Since early 2020, the covid-19 pandemic has unfolded as a global crisis that poses significant challenges to governments and societies.1 Governments have reacted quite variably, with policies ranging from strict lockdowns over a longer period of time to flexible approaches with restriction of freedoms at very low thresholds of intrusion into citizens’ rights.2 While the pandemic does not affect everyone equally, and some countries are more advanced in containing the virus than others, the sense of vulnerability and insecurity is widespread. In addition to the 6.5 million people who have died from covid-19 as of late August 2022, many more are affected by ongoing symptoms of long covid-19. Increased economic disparities and new forms of inequality only exacerbate the degree of uncertainty and the feeling that life is out of control.3 However, the popular yearning to regain control has not led to an unambiguous “desire for the state.”4 Rather, trust in governments has fluctuated in the wake of the pandemic. If there was a “rally around the flag” effect, it was certainly not found in every country.5 Even if support for government regulations and restrictions were prevalent within a state, it was not shared equally by different parts of the population. In several countries, the pandemic has also given rise to substantial protests against the restriction of civic, economic, and social liberties, often driven by fears of state surveillance, libertarian rebellion against state paternalism, and conspiratorial beliefs.6
{"title":"Introduction","authors":"Antje Daniel, Anna Schwenck, Fabian Virchow","doi":"10.3167/gps.2023.410201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3167/gps.2023.410201","url":null,"abstract":"Since early 2020, the covid-19 pandemic has unfolded as a global crisis that poses significant challenges to governments and societies.1 Governments have reacted quite variably, with policies ranging from strict lockdowns over a longer period of time to flexible approaches with restriction of freedoms at very low thresholds of intrusion into citizens’ rights.2 While the pandemic does not affect everyone equally, and some countries are more advanced in containing the virus than others, the sense of vulnerability and insecurity is widespread. In addition to the 6.5 million people who have died from covid-19 as of late August 2022, many more are affected by ongoing symptoms of long covid-19. Increased economic disparities and new forms of inequality only exacerbate the degree of uncertainty and the feeling that life is out of control.3 However, the popular yearning to regain control has not led to an unambiguous “desire for the state.”4 Rather, trust in governments has fluctuated in the wake of the pandemic. If there was a “rally around the flag” effect, it was certainly not found in every country.5 Even if support for government regulations and restrictions were prevalent within a state, it was not shared equally by different parts of the population. In several countries, the pandemic has also given rise to substantial protests against the restriction of civic, economic, and social liberties, often driven by fears of state surveillance, libertarian rebellion against state paternalism, and conspiratorial beliefs.6","PeriodicalId":44521,"journal":{"name":"GERMAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41954093","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
After the outbreak of the covid-19 pandemic, a heterogeneous protest movement emerged in Austria that managed to mobilize more than 20,000 people to protest against the prevention measures imposed by the government in February 2021. The preliminary results from the survey we conducted in January showed that an unusually large proportion of women participated in these protests. In this article, we aim at exploring the gendered aspects of the protests through the use of a frame analysis. Against the backdrop of an extensive public debate on the gendered ramifications of the pandemic, we also ask whether experiences of double burden were incorporated into the problem definition. We base our analysis on a mixed-methods approach that complements the results of a quantitative protest survey with qualitative interviews, social media analysis, and data from protest observations.
{"title":"Does Gender Play a Role?","authors":"Antje Daniel, M. Brunner, Florian Knasmüller","doi":"10.3167/gps.2023.410204","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3167/gps.2023.410204","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000After the outbreak of the covid-19 pandemic, a heterogeneous protest movement emerged in Austria that managed to mobilize more than 20,000 people to protest against the prevention measures imposed by the government in February 2021. The preliminary results from the survey we conducted in January showed that an unusually large proportion of women participated in these protests. In this article, we aim at exploring the gendered aspects of the protests through the use of a frame analysis. Against the backdrop of an extensive public debate on the gendered ramifications of the pandemic, we also ask whether experiences of double burden were incorporated into the problem definition. We base our analysis on a mixed-methods approach that complements the results of a quantitative protest survey with qualitative interviews, social media analysis, and data from protest observations.","PeriodicalId":44521,"journal":{"name":"GERMAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45391402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article shows how antifeminism manifested during the covid-19 pandemic and played an integrative role for pandemic-deniers. It first explains how antifeminism was understood and shows that antifeminist actors often used alleged concerns about child welfare to legitimize and morally enhance their own political views. Subsequently, the results of a systematic study of various antifeminist actors such as Birgit Kelle, Beatrix von Storch, Demo für Alle (Protest for all), and Eltern Stehen Auf (Parents Rise) from the pandemic denial spectrum are presented and compared to each other. Further analyses of the Querdenken protests make it clear that some narratives of antifeminist actors were also taken up by Querdenken members, and that in this way various alliances were able to emerge.
