首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Risk and Contingency Management >Comparing the Socio-Political Ethics of Fighting Terrorism with Extreme Self-Defense in USA: An Exploratory Insight
【24h】

Comparing the Socio-Political Ethics of Fighting Terrorism with Extreme Self-Defense in USA: An Exploratory Insight

机译:在美国,将反恐的社会政治道德与极端自卫相比较:探索性见解

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In this study the authors adopted a post-positivist research design philosophy to explore the likelihood that Americans would support extreme self-defense policies like torture, reducing human rights or banning Muslims to fight against global terrorism, especially after 9/11 and in light of the Trump conservative government. The authors grounded their research questions into the literature to form hypotheses in a correlational design strategy which they tested using nonparametric statistics. They collected opinions from 3213 Americans during 2016-2017 about applying extreme self-defense tactics to combat global terrorism and how these opinions contrasted between those holding a conservative versus liberal or other individualistic socio-political ideology. The surprising results were that American citizens did not unanimously endorse banning Muslims (only 30% supported the policy and 6% were undecided) but the majority (51%) of participants sanctioned torture as a self-defense to combat global terrorism.
机译:在这项研究中,作者采用了后实证主义的研究设计理念,以探索美国人支持极端的自卫政策(例如酷刑,减少人权或禁止穆斯林与全球恐怖主义作斗争)的可能性,尤其是在9/11之后并根据特朗普保守党政府。作者将他们的研究问题打入了文献中,从而在相关设计策略中形成了假设,并使用非参数统计进行了检验。他们在2016年至2017年期间收集了3213名美国人的意见,这些意见涉及运用极端的自卫手段打击全球恐怖主义,以及持有保守派与自由派或其他个人主义社会政治思想的人之间的差异。令人惊讶的结果是,美国公民并未一致赞成禁止穆斯林(只有30%的人支持该政策,而6%的人尚未决定),但大多数参与者(51%)将酷刑作为打击全球恐怖主义的一种自卫手段。

著录项

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