民粹主义和民族主义作为外交政策话语的分离:2010-19年欧元区危机期间希腊外交政策的案例

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Relations Pub Date : 2022-04-29 DOI:10.1177/00471178221094242
Angelos Chryssogelos
{"title":"民粹主义和民族主义作为外交政策话语的分离:2010-19年欧元区危机期间希腊外交政策的案例","authors":"Angelos Chryssogelos","doi":"10.1177/00471178221094242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Populism and nationalism are often grouped together as phenomena challenging international cooperation. This article argues that, despite these similarities, international relations and foreign policy scholarship can and should distinguish analytically between them. Populism and nationalism differ in how they visualise and articulate the boundaries of the political community and its relationship with political authority. Also, populism can be distinguished from nationalism in that the political community it discursively constructs and mobilises is temporally and territorially particularistic, holding different interests from those of the historically universal nation. These differences imply that populism and nationalism express themselves in distinct, although often overlapping, discourses in foreign policy. The article develops a typology of foreign policy discourses created by the intertwining of populism and nationalism and applies it to an analysis of Greek foreign policy during the decade of the Eurozone crisis (2010–19).","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disentangling populism and nationalism as discourses of foreign policy: the case of Greek foreign policy during the Eurozone crisis 2010-19\",\"authors\":\"Angelos Chryssogelos\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00471178221094242\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Populism and nationalism are often grouped together as phenomena challenging international cooperation. This article argues that, despite these similarities, international relations and foreign policy scholarship can and should distinguish analytically between them. Populism and nationalism differ in how they visualise and articulate the boundaries of the political community and its relationship with political authority. Also, populism can be distinguished from nationalism in that the political community it discursively constructs and mobilises is temporally and territorially particularistic, holding different interests from those of the historically universal nation. These differences imply that populism and nationalism express themselves in distinct, although often overlapping, discourses in foreign policy. The article develops a typology of foreign policy discourses created by the intertwining of populism and nationalism and applies it to an analysis of Greek foreign policy during the decade of the Eurozone crisis (2010–19).\",\"PeriodicalId\":47031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Relations\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178221094242\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178221094242","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

民粹主义和民族主义经常被归类为挑战国际合作的现象。本文认为,尽管有这些相似之处,国际关系和外交政策研究能够而且应该对它们进行分析区分。民粹主义和民族主义的不同之处在于它们如何想象和阐明政治共同体的边界及其与政治权威的关系。此外,民粹主义可以与民族主义区分开来,因为它话语建构和动员的政治社区在时间和地域上都是特殊的,与历史上普遍存在的民族有着不同的利益。这些差异意味着民粹主义和民族主义在外交政策中以不同的、尽管经常重叠的话语表达自己。本文发展了民粹主义和民族主义交织产生的外交政策话语的类型学,并将其应用于欧元区危机十年(2010-19)期间希腊外交政策的分析。
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
Disentangling populism and nationalism as discourses of foreign policy: the case of Greek foreign policy during the Eurozone crisis 2010-19
Populism and nationalism are often grouped together as phenomena challenging international cooperation. This article argues that, despite these similarities, international relations and foreign policy scholarship can and should distinguish analytically between them. Populism and nationalism differ in how they visualise and articulate the boundaries of the political community and its relationship with political authority. Also, populism can be distinguished from nationalism in that the political community it discursively constructs and mobilises is temporally and territorially particularistic, holding different interests from those of the historically universal nation. These differences imply that populism and nationalism express themselves in distinct, although often overlapping, discourses in foreign policy. The article develops a typology of foreign policy discourses created by the intertwining of populism and nationalism and applies it to an analysis of Greek foreign policy during the decade of the Eurozone crisis (2010–19).
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
International Relations
International Relations INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: International Relations is explicitly pluralist in outlook. Editorial policy favours variety in both subject-matter and method, at a time when so many academic journals are increasingly specialised in scope, and sectarian in approach. We welcome articles or proposals from all perspectives and on all subjects pertaining to international relations: law, economics, ethics, strategy, philosophy, culture, environment, and so on, in addition to more mainstream conceptual work and policy analysis. We believe that such pluralism is in great demand by the academic and policy communities and the interested public.
期刊最新文献
A neoclassical realist model of overconfidence and the Japan–Soviet Neutrality Pact in 1941 Brazil’s pragmatic equidistance: hedging and the Second World War Mediated public diplomacy and securitisation theory: the US campaign against Chinese 5G in Brazil and Chile Domestic terrorism, incumbency, and legislative vote shares The customer is always right? Flags of convenience and the assembling of maritime affairs
×
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