本文展示了反女权主义如何在covid-19大流行期间表现出来，并为大流行否认者发挥了整合作用。它首先解释了反女权主义是如何被理解的，并表明反女权主义演员经常利用所谓的对儿童福利的关注来使他们自己的政治观点合法化并在道德上加强他们的政治观点。随后，对各种反女权主义演员的系统研究结果，如Birgit Kelle, Beatrix von Storch, Demo f r Alle(为所有人抗议)和Eltern Stehen Auf(父母崛起)，从流行病否认谱中提出并相互比较。对Querdenken抗议活动的进一步分析清楚地表明，一些反女权主义演员的叙述也被Querdenken成员所接受，通过这种方式，各种联盟得以出现。
{"title":"Focusing on the Child's Best Interest and the Rejection of Protective Measures","authors":"Rick S. Blum","doi":"10.3167/gps.2023.410205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3167/gps.2023.410205","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article shows how antifeminism manifested during the covid-19 pandemic and played an integrative role for pandemic-deniers. It first explains how antifeminism was understood and shows that antifeminist actors often used alleged concerns about child welfare to legitimize and morally enhance their own political views. Subsequently, the results of a systematic study of various antifeminist actors such as Birgit Kelle, Beatrix von Storch, Demo für Alle (Protest for all), and Eltern Stehen Auf (Parents Rise) from the pandemic denial spectrum are presented and compared to each other. Further analyses of the Querdenken protests make it clear that some narratives of antifeminist actors were also taken up by Querdenken members, and that in this way various alliances were able to emerge.","PeriodicalId":44521,"journal":{"name":"GERMAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44362460","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines the response of West German cities to the end of guest worker recruitment in 1973 and to the federal government's implementation of its foreigner policy of “consolidation” in the mid-1970s. It argues that cities critiqued federal policies as failing to address the long-term impact of a permanent migrant population and called for a more comprehensive immigration policy that addressed such a population. Fearing potential social problems from a settled foreigner population, cities saw greater social infrastructure investments as essential for the integration of not just individual guest workers but entire foreigner families. By continuing to support the reunification of foreigner families after the end of guest worker recruitment, cities decoupled their assessment of a resident foreigner population from a purely labor market perspective and thought more broadly of the multifaceted impact and demands that the foreigner population made on their communities.
{"title":"West German Cities and the End of Guest Worker Recruitment, 1973–1978","authors":"Mark E. Spicka","doi":"10.3167/gps.2023.410103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3167/gps.2023.410103","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article examines the response of West German cities to the end of guest worker recruitment in 1973 and to the federal government's implementation of its foreigner policy of “consolidation” in the mid-1970s. It argues that cities critiqued federal policies as failing to address the long-term impact of a permanent migrant population and called for a more comprehensive immigration policy that addressed such a population. Fearing potential social problems from a settled foreigner population, cities saw greater social infrastructure investments as essential for the integration of not just individual guest workers but entire foreigner families. By continuing to support the reunification of foreigner families after the end of guest worker recruitment, cities decoupled their assessment of a resident foreigner population from a purely labor market perspective and thought more broadly of the multifaceted impact and demands that the foreigner population made on their communities.","PeriodicalId":44521,"journal":{"name":"GERMAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42356748","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the aftermath of unification, studies consistently uncovered differences in trust between citizens of the east and west of Germany. This article examines if this remains the case. It evaluates the trends and individual-level drivers of trust from 1984 to 2018 using data from the German General Social Survey (allbus) showing, first, that Germans are cautiously trusting of institutions, trust is more extensive than at any point since unification, and the differences between the east and west have narrowed; and, second, that trust is shaped by factors that are broadly similar between the two parts of the country. Multivariate models and post-estimation analyses show that trust is steeped in a variety of phenomena, some of which provide it with resilience and durability. The study rejects suggestions that Germany is suffering from a legitimacy crisis and concludes that the project of national integration is more complete than has previously been thought.
