害怕愤怒的暴徒

J. Jasper
{"title":"害怕愤怒的暴徒","authors":"J. Jasper","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2021.1913506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Capitol breach that occurred on 6 January 2021 immediately revived images of protest crowds as irrational, emotional, violent, and out of control. This frame had flourished for millennia, but had been displaced by more sympathetic ideas about protest in recent decades. Inspired by the civil rights and feminist movements, scholars had come to see street protest as politics by extraordinary means for those closed off from more mainstream channels of influence. Journalists, politicians, and police did not entirely change their minds along with researchers, but they had softened their views somewhat: protestors are not necessarily criminals to be attacked. In a society where protest is common, Americans had developed more nuanced thinking and feelings about crowds – all of which went out the window on January 6th. In this paper I trace some of the history of European and American ideas about crowds in order to show how easy – and how mistaken – it is to see a crowd of protestors as “a hostile crowd” or “a violent crowd,” or simply “the mob.”","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2021.1913506","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fear of the angry mob\",\"authors\":\"J. Jasper\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17467586.2021.1913506\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Capitol breach that occurred on 6 January 2021 immediately revived images of protest crowds as irrational, emotional, violent, and out of control. This frame had flourished for millennia, but had been displaced by more sympathetic ideas about protest in recent decades. Inspired by the civil rights and feminist movements, scholars had come to see street protest as politics by extraordinary means for those closed off from more mainstream channels of influence. Journalists, politicians, and police did not entirely change their minds along with researchers, but they had softened their views somewhat: protestors are not necessarily criminals to be attacked. In a society where protest is common, Americans had developed more nuanced thinking and feelings about crowds – all of which went out the window on January 6th. In this paper I trace some of the history of European and American ideas about crowds in order to show how easy – and how mistaken – it is to see a crowd of protestors as “a hostile crowd” or “a violent crowd,” or simply “the mob.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":38896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2021.1913506\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2021.1913506\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2021.1913506","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要2021年1月6日发生的国会大厦被攻破事件立即再现了抗议人群非理性、情绪化、暴力和失控的画面。这一框架繁荣了数千年,但在近几十年中被更具同情心的抗议思想所取代。受民权和女权运动的启发,学者们开始将街头抗议视为政治,对那些被更主流的影响力渠道拒之门外的人来说,这是一种非同寻常的手段。记者、政客和警察并没有和研究人员一起完全改变主意,但他们的观点有所软化:抗议者不一定是要受到攻击的罪犯。在一个抗议活动普遍存在的社会里,美国人对人群产生了更微妙的思考和感受——所有这些都在1月6日消失了。在这篇论文中,我追溯了欧洲和美国关于人群的一些思想的历史,以表明将一群抗议者视为“敌对人群”、“暴力人群”或简单的“暴徒”是多么容易,也是多么错误
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
Fear of the angry mob
ABSTRACT The Capitol breach that occurred on 6 January 2021 immediately revived images of protest crowds as irrational, emotional, violent, and out of control. This frame had flourished for millennia, but had been displaced by more sympathetic ideas about protest in recent decades. Inspired by the civil rights and feminist movements, scholars had come to see street protest as politics by extraordinary means for those closed off from more mainstream channels of influence. Journalists, politicians, and police did not entirely change their minds along with researchers, but they had softened their views somewhat: protestors are not necessarily criminals to be attacked. In a society where protest is common, Americans had developed more nuanced thinking and feelings about crowds – all of which went out the window on January 6th. In this paper I trace some of the history of European and American ideas about crowds in order to show how easy – and how mistaken – it is to see a crowd of protestors as “a hostile crowd” or “a violent crowd,” or simply “the mob.”
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
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊最新文献
Should activism be treated as an indicator of attitudes towards political violence? ‘When militias go ‘rogue’: explaining anti-government extremism in so-called ‘pro-nation-state’ militias in the United States of America and Ukraine Perception of human rights, law enforcement interference and justifiability of terrorism: a Cross-National Analysis Why are some suicide terror attacks more newsworthy than others? Measuring the competitive communicative constitution of insurgencies and their opponents
×
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