泰国的意识形态斗争:走向泰国两极分化政治去极化的可能性

IF 1 3区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Political Ideologies Pub Date : 2021-01-22 DOI:10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470
Dulyaphab Chaturongkul
{"title":"泰国的意识形态斗争:走向泰国两极分化政治去极化的可能性","authors":"Dulyaphab Chaturongkul","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Seemingly intractable social-political divisions involving a range of actors and interests with zero-sum propensities continue to haunt Thailand. This article argues that unmasking the contingent nature of Thailand’s polarized politics helps vindicate the possibility of depolarization in societies steeped in polarization. It proceeds by sketching the development of the so-called ‘Yellow-Red’ divide, identifying it with the hard-edged, ideological bifurcation of ‘right’, i.e. liberalism/conservatism, and ‘left’, i.e. egalitarianism, respectively. The article then demonstrates that while ideologically polarized configurations such as illiberal democracy and undemocratic liberalism/conservatism necessarily sustain the resilience of Yellow and Red, they may be surplus to the range of ideological configurations with which disputants first and foremost identify. The theoretical argument is that holding different ideological viewpoints do not necessitate polarization. Deep polarization is contingent and this is connected to Michael Freeden’s morphological account of ideology. Depolarization reflects less of a rejection and more of a restructuring of the right-left binary along the lines of a continuum running from right to left. To elaborate, by the same logic that structured antagonisms may be superimposed over varied ideologies, thereby triggering ideological mutation, they are also liable to dislodgement .","PeriodicalId":47036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Ideologies","volume":"28 1","pages":"16 - 34"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Thailand’s ideological struggle: towards the possibility of depolarizing Thailand’s polarized politics\",\"authors\":\"Dulyaphab Chaturongkul\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Seemingly intractable social-political divisions involving a range of actors and interests with zero-sum propensities continue to haunt Thailand. This article argues that unmasking the contingent nature of Thailand’s polarized politics helps vindicate the possibility of depolarization in societies steeped in polarization. It proceeds by sketching the development of the so-called ‘Yellow-Red’ divide, identifying it with the hard-edged, ideological bifurcation of ‘right’, i.e. liberalism/conservatism, and ‘left’, i.e. egalitarianism, respectively. The article then demonstrates that while ideologically polarized configurations such as illiberal democracy and undemocratic liberalism/conservatism necessarily sustain the resilience of Yellow and Red, they may be surplus to the range of ideological configurations with which disputants first and foremost identify. The theoretical argument is that holding different ideological viewpoints do not necessitate polarization. Deep polarization is contingent and this is connected to Michael Freeden’s morphological account of ideology. Depolarization reflects less of a rejection and more of a restructuring of the right-left binary along the lines of a continuum running from right to left. To elaborate, by the same logic that structured antagonisms may be superimposed over varied ideologies, thereby triggering ideological mutation, they are also liable to dislodgement .\",\"PeriodicalId\":47036,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Political Ideologies\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"16 - 34\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Political Ideologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Political Ideologies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1873470","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要看似棘手的社会政治分歧,涉及一系列具有零和倾向的行动者和利益,继续困扰着泰国。本文认为,揭露泰国两极分化政治的偶然性有助于证明两极分化社会中去极端化的可能性。它通过描绘所谓的“黄-红”鸿沟的发展,将其与“右翼”(即自由主义/保守主义)和“左翼”(即平等主义)的尖锐意识形态分歧区分开来。文章随后证明,尽管意识形态两极分化的配置,如非自由民主和非民主自由主义/保守主义,必然会维持黄色和红色的韧性,但它们可能超出了争论者首先认同的意识形态配置范围。理论上的论点是,持有不同的意识形态观点并不需要两极分化。深度两极分化是偶然的,这与迈克尔·弗里登对意识形态的形态学描述有关。去极化反映的不是拒绝,而是沿着从右到左的连续谱线对左右二进制的重组。更详细地说,根据同样的逻辑,结构化的对抗可能叠加在不同的意识形态上,从而引发意识形态变异,它们也很容易被驱逐。
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
Thailand’s ideological struggle: towards the possibility of depolarizing Thailand’s polarized politics
ABSTRACT Seemingly intractable social-political divisions involving a range of actors and interests with zero-sum propensities continue to haunt Thailand. This article argues that unmasking the contingent nature of Thailand’s polarized politics helps vindicate the possibility of depolarization in societies steeped in polarization. It proceeds by sketching the development of the so-called ‘Yellow-Red’ divide, identifying it with the hard-edged, ideological bifurcation of ‘right’, i.e. liberalism/conservatism, and ‘left’, i.e. egalitarianism, respectively. The article then demonstrates that while ideologically polarized configurations such as illiberal democracy and undemocratic liberalism/conservatism necessarily sustain the resilience of Yellow and Red, they may be surplus to the range of ideological configurations with which disputants first and foremost identify. The theoretical argument is that holding different ideological viewpoints do not necessitate polarization. Deep polarization is contingent and this is connected to Michael Freeden’s morphological account of ideology. Depolarization reflects less of a rejection and more of a restructuring of the right-left binary along the lines of a continuum running from right to left. To elaborate, by the same logic that structured antagonisms may be superimposed over varied ideologies, thereby triggering ideological mutation, they are also liable to dislodgement .
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
Journal of Political Ideologies
Journal of Political Ideologies POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Journal of Political Ideologies is dedicated to the analysis of political ideology both in its theoretical and conceptual aspects, and with reference to the nature and roles of concrete ideological manifestations and practices. The journal serves as a major discipline-developing vehicle for an innovative, growing and vital field in political studies, exploring new methodologies and illuminating the complexity and richness of ideological structures and solutions that form, and are formed by, political thinking and political imagination. Concurrently, the journal supports a broad research agenda aimed at building inter-disciplinary bridges with relevant areas and invigorating cross-disciplinary debate.
期刊最新文献
Editorial: ideology and the individual Road not taken? Inventing, modernizing, and renegotiating the concept of association in 19 th -century Socialism A space for freedom: the Paleolibertarian coalition Whitewashing white Power: a Rhetorical Political Analysis of the parliamentary ambition of the Nordic Resistance Movement in Sweden Personal enemies, conceptual friends. Karl Loewenstein and Carl Schmitt on self-destructive legalism
×
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