首页> 外文期刊>Development and change >Fight or Acquiesce? Religion and Political Process in Turkey's and Egypt's Neoliberalizations
【24h】

Fight or Acquiesce? Religion and Political Process in Turkey's and Egypt's Neoliberalizations

机译:战斗还是默许?土耳其和埃及新自由主义的宗教与政治进程

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The Polanyian expectation that disruptive marketization will lead to movements and policies that seek to 'embed' the market in society needs to be tempered by closer scrutiny to historical, religious and political contexts. This article studies how movements respond to marketization. The analysis proceeds through a comparison of the Turkish and Egyptian neoliberalizations, religious movements of the last decades, secular opposition, and finally recent processes, which have led to generally different social takes on neolib-eralism. The irony of the Turkish case is that with the empowerment of the Islamists, religious opposition to neoliberalism was muted and secular opposition further marginalized and labelled as 'anti-democratic'. As a result, free market policies were not only sustained, but deepened and intensified, turning Turkey into a neoliberal 'success story'. The (thus far) sustained mobilization of youth and labour in Egypt makes a direct imitation unlikely. Another major factor that would prevent a 'Turkish' solution to Egypt's crisis is the contrasting structure of the religious fields. Moreover, while the passive revolution has further solidified the professional and unified religious field in Turkey, the revolutionary process in Egypt seems to reinforce the fragmentation of the religious field. The article points out that making Islam compatible with neoliberalism would be more difficult in a country with a fragmented religious field, such as Egypt. Although neoliberalism was imposed from above and resisted from below in both nations, in Turkey it came to be embraced in the name of Islam and democracy, whereas in Egypt it remains an imposition and popular struggles against it persist. It is suggested that this process and field-based approach to a Polanyian problem can also shed new light on discussions about 'actually existing neoliberalisms'.
机译:波兰人对颠覆性市场化将导致旨在将市场“嵌入”社会的运动和政策的期望,需要通过对历史,宗教和政治背景的仔细审查来缓和。本文研究运动如何响应市场化。通过对土耳其和埃及的新自由主义,近几十年来的宗教运动,世俗的反对以及最后的近期进程进行比较,从而进行了分析,这导致了对新自由主义的社会看法普遍不同。具有土耳其讽刺意味的是,随着伊斯兰主义者的授权,对新自由主义的宗教反对被淡化了,世俗反对被进一步边缘化并被标记为“反民主”。结果,自由市场政策不仅得以维持,而且得到了深化和强化,使土耳其成为了新自由主义的“成功故事”。埃及(迄今)持续动员青年和劳动力使得不可能直接模仿。阻止“土耳其”解决埃及危机的另一个主要因素是宗教领域的对比结构。此外,尽管被动革命进一步巩固了土耳其的专业和统一宗教领域,但埃及的革命进程似乎加剧了宗教领域的分裂。该文章指出,在一个宗教领域零散的国家(例如埃及),使伊斯兰与新自由主义兼容将更加困难。尽管新自由主义在两个国家都是自上而下强加的,但在土耳其却以伊斯兰和民主的名义受到拥护,而在埃及,它仍然是一种强加于人的运动,反对它的民众斗争仍在继续。有人认为,这种解决波兰尼问题的过程和基于领域的方法也可以为有关“实际上存在的新自由主义”的讨论提供新的思路。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Development and change》 |2012年第1期|p.23-51|共29页
  • 作者

    Cihan Tugal;

  • 作者单位

    University of California Berkeley 410 Barrows Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号