajtín and M. Foucault who consider discourse as a social fact (Bajtín), distancing themselves from linguistics to obtain a more extensive vision of discursiveness (Foucault). We also consider the material effects on the social constitution of the subjects. These effects are related to two aspects of social languages: their performative functioning and their role as models. Although we are not going to dwell on the implementation of these concepts, we want to underline their importance as a framework for this reflection. The final intention of the article is to present a positive idea of love passions, thinking of them as a thermometer of social spaces that we provisionally call public spaces, to reinvict emotions that from certain positions of feminism are viewed and criticized negatively. With this we want to point out, on the one hand, the importance of the subject in the context of a certain culture and, on the other hand, to mark the historical limitation of the concept of love. ; El trabajo se propone indagar sobre la constitución del amor como objeto sociológico discursivo. Este punto de vista posee su marco teórico en las teorías de M. Bajtín y M. Foucault quienes consideran al discurso como un hecho social (Bajtín), distanciándose de la lingüística para obtener una visión más extensa de la discursividad (Foucault). Igualmenteconsideramos los efectos materiales en la constitución social de los sujetos. Estos efectos guardan relación con dos aspectos de los lenguajes sociales: su funcionamiento performativo ysu rol modélico. Si bien no vamos a detenernos en la implementación de estos conceptos, queremos subrayarsu importancia como marco de esta reflexión. La intención final del artículo es presentar una idea positiva de las pasiones amorosas, pensándolas como termómetro de espacios sociales que llamamos provisoriamente espacios públicos, para reivindicar emociones que desde ciertas posturas del feminismo son vistas y criticadas negativamente. Con ello queremos señalar, por un lado, la pregnancia del tema en el ámbito de una determinadacultura y,por otro lado, marcar la limitación histórica del concepto de amor.
Economists and Political scientists have suggested for a long time that democracy and the environment are linked. What they did not analyze in detail is ifthe way in which politicians are elected influences the environment as well. Thescope of this paper is to fill this gap. Using high quality data on a cross section of countries, coming from previous studies, we find strong results suggestingthat politicians in majoritarian systems are less interested in environmental commitments than those in proportional representations. The consequence is thatenvironmental commitments are lower in the former system than in the latter.
Professors dels Estudis de Dret i Ciència Política van participar al congrés "Internet, Politics, Policy 2010: An Impact Assessment", celebrat el passat 16 i 17 de setembre a Oxford i organitzat per l'Oxford Internet Institut. ; Lecturers in Law and Political Science Studies took part in the "Internet, Politics, Policy 2010: An Impact Assessment" congress in Oxford on 16 and 17 September, organised by the Oxford Internet Institute. ; Profesores de los Estudios de Derecho y Ciencia Política de la UOC participaron en el congreso "Internet, Politics, Policy 2010: An Impact Assessment" celebrado el pasado 16 y 17 de septiembre en Oxford y organizado por el Oxford Internet Institut.
