Pub Date : 2021-11-26DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2021.2007848
Ihsan Yilmaz, M. Demir, Erdoan Shipoli
ABSTRACT By combining two separate strands of research, the comparative authoritarianism literature and securitisation theory, this article examines the question of why the Kurdish peace process in Turkey failed. By analysing the Turkish government’s treatment of the pro-Kurdish opposition, the article argues for a novel conceptual proposition on a securitisation mechanism of authoritarian resilience in electoral politics. It argues that the incumbents attempted to use the peace process (de-securitisation of the Kurdish issue) not for democratisation but for authoritarianism (by co-opting the pro-Kurdish opposition) and when that failed, they re-securitised the Kurdish issue, repressed the opposition and established an authoritarian regime thanks to justification of securitisation. The article contributes to both securitisation and authoritarian stability theories by showing that for authoritarian stability, depending on its needs and context, a government can successfully securitise, de-securitise and re-securitise the same issue with the use of the same functional actor in each stage.
{"title":"Securitisation via functional actors and authoritarian resilience: collapse of the Kurdish peace process in Turkey","authors":"Ihsan Yilmaz, M. Demir, Erdoan Shipoli","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.2007848","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.2007848","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT By combining two separate strands of research, the comparative authoritarianism literature and securitisation theory, this article examines the question of why the Kurdish peace process in Turkey failed. By analysing the Turkish government’s treatment of the pro-Kurdish opposition, the article argues for a novel conceptual proposition on a securitisation mechanism of authoritarian resilience in electoral politics. It argues that the incumbents attempted to use the peace process (de-securitisation of the Kurdish issue) not for democratisation but for authoritarianism (by co-opting the pro-Kurdish opposition) and when that failed, they re-securitised the Kurdish issue, repressed the opposition and established an authoritarian regime thanks to justification of securitisation. The article contributes to both securitisation and authoritarian stability theories by showing that for authoritarian stability, depending on its needs and context, a government can successfully securitise, de-securitise and re-securitise the same issue with the use of the same functional actor in each stage.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"57 1","pages":"1 - 16"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45212172","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2021.1998345
Mark Chou, L. Pruitt, Luke Dean
ABSTRACT This article analyses the demographics, party affiliation, political motivations, and personal experiences of young people in Australia who run for elected office. By analysing a survey conducted with 51 young political candidates who ran in the 2020 Victorian local government elections, we show that that the most under-represented groups include young women, young people with Indigenous heritage or from minority ethnic backgrounds, and young people who do not have tertiary education and/or who live outside the metropolitan region. Our study also demonstrates that while a majority of young candidates were political party members, only relatively few ran as a candidate of their party. Finally, we highlight the link between age (youth orientation) and effectiveness (political efficacy) among our respondents.
{"title":"Too young to run? Young political candidates and the 2020 Victorian local government elections","authors":"Mark Chou, L. Pruitt, Luke Dean","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.1998345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1998345","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyses the demographics, party affiliation, political motivations, and personal experiences of young people in Australia who run for elected office. By analysing a survey conducted with 51 young political candidates who ran in the 2020 Victorian local government elections, we show that that the most under-represented groups include young women, young people with Indigenous heritage or from minority ethnic backgrounds, and young people who do not have tertiary education and/or who live outside the metropolitan region. Our study also demonstrates that while a majority of young candidates were political party members, only relatively few ran as a candidate of their party. Finally, we highlight the link between age (youth orientation) and effectiveness (political efficacy) among our respondents.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"56 1","pages":"428 - 444"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42366456","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2021.1998344
L. Carroll, Susan Engel
ABSTRACT Universal basic income is an old idea that has experienced a surge in global attention. In many countries, it is creeping up the policy agenda as an alternative to traditional welfare. Yet, in Australia, the idea is mostly ignored by the two main political parties. Communication scholars have long contended that the media play a role in influencing opinion and setting the policy agenda. Using a framing approach, this study analyses how basic income was framed in 2018 by seven Australian newspapers and compares the results with those in countries where basic income has solidified a position in public discourse. We found that the mainstream media outlets in Australia are overtly hostile to the idea, which presents a significant obstacle to a universal basic income gaining legitimacy as a social policy.
