欧元区危机话语中“坏想法”的弹性,即使是竞争的想法通知了不断变化的实践

V. Schmidt
{"title":"欧元区危机话语中“坏想法”的弹性,即使是竞争的想法通知了不断变化的实践","authors":"V. Schmidt","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2907701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the Eurozone Crisis, ‘bad ideas’ were initially resilient not just in the discourse but also in practice, as neo-liberal ideas focused on austerity and structural reform were embedded in the legislative packages and intergovernmental pacts (Six Pack, Two Pack, and Fiscal Compact). Later, however, the bad ideas continued to be resilient in the discourse while the practices incrementally changed for the better as rival ideas gain influence. This paper explains why such discursive resilience through an empirical examination of EU political actors’ discourse first in their initial response to the crisis that reinforced the ‘stability’ rules and then in their shift first to a discourse of growth and then of flexibility, all the while insisting that they were sticking by the rules. The paper argues, in essence, that leaders chose to reinterpret the rules ‘by stealth,’ that is, by not admitting to their national constituencies—or even to one another—that their ideas weren’t working, and that the rules therefore needed to change. Theoretically, the paper explains this according to five possible reasons for the resilience of neo-liberal ideas, including the adaptability of the concepts, their lack of actual implementation, their strength in the discourse compared to alternatives, the role of interests in benefiting from those ideas, and their embedding in institutions.","PeriodicalId":326599,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Europe & Eurasia (Comparative) (Topic)","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Resilience of ‘Bad Ideas’ in Eurozone Crisis Discourse, Even as Rival Ideas Inform Changing Practices\",\"authors\":\"V. Schmidt\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2907701\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the Eurozone Crisis, ‘bad ideas’ were initially resilient not just in the discourse but also in practice, as neo-liberal ideas focused on austerity and structural reform were embedded in the legislative packages and intergovernmental pacts (Six Pack, Two Pack, and Fiscal Compact). Later, however, the bad ideas continued to be resilient in the discourse while the practices incrementally changed for the better as rival ideas gain influence. This paper explains why such discursive resilience through an empirical examination of EU political actors’ discourse first in their initial response to the crisis that reinforced the ‘stability’ rules and then in their shift first to a discourse of growth and then of flexibility, all the while insisting that they were sticking by the rules. The paper argues, in essence, that leaders chose to reinterpret the rules ‘by stealth,’ that is, by not admitting to their national constituencies—or even to one another—that their ideas weren’t working, and that the rules therefore needed to change. Theoretically, the paper explains this according to five possible reasons for the resilience of neo-liberal ideas, including the adaptability of the concepts, their lack of actual implementation, their strength in the discourse compared to alternatives, the role of interests in benefiting from those ideas, and their embedding in institutions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":326599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PSN: Europe & Eurasia (Comparative) (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"82 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PSN: Europe & Eurasia (Comparative) (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2907701\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Europe & Eurasia (Comparative) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2907701","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

在欧元区危机中,“坏主意”最初不仅在话语中有弹性,而且在实践中也有弹性,因为专注于紧缩和结构改革的新自由主义思想被纳入立法方案和政府间协议(六包、两包和财政契约)。然而,后来,糟糕的想法在话语中继续保持弹性,而随着竞争对手的想法获得影响力,实践逐渐变得更好。本文通过对欧盟政治行为者话语的实证研究,首先解释了这种话语弹性的原因,首先是他们对危机的最初反应,加强了“稳定”规则,然后是他们首先转向增长的话语,然后是灵活性的话语,同时坚持他们遵守规则。这篇论文认为,从本质上讲,领导人选择“秘密地”重新解释这些规则,也就是说,他们不向本国选民承认——甚至不向彼此承认——他们的想法行不通,因此需要改变这些规则。从理论上讲,本文根据新自由主义思想的弹性的五个可能原因来解释这一点,包括概念的适应性,它们缺乏实际实施,与替代方案相比,它们在话语中的力量,利益在受益于这些思想中的作用,以及它们在制度中的嵌入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Resilience of ‘Bad Ideas’ in Eurozone Crisis Discourse, Even as Rival Ideas Inform Changing Practices
In the Eurozone Crisis, ‘bad ideas’ were initially resilient not just in the discourse but also in practice, as neo-liberal ideas focused on austerity and structural reform were embedded in the legislative packages and intergovernmental pacts (Six Pack, Two Pack, and Fiscal Compact). Later, however, the bad ideas continued to be resilient in the discourse while the practices incrementally changed for the better as rival ideas gain influence. This paper explains why such discursive resilience through an empirical examination of EU political actors’ discourse first in their initial response to the crisis that reinforced the ‘stability’ rules and then in their shift first to a discourse of growth and then of flexibility, all the while insisting that they were sticking by the rules. The paper argues, in essence, that leaders chose to reinterpret the rules ‘by stealth,’ that is, by not admitting to their national constituencies—or even to one another—that their ideas weren’t working, and that the rules therefore needed to change. Theoretically, the paper explains this according to five possible reasons for the resilience of neo-liberal ideas, including the adaptability of the concepts, their lack of actual implementation, their strength in the discourse compared to alternatives, the role of interests in benefiting from those ideas, and their embedding in institutions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Impacts of Sovereign Risk Premium on Bank Profitability: Evidence from Euro Area A New Macro-Financial Condition Index for the Euro Area The Anatomy of Government Bond Yields Synchronization in the Eurozone What Affects Bank Market Power in the Euro Area? A Structural Model Approach Financial Drivers of the Euro Area Business Cycle: A Dsge-Based Approach
×
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