Journal•ISSN: 1674-0750
Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences
Springer Science+Business Media
About: Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences is an academic journal. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): China & Politics. It has an ISSN identifier of 1674-0750. Over the lifetime, 293 publications have been published receiving 1086 citations.
Topics: China, Politics, Government, Global governance, Globalization
Papers
More filters
Journal Article•
184 citations
TL;DR: In a time of great change, accelerating globalization and increasing uncertainty, all countries, whether developed or developing, are searching for a new form of governance that is better adapted to the times so as to gain an advantage in economic competitiveness and create substantial and sustainable social growth as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: In a time of great change, accelerating globalization and increasing uncertainty, all countries, whether developed or developing, are searching for a new form of governance that is better adapted to the times so as to gain an advantage in economic competitiveness and create substantial and sustainable social growth. As governance theory is becoming the dominant political theory in response to the change, the values backing the discourse and texts consistent with them have helped revise the theory of government in mainstream politics and were agreed upon by global politicians, scholars, officials and entrepreneurs. When we comprehend governance theory based on the practice of public administration in China, it strikes us how theoretically and practically important governance theory is for rebuilding the intellectual system of China’s democratic politics, searching for an institutional platform for good governance, transforming the public policy-making model and getting rid of the practice in public administration in the process of market-oriented development that is inefficient, or even fails in many ways.
111 citations
TL;DR: This paper explored the nationalist roots of the trade war from both the US and Chinese perspectives, and concluded that until both sides are convinced they have achieved their goals, or the USA undergoes an administration change, the conflict will likely continue.
Abstract: The trade war between the USA and China has shocked many across the world. A disruption to the interdependence of the two largest economies seemed unfathomable. However, in an effort to thwart China’s economic practices and boost the US economy, President Trump’s administration levied tariffs on Chinese imports shortly after taking office, moving US foreign economic policy from liberalism, practiced for decades, to protectionism. China has retaliated, and the trade war continues today. With conceptual insights from the nationalism literature, we explore the nationalist roots of the trade war from both the US and Chinese perspectives. In the USA, the Trump administration’s plan to achieve energy autonomy, decrease reliance on foreign resources, and reinvigorate the manufacturing sector has led to protectionist policies, the othering of China, and hence the trade war. Although reluctant to enter the conflict, China has rebuffed the USA, resisting and counterattacking US actions, owing to a long-felt sense of persecution in the global space and an eagerness to participate fully, and lead in some issue areas, in international affairs. The conflict continues into the COVID-19 era, marked by US scapegoating of China and hits to economic performance. Until both sides are convinced they have achieved their goals, or the USA undergoes an administration change, the conflict will likely continue.
69 citations
TL;DR: In the last three decades, the rise of a populist challenge to the liberal political mainstream exposed how shallow the supposed victory of global liberalism was, even in its heartlands in Europe and North America as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: In the last three decades, the rise of a populist challenge to the liberal political mainstream exposed how shallow the supposed victory of global liberalism was, even in its heartlands in Europe and North America. Exclusive nationalism and nativism, identity politics, critiques of globalisation and internationalism, and calls for democratic re-empowerment of the demos have converged politically on a new locus of inflated territorial, indeed ‘border’ sovereignty, aligning the call of ‘taking back control’ on behalf of a radically re-defined community (‘we’) with a defensive re-territorialisation of power along existing fault lines of nation-statism. In this paper, I argue that the very same call has become the new common political denominator for all populist platforms and parties across Europe. I argue that populists across the conventional left–right divide have deployed a rigidly territorialised concept of popular sovereignty in order to bestow intellectual coherence and communicative power to the otherwise disparate strands of their anti-utopian critiques of globalisation. In spite of significant ideological differences between so-called right- and left-wing populism, in the short-term the two populist projects have sought to stage their performances of sovereigntism on, behind or inside the borders of the existing nation-states.
62 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the intersection of technological design of social media communication, the notion of post-politics-affective turn in contemporary (Western) societies and the rise of populism as a trend in political communication.
Abstract: The paper examines the intersection of technological design of Social Media communication, the notion of post-politics-affective turn in contemporary (Western) societies and the rise of populism as a trend in political communication. Following on conceptualizations for a Social Media approach to a broadly defined critical discourse studies framework (KhosraviNik, in: Kalyango and Kopytowska (eds) Why discourse matters: negotiating identity in the mediatized world, Peter Lang, New York, 2014, in: Flowerdew and Richardson, Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies, Routledge, London, 2017b), the paper attempts to integrate discussions on affective nature of communication in participatory web ecology and consequences of algorithmic regimentation of meaning bearing resources (e.g., news and entertainment) on Social Media. Issues around quality and distribution of digital discursive practices and their relations to traditional perceptions of rational politics, within the internalised ethos of visibility-as-legitimacy, are critically elaborated and examined. While the rise of right wing populism (e.g., Trump presidency, Brexit vote) should primarily be explicated within qualities of the context on the ground, i.e., the deliberate and well-orchestrated misplacement of real grievances in society through discursive operation and manipulation (KhosraviNik in Insight Turk 19(3):53–68, 2017a), it is equally important to critically elaborate the function and consequences of (digital) media practices as a main part of this socialization context. The overall argument here is that the hyper-normalization and triumph of neo-liberal rationality together with new media technological affordances, design and requirements have created a momentum for the growth of haphazard populist politics, i.e., the valorization of affective relevance over rational significance.
57 citations