{"title":"Germany United?","authors":"Ross Campbell","doi":"10.3167/gps.2023.410101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3167/gps.2023.410101","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000In the aftermath of unification, studies consistently uncovered differences in trust between citizens of the east and west of Germany. This article examines if this remains the case. It evaluates the trends and individual-level drivers of trust from 1984 to 2018 using data from the German General Social Survey (allbus) showing, first, that Germans are cautiously trusting of institutions, trust is more extensive than at any point since unification, and the differences between the east and west have narrowed; and, second, that trust is shaped by factors that are broadly similar between the two parts of the country. Multivariate models and post-estimation analyses show that trust is steeped in a variety of phenomena, some of which provide it with resilience and durability. The study rejects suggestions that Germany is suffering from a legitimacy crisis and concludes that the project of national integration is more complete than has previously been thought.","PeriodicalId":44521,"journal":{"name":"GERMAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44687285","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Does political ambivalence increase vote switching? While the effects of ambivalence on vote switching have been investigated in the American political system, its application to multi-party systems has not been explored. To address this gap, this article investigates the effects of ambivalence on vote intention switching and vote switching in Germany's multi-party system, which has recently experienced electoral instability. Using the German Longitudinal Election Study (gles), the article teases out the mechanics of party ambivalence, leader ambivalence, and party-leader ambivalence. The results suggest that ambivalence increases the probability of voters switching parties during the pre-election campaigning period and between two consecutive elections. Ambivalence therefore has important implications for vote switching and for understanding the underlying determinants of electoral volatility in twenty-first-century politics.
{"title":"Should I Stay or Should I Go?","authors":"Klara Dentler","doi":"10.3167/gps.2023.410102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3167/gps.2023.410102","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Does political ambivalence increase vote switching? While the effects of ambivalence on vote switching have been investigated in the American political system, its application to multi-party systems has not been explored. To address this gap, this article investigates the effects of ambivalence on vote intention switching and vote switching in Germany's multi-party system, which has recently experienced electoral instability. Using the German Longitudinal Election Study (gles), the article teases out the mechanics of party ambivalence, leader ambivalence, and party-leader ambivalence. The results suggest that ambivalence increases the probability of voters switching parties during the pre-election campaigning period and between two consecutive elections. Ambivalence therefore has important implications for vote switching and for understanding the underlying determinants of electoral volatility in twenty-first-century politics.","PeriodicalId":44521,"journal":{"name":"GERMAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46436621","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The German novelist and Nobel laureate Günter Grass investigated the connection between nationhood, language, and politics throughout his literary career. In particular, he advocated a form of “literary nationhood” called Kulturnation (cultural nation) that conflates a nation's letters with its national identity. Grass believed that this identity served as a form of resistance to the nation-state and could force the German people to acknowledge the Holocaust. In going about this alternative nationality, Grass utilized what he called the “worm's-eye view” to align a literary imagination from the perspective of history's “victims” rather than its “makers.” The result of this literary methodology are two novels: The Meeting at Telgte (Das Treffen in Telgte) and Too Far Afield (Ein weites Feld). This article traces the development of the Kulturnation in these works and discusses its implications for politics, with special attention given to the tension between language and politics.
德国小说家、诺贝尔文学奖得主格特尔·格拉斯在他的文学生涯中研究了国家、语言和政治之间的联系。他特别提倡一种“文学民族”的形式，称为“文化民族”(Kulturnation)，将一个民族的文字与民族认同混为一谈。格拉斯认为，这种身份是对民族国家的一种抵抗，可以迫使德国人民承认大屠杀。在讲述这个另类的民族时，格拉斯运用了他所谓的“蠕虫视角”，从历史的“受害者”而不是“创造者”的角度来调整文学想象。这种文学方法的结果是两部小说:在泰尔格特的会议(Das Treffen in Telgte)和太远的地方(Ein weites Feld)。本文追溯了这些作品中文化转向的发展，并讨论了其对政治的影响，特别关注语言与政治之间的紧张关系。
{"title":"Günter Grass's Literary Nationalism","authors":"Alex Donovan Cole","doi":"10.3167/gps.2023.410104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3167/gps.2023.410104","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The German novelist and Nobel laureate Günter Grass investigated the connection between nationhood, language, and politics throughout his literary career. In particular, he advocated a form of “literary nationhood” called Kulturnation (cultural nation) that conflates a nation's letters with its national identity. Grass believed that this identity served as a form of resistance to the nation-state and could force the German people to acknowledge the Holocaust. In going about this alternative nationality, Grass utilized what he called the “worm's-eye view” to align a literary imagination from the perspective of history's “victims” rather than its “makers.” The result of this literary methodology are two novels: The Meeting at Telgte (Das Treffen in Telgte) and Too Far Afield (Ein weites Feld). This article traces the development of the Kulturnation in these works and discusses its implications for politics, with special attention given to the tension between language and politics.","PeriodicalId":44521,"journal":{"name":"GERMAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43264854","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Immigration attitudes have long been critical in predicting electoral behavior in Western Europe. Whether such attitudes will continue to motivate political behavior in the current pandemic environment is yet to be seen. This article addresses this topic by exploring immigration's prevalence and impact on Germany's 2021 Bundestag election. Combining evidence across multiple German election surveys, I find that immigration remains consequential in shaping political behavior throughout the country. In spite of immigration's reduced political salience, voters continued to view immigration as one of the most important political problems facing Germany. Moreover, immigration-minded voters were significantly more likely to support the Alternative for Germany on the far right and punish the Greens on the left. The article concludes that reducing immigration's salience will not necessarily change its influence over modern German elections.