{"title":"Framing basic income in Australia: how the media is shaping the debate","authors":"L. Carroll, Susan Engel","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.1998344","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1998344","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Universal basic income is an old idea that has experienced a surge in global attention. In many countries, it is creeping up the policy agenda as an alternative to traditional welfare. Yet, in Australia, the idea is mostly ignored by the two main political parties. Communication scholars have long contended that the media play a role in influencing opinion and setting the policy agenda. Using a framing approach, this study analyses how basic income was framed in 2018 by seven Australian newspapers and compares the results with those in countries where basic income has solidified a position in public discourse. We found that the mainstream media outlets in Australia are overtly hostile to the idea, which presents a significant obstacle to a universal basic income gaining legitimacy as a social policy.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"56 1","pages":"410 - 427"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49537522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2021.1998343
J. Drew
ABSTRACT Much has been written about the public policy success of measures taken in response to COVID-19 from health, political and economic perspectives. However, considerably less effort has been put into evaluating the coronavirus public policy responses according to moral frameworks. This seems somewhat surprising given that coronavirus responses were principally motivated by moral considerations – especially concern for the vulnerable. The main contribution of this study is to show how the inclusion of a specifically moral lens can contribute to new learning and policy refinement. To do so, I employ the natural law principle of subsidiarity which is chiefly concerned about what is required to balance human dignity against the common good – precisely the values most in tension during the pandemic. I conclude with some observations on the importance of adopting a moral lens as part of a broad multidisciplinary approach to assessing public policy.
{"title":"The principle of subsidiarity and COVID-19: how a moral assessment of public policy success can contribute to learning","authors":"J. Drew","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.1998343","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1998343","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Much has been written about the public policy success of measures taken in response to COVID-19 from health, political and economic perspectives. However, considerably less effort has been put into evaluating the coronavirus public policy responses according to moral frameworks. This seems somewhat surprising given that coronavirus responses were principally motivated by moral considerations – especially concern for the vulnerable. The main contribution of this study is to show how the inclusion of a specifically moral lens can contribute to new learning and policy refinement. To do so, I employ the natural law principle of subsidiarity which is chiefly concerned about what is required to balance human dignity against the common good – precisely the values most in tension during the pandemic. I conclude with some observations on the importance of adopting a moral lens as part of a broad multidisciplinary approach to assessing public policy.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"56 1","pages":"393 - 409"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41722383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-02DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2021.1998342
Roger Davis
ABSTRACT Despite increased understanding of Indigenous environmental values, governments still fail to respectfully incorporate these values into environmental policy. Deliberative democratic theory can help to better understand this problem. First, by recognising Indigenous democracy as a distinct deliberative system and drawing attention to this ‘invisible’ democratic contribution to the larger democratic system. Second, the resistance of Indigenous environment policy to openly address Indigenous environmental values, can be understood as weakness in transmission between Indigenous peoples and the settler state. Third, Indigenous deliberative forums linked to the state may help overcome some of these barriers in environment policy. Deliberative democracy draws attention to environmental relations between Indigenous peoples and the state not simply as Indigenous policy making but as democracy making.
{"title":"Australian Indigenous environment policy as a deliberative system","authors":"Roger Davis","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.1998342","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1998342","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Despite increased understanding of Indigenous environmental values, governments still fail to respectfully incorporate these values into environmental policy. Deliberative democratic theory can help to better understand this problem. First, by recognising Indigenous democracy as a distinct deliberative system and drawing attention to this ‘invisible’ democratic contribution to the larger democratic system. Second, the resistance of Indigenous environment policy to openly address Indigenous environmental values, can be understood as weakness in transmission between Indigenous peoples and the settler state. Third, Indigenous deliberative forums linked to the state may help overcome some of these barriers in environment policy. Deliberative democracy draws attention to environmental relations between Indigenous peoples and the state not simply as Indigenous policy making but as democracy making.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"56 1","pages":"376 - 392"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49056945","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-27DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2021.1978389
L. Botterill, Joshua Lake, M. Walsh
ABSTRACT The COVID-19 crisis highlighted issues of trust in government and experts, as citizens were asked to accept restrictions on liberties in order to slow the spread of the virus. Based on a survey of 1992 Australians conducted in May 2020, this paper reports on the attitudes of Australians toward the responses of their State and Federal governments to the pandemic. Unsurprisingly, we found support for government responses differed with partisan alignment. However, when we controlled for values differences, we found that values predicted social distancing attitudes and behaviour. This oppugns the common conclusion in political psychology that party alignment is a proxy for values. Scientists were trusted more than political institutions or actors for accurate COVID-19 information, and likewise, traditional media were preferred to online sources. These findings have implications for policy communication when individual action is required to address collective goals.
