International Journal of Politics Culture and Society最新文献

In recent years, scholars have increasingly revealed the importance of celebrities in society, among them celebrity politicians. These celebrities not only influence political attitudes but also serve as role models for many individuals. Yet, little is known regarding what types of role models' politicians serve as in the context of health. To fill this gap, we examined three influential contemporary political leaders: Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, and the type of mediated role models each possibly comprise in the context of healthy living. By conducting a qualitative content analysis, we analyzed 90 articles from 2018 to 2019 from two leading newspapers in each of the three politician's countries, namely Russia, the USA, and Israel as well as the respective politician's Facebook pages. Our findings point to three types of potential role models' as political leaders: a health-promoting model (Putin), a hybrid model (Trump), and a model of non-existence (Netanyahu), as the literature points to mediated role models influencing individuals' beliefs and behaviors. This study contributes to the understanding of mediated types of role models' politicians potentially serve as in the context of health vital to people's personal health.

American Muslim intercommunal disunity (fitnah) is exemplified by an emic event when an editorial foray contests the inherited legacies of black Muslim icons like Malcolm X and Muhammad Ali, which exigently compels "diplomats" of different minds into engaging the digital public square with calculated strokes. The woke era's partisan identity politics asymmetrically curtail acceptable expressions of religious authority on issues of race, religion, and politics. Hence, scholars spend their social capital as political actors in these ultracrepidarian environments to different ends. This multi-year study conducted across global sites analyzes scholars with dissimilar approaches to media and political engagement amidst an environment characterized by weaponized media, polarization, and shifting goal posts. Participant observation and textual analysis impart scenes of scholars with fraught associations to administrations, funding sources, and feuding authoritarian Arab regimes getting embroiled in geopolitical hostilities. With mainstream American Muslim narratives aligned with mainstream media's liberal filter bubbles, scholars impact consensus building with varying levels of success; those negotiating compromise within spheres of legitimate contestation and consensus ad interim maintain subsisting influence. However, those that do not are expurgated and thereby cede influence.

Climate change is an overwhelming issue today, but sociology has yet to fully engage with its hermeneutical and political aspects. The article tackles this limitation and thus the lexicon of climate change, proposing an integrated framework that brings its principal concepts and notions together. In particular, it singles out hazard, risk and threat, vulnerability and resilience, adaptation, mitigation and precaution, Anthropocene and Capitalocene, nature and society. Although some authors have stressed the political aspects underlying these concepts and notions, and the IPCC itself has incipiently recognised this issue, the parameters of the debate remain conspicuously narrow. The article therefore proposes to engage it in direct and strong political terms, countering the partly successful operation of depoliticisation that such concepts and notions undergo. While the article concentrates on discursive aspects, it eventually points to the role of agents and power within the UN system concerning the articulation of this lexicon.

This article is a critique of the notion of post-truth. Drawing on the work of Hannah Arendt, I argue that the epistemological crisis suggested by the notion of post-truth is epiphenomenal to a more general crisis of authority, a crisis that is poorly understood in the literature. I also argue that revisiting Arendt's account of authority can help us elucidate the vexed dynamics of authority in modern society, as well as the dynamics behind its current crisis. The post-truth situation is a loss of authority that is political before it presents as epistemological. Effectively addressing this situation, I conclude, is a much more challenging and complex proposition than what is suggested in the literature on post-truth.