长期以来，移民态度一直是预测西欧选举行为的关键因素。在当前的大流行环境中，这种态度是否会继续激发政治行为，还有待观察。本文通过探讨移民的普遍性及其对德国2021年联邦议院选举的影响来探讨这一主题。综合多项德国选举调查的证据，我发现移民在塑造整个国家的政治行为方面仍然至关重要。尽管移民问题在政治上的重要性有所降低，但选民仍将移民问题视为德国面临的最重要政治问题之一。此外，关注移民的选民更有可能支持极右翼的德国新选择党(Alternative for Germany)，并惩罚左翼的绿党(Greens)。文章的结论是，减少移民的重要性并不一定会改变其对现代德国选举的影响。
{"title":"The Enduring Effect of Immigration Attitudes on Vote Choice","authors":"Hannah M. Alarian","doi":"10.3167/gps.2022.400403","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3167/gps.2022.400403","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Immigration attitudes have long been critical in predicting electoral behavior in Western Europe. Whether such attitudes will continue to motivate political behavior in the current pandemic environment is yet to be seen. This article addresses this topic by exploring immigration's prevalence and impact on Germany's 2021 Bundestag election. Combining evidence across multiple German election surveys, I find that immigration remains consequential in shaping political behavior throughout the country. In spite of immigration's reduced political salience, voters continued to view immigration as one of the most important political problems facing Germany. Moreover, immigration-minded voters were significantly more likely to support the Alternative for Germany on the far right and punish the Greens on the left. The article concludes that reducing immigration's salience will not necessarily change its influence over modern German elections.","PeriodicalId":44521,"journal":{"name":"GERMAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43710150","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The new German government resulting from the 2021 Bundestag election will have to revise and reshape the legacy of the Merkel era's policies on Russia and China. Germany's own interests as a geoeconomic power will have to be balanced against concerns about the values of these two illiberal states and the strategic challenges they pose. The new coalition government in Germany will have to find consensus between three parties that hold often conflicting views, led by a team with little foreign policy experience.
{"title":"China and Russia Policy in the 2021 Election and Beyond","authors":"Stephen F. Szabo","doi":"10.3167/gps.2022.400406","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3167/gps.2022.400406","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The new German government resulting from the 2021 Bundestag election will have to revise and reshape the legacy of the Merkel era's policies on Russia and China. Germany's own interests as a geoeconomic power will have to be balanced against concerns about the values of these two illiberal states and the strategic challenges they pose. The new coalition government in Germany will have to find consensus between three parties that hold often conflicting views, led by a team with little foreign policy experience.","PeriodicalId":44521,"journal":{"name":"GERMAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48295997","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The climate crisis unfolded in real time during the 2021 Bundestag campaign, as western Germany experienced sudden, catastrophic flooding. The climate issue presented a varying and at times unexpected array of challenges and opportunities to the German political parties. In this article I will analyze the shifting role of climate change as it played out during the campaign, in the coalition discussions that followed, and in the first nine months of the new traffic light coalition government.
{"title":"The Shifting Role of Climate Change in the 2021 Bundestag Election","authors":"C. Hager","doi":"10.3167/gps.2022.400401","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3167/gps.2022.400401","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The climate crisis unfolded in real time during the 2021 Bundestag campaign, as western Germany experienced sudden, catastrophic flooding. The climate issue presented a varying and at times unexpected array of challenges and opportunities to the German political parties. In this article I will analyze the shifting role of climate change as it played out during the campaign, in the coalition discussions that followed, and in the first nine months of the new traffic light coalition government.","PeriodicalId":44521,"journal":{"name":"GERMAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43183886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：