首页> 外文OA文献 >Comparing protests and demonstrators in times of austerity: regular and occasional protesters in universalistic and particularistic mobilisations,
【2h】

Comparing protests and demonstrators in times of austerity: regular and occasional protesters in universalistic and particularistic mobilisations,

机译:比较紧缩时期的抗议者和示威者:普遍和特殊动员中的定期和偶尔的抗议者,

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The recent economic crisis shaped a new wave of protest in Europe mobilising thousands of people. Austerity measures brought not only the ‘usual suspects’ onto