{"title":"Factors affecting public responses to health messages during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia: partisanship, values, and source credibility","authors":"L. Botterill, Joshua Lake, M. Walsh","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.1978389","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1978389","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The COVID-19 crisis highlighted issues of trust in government and experts, as citizens were asked to accept restrictions on liberties in order to slow the spread of the virus. Based on a survey of 1992 Australians conducted in May 2020, this paper reports on the attitudes of Australians toward the responses of their State and Federal governments to the pandemic. Unsurprisingly, we found support for government responses differed with partisan alignment. However, when we controlled for values differences, we found that values predicted social distancing attitudes and behaviour. This oppugns the common conclusion in political psychology that party alignment is a proxy for values. Scientists were trusted more than political institutions or actors for accurate COVID-19 information, and likewise, traditional media were preferred to online sources. These findings have implications for policy communication when individual action is required to address collective goals.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"56 1","pages":"358 - 375"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47640489","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2021.1960272
Ruth Dassonneville, I. McAllister
ABSTRACT In most established democracies, trends in political trust in recent decades have fluctuated, but have not declined strongly. Citizens’ democratic attitudes in many countries have even proven to be resilient in the face of the Great Recession. Such trends contrast sharply with the observation of a gradual and continued decline of Australian’s trust in politics since 2007. Using a combined file of seven Australian Election Study surveys, employing exactly comparable questions and methodologies, this paper tests two explanations – government performance and political detachment – to account for this remarkable decline. The findings show that both a lack of performance by successive governments and a broad detachment from politics matter. The findings suggest that there is no single explanation for the decline; rather, a diverse range of inter-related factors appear to be at work.
{"title":"Explaining the decline of political trust in Australia","authors":"Ruth Dassonneville, I. McAllister","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.1960272","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1960272","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In most established democracies, trends in political trust in recent decades have fluctuated, but have not declined strongly. Citizens’ democratic attitudes in many countries have even proven to be resilient in the face of the Great Recession. Such trends contrast sharply with the observation of a gradual and continued decline of Australian’s trust in politics since 2007. Using a combined file of seven Australian Election Study surveys, employing exactly comparable questions and methodologies, this paper tests two explanations – government performance and political detachment – to account for this remarkable decline. The findings show that both a lack of performance by successive governments and a broad detachment from politics matter. The findings suggest that there is no single explanation for the decline; rather, a diverse range of inter-related factors appear to be at work.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"56 1","pages":"280 - 297"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10361146.2021.1960272","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43546163","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2021.1956431
Glenn Kefford, S. Ratcliff
ABSTRACT Populism is widely considered to be one of the most significant political phenomena of the past decade. Yet for all the scholarly and media attention it receives, how important it is in driving support for populist radical right parties is debatable. Scholars have long theorised that nativism and authoritarianism are likely to be equally if not more important than populism in driving support for populist radical right parties, but the empirical evidence to support this argument has been limited. We conduct a cross-national analysis on a representative sample of voters from the United States, United Kingdom and Australia (n = 4650) to test this proposition. We demonstrate that rather than populism, it is primarily nativism driving support for populist radical right parties. Populism is, therefore, shown to be less important than often suggested.
