Mainstream Parties’ Construction of Populist Discourse in Australia’s Temporary Migration Policy

IF 3.3 3区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT Organization Pub Date : 2023-11-25 DOI:10.1177/13505084231212641
Kyoung-Hee Yu, Chris F. Wright
{"title":"Mainstream Parties’ Construction of Populist Discourse in Australia’s Temporary Migration Policy","authors":"Kyoung-Hee Yu, Chris F. Wright","doi":"10.1177/13505084231212641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Growing alarm has been expressed about populism in mainstream political parties, yet the vast majority of scholarship investigating populism has documented the role of radical right populist parties rather than that of mainstream parties. This article draws on non-essentialist understandings of populism—the idea that populism is a central aspect of democracy and not restricted to the realm of radical political parties and “populist” leaders—to examine how mainstream political leaders discursively articulate the antagonism between “the people” and the institutional order. We also examine how mainstream party leaders, who are likely to be deeply embedded in the institutional order, negotiate tensions between the institutionalized system and populist articulation. We study this in the Australian context, which is appropriate for examining populism in mainstream political parties given that far-right and far-left parties have gained much smaller shares of electoral support in Australia than elsewhere. Our findings indicate that mainstream party leaders discursively construct the idea of “the people” by homogenizing disparate social demands and claiming their right to represent the community as a whole. In doing so, these leaders must negotiate pressures from the institutionalized order in the form of clientelism and accountability. This article contributes insights on the reconciliation of contemporary populism with institutionalized settings and processes.","PeriodicalId":48238,"journal":{"name":"Organization","volume":"15 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organization","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13505084231212641","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Growing alarm has been expressed about populism in mainstream political parties, yet the vast majority of scholarship investigating populism has documented the role of radical right populist parties rather than that of mainstream parties. This article draws on non-essentialist understandings of populism—the idea that populism is a central aspect of democracy and not restricted to the realm of radical political parties and “populist” leaders—to examine how mainstream political leaders discursively articulate the antagonism between “the people” and the institutional order. We also examine how mainstream party leaders, who are likely to be deeply embedded in the institutional order, negotiate tensions between the institutionalized system and populist articulation. We study this in the Australian context, which is appropriate for examining populism in mainstream political parties given that far-right and far-left parties have gained much smaller shares of electoral support in Australia than elsewhere. Our findings indicate that mainstream party leaders discursively construct the idea of “the people” by homogenizing disparate social demands and claiming their right to represent the community as a whole. In doing so, these leaders must negotiate pressures from the institutionalized order in the form of clientelism and accountability. This article contributes insights on the reconciliation of contemporary populism with institutionalized settings and processes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
主流政党在澳大利亚临时移民政策中构建民粹主义话语
人们对主流政党中的民粹主义表达了越来越多的担忧,然而绝大多数研究民粹主义的学术著作都记录了激进右翼民粹主义政党的作用,而非主流政党的作用。本文借鉴了对民粹主义的非本质主义理解--即民粹主义是民主的一个核心方面,并不局限于激进政党和 "民粹主义 "领导人的领域--来研究主流政治领导人如何通过话语表达 "人民 "与制度秩序之间的对立。我们还研究了可能深深扎根于制度秩序中的主流政党领导人如何处理制度化体系与民粹主义表述之间的紧张关系。鉴于极右和极左政党在澳大利亚选举中获得的支持比例远低于其他国家,因此我们以澳大利亚为背景进行研究,以考察主流政党中的民粹主义。我们的研究结果表明,主流政党领导人通过将不同的社会诉求同质化,并声称自己有权代表整个社会,从而在话语上构建了 "人民 "这一概念。在这样做的过程中,这些领导人必须与来自制度化秩序的压力进行谈判,这些压力的表现形式是裙带关系和问责制。本文就当代民粹主义与制度化环境和程序的协调问题提出了自己的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Organization
Organization MANAGEMENT-
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: The journal encompasses the full range of key theoretical, methodological and substantive debates and developments in organizational analysis, broadly conceived, identifying and assessing their impacts on organizational practices worldwide. Alongside more micro-processual analyses, it particularly encourages attention to the links between intellectual developments, changes in organizational forms and practices, and broader social, cultural and institutional transformations.
期刊最新文献
Alter-anthropological thought in organization studies From anti-state Nazism to neo-bureaucracy? Media Review: Lupin: Eradicating the stereotype of the African immigrant Carta Aberta: (In)visibilizing transgender bodies in organizations Rethinking organization studies methods through a posthumanist epistemology of practice
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1