封锁表达:COVID-19大流行期间对公民空间的限制,以应对大规模抗议

IF 3.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Democratization Pub Date : 2023-05-12 DOI:10.1080/13510347.2023.2209021
Felix S. Bethke, Jonas Wolff
{"title":"封锁表达:COVID-19大流行期间对公民空间的限制,以应对大规模抗议","authors":"Felix S. Bethke, Jonas Wolff","doi":"10.1080/13510347.2023.2209021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments across the globe implemented severe restrictions of civic freedoms to contain the spread of the virus. The global health emergency posed the risk of governments seizing the pandemic as a window of opportunity to curb (potential) challenges to their power, thereby reinforcing the ongoing, worldwide trend of shrinking civic spaces. In this article, we investigate whether and how governments used the pandemic as a justification to impose restrictions of freedom of expression. Drawing on the scholarship on the causes of civic space restrictions, we argue that governments responded to COVID-19 by curtailing the freedom of expression when they had faced significant contentious political challenges before the pandemic. Our results from a quantitative analysis indeed show that countries who experienced high levels of pro-democracy mobilization before the onset of the pandemic were more likely to see restrictions of the freedom of expression relative to countries with no or low levels of mobilization. Additional three brief case studies (Algeria, Bolivia and India) illustrate the process of how pre-pandemic mass protests fostered the im-position of restrictions on the freedom of expression during the pandemic.","PeriodicalId":47953,"journal":{"name":"Democratization","volume":"30 1","pages":"1073 - 1091"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lockdown of expression: civic space restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic as a response to mass protests\",\"authors\":\"Felix S. Bethke, Jonas Wolff\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13510347.2023.2209021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments across the globe implemented severe restrictions of civic freedoms to contain the spread of the virus. The global health emergency posed the risk of governments seizing the pandemic as a window of opportunity to curb (potential) challenges to their power, thereby reinforcing the ongoing, worldwide trend of shrinking civic spaces. In this article, we investigate whether and how governments used the pandemic as a justification to impose restrictions of freedom of expression. Drawing on the scholarship on the causes of civic space restrictions, we argue that governments responded to COVID-19 by curtailing the freedom of expression when they had faced significant contentious political challenges before the pandemic. Our results from a quantitative analysis indeed show that countries who experienced high levels of pro-democracy mobilization before the onset of the pandemic were more likely to see restrictions of the freedom of expression relative to countries with no or low levels of mobilization. Additional three brief case studies (Algeria, Bolivia and India) illustrate the process of how pre-pandemic mass protests fostered the im-position of restrictions on the freedom of expression during the pandemic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Democratization\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"1073 - 1091\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Democratization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2023.2209021\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Democratization","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2023.2209021","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在2019冠状病毒病大流行的第一年,全球各国政府对公民自由实施了严格限制,以遏制病毒的传播。全球卫生紧急情况带来的风险是,各国政府可能将疫情视为遏制(潜在)对其权力的挑战的机会之窗,从而加剧正在发生的缩小公民空间的全球趋势。在本文中,我们调查了政府是否以及如何利用疫情作为限制言论自由的理由。根据对公民空间限制原因的研究,我们认为,各国政府在疫情前面临重大有争议的政治挑战时,通过限制言论自由来应对COVID-19。我们的定量分析结果确实表明,与没有或低水平动员的国家相比,在大流行爆发前经历过高水平民主动员的国家更有可能看到言论自由受到限制。另外三个简要案例研究(阿尔及利亚、玻利维亚和印度)说明了大流行病前的大规模抗议活动如何在大流行病期间助长了对言论自由的限制。
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
Lockdown of expression: civic space restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic as a response to mass protests
ABSTRACT During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments across the globe implemented severe restrictions of civic freedoms to contain the spread of the virus. The global health emergency posed the risk of governments seizing the pandemic as a window of opportunity to curb (potential) challenges to their power, thereby reinforcing the ongoing, worldwide trend of shrinking civic spaces. In this article, we investigate whether and how governments used the pandemic as a justification to impose restrictions of freedom of expression. Drawing on the scholarship on the causes of civic space restrictions, we argue that governments responded to COVID-19 by curtailing the freedom of expression when they had faced significant contentious political challenges before the pandemic. Our results from a quantitative analysis indeed show that countries who experienced high levels of pro-democracy mobilization before the onset of the pandemic were more likely to see restrictions of the freedom of expression relative to countries with no or low levels of mobilization. Additional three brief case studies (Algeria, Bolivia and India) illustrate the process of how pre-pandemic mass protests fostered the im-position of restrictions on the freedom of expression during the pandemic.
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
Democratization
Democratization POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
73
期刊介绍: Democratization aims to promote a better understanding of democratization - defined as the way democratic norms, institutions and practices evolve and are disseminated both within and across national and cultural boundaries. While the focus is on democratization viewed as a process, the journal also builds on the enduring interest in democracy itself and its analysis. The emphasis is contemporary and the approach comparative, with the publication of scholarly contributions about those areas where democratization is currently attracting considerable attention world-wide.
期刊最新文献
Benign bureaucracies? Religious affairs ministries as institutions of political control Legitimation, co-optation, and survival: why is Turkey silent on China’s persecution of Uyghurs? Neoliberal Citizenship: Sacred Markets, Sacrificial Lives Neoliberal Citizenship: Sacred Markets, Sacrificial Lives , by Luca Mavelli, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2022, 190 pp., £75(hardback), index, ISBN 978-0-19-285758-3 Democratization, state capacity and developmental correlates of international artificial intelligence trade Bread, freedom or social justice? An empirical investigation into the determinants of the Arab Spring
×
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