{"title":"Populists or nativist authoritarians? A cross-national analysis of the radical right","authors":"Glenn Kefford, S. Ratcliff","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.1956431","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1956431","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Populism is widely considered to be one of the most significant political phenomena of the past decade. Yet for all the scholarly and media attention it receives, how important it is in driving support for populist radical right parties is debatable. Scholars have long theorised that nativism and authoritarianism are likely to be equally if not more important than populism in driving support for populist radical right parties, but the empirical evidence to support this argument has been limited. We conduct a cross-national analysis on a representative sample of voters from the United States, United Kingdom and Australia (n = 4650) to test this proposition. We demonstrate that rather than populism, it is primarily nativism driving support for populist radical right parties. Populism is, therefore, shown to be less important than often suggested.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"56 1","pages":"261 - 279"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44002810","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2021.1971834
K. Beauregard
ABSTRACT While attitudes toward women and gender equality are increasingly salient in Australian politics, little is known about how sexist attitudes shape political behaviour. Using the Australian Election Study, I assess the extent hostile sexism is present among Australian citizens and influenced vote choice in the 2019 Federal election. First, I find that women are less likely than men to hold hostile sexist attitudes, but gender differences vary by party identification. Second, I show that hostile sexism is not significantly related to the likelihood of voting for the Labor or Liberal parties. Hostile sexist attitudes, however, significantly increase the likelihood of voting for the National party and significantly decrease the likelihood of voting for the Greens. Finally, I find no gender difference in the role of hostile sexism in explaining vote choice.
{"title":"Sexism and the Australian voter: how sexist attitudes influenced vote choice in the 2019 federal election","authors":"K. Beauregard","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.1971834","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1971834","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT While attitudes toward women and gender equality are increasingly salient in Australian politics, little is known about how sexist attitudes shape political behaviour. Using the Australian Election Study, I assess the extent hostile sexism is present among Australian citizens and influenced vote choice in the 2019 Federal election. First, I find that women are less likely than men to hold hostile sexist attitudes, but gender differences vary by party identification. Second, I show that hostile sexism is not significantly related to the likelihood of voting for the Labor or Liberal parties. Hostile sexist attitudes, however, significantly increase the likelihood of voting for the National party and significantly decrease the likelihood of voting for the Greens. Finally, I find no gender difference in the role of hostile sexism in explaining vote choice.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"56 1","pages":"298 - 317"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48320181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2021.1978388
Jun-Hyeok Kwak
ABSTRACT This paper suggests the conception of the ‘political’ in Aristotle’s Politics as an alternative to the Hobbesian conception of the ‘political’. More specifically, I will develop two arguments in this paper. First, investigating Aristotle’s conception of the ‘political’ in the Politics, I will maintain that the ‘political’ rule (πολιτικὴ ἀρχή) is not a political ideal to be realised in the best possible regime but the necessary condition for making political life possible. Second, exploring ‘persuasion’ as the most imperative way in which a particular claim about justice may be justified in democratic deliberation, I will argue that in Aristotle’s conception of the political, democratic deliberation is not constrained by an architectonic political vision or a shared solidarity but guided by persuasion based on the fear of domination under which antagonistic contentions between citizens can contribute to making a tolerably good decision without empowering anyone who knows better.
{"title":"Deliberation with persuasion: the ‘political’ in Aristotle’s Politics","authors":"Jun-Hyeok Kwak","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.1978388","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1978388","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper suggests the conception of the ‘political’ in Aristotle’s Politics as an alternative to the Hobbesian conception of the ‘political’. More specifically, I will develop two arguments in this paper. First, investigating Aristotle’s conception of the ‘political’ in the Politics, I will maintain that the ‘political’ rule (πολιτικὴ ἀρχή) is not a political ideal to be realised in the best possible regime but the necessary condition for making political life possible. Second, exploring ‘persuasion’ as the most imperative way in which a particular claim about justice may be justified in democratic deliberation, I will argue that in Aristotle’s conception of the political, democratic deliberation is not constrained by an architectonic political vision or a shared solidarity but guided by persuasion based on the fear of domination under which antagonistic contentions between citizens can contribute to making a tolerably good decision without empowering anyone who knows better.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"56 1","pages":"318 - 333"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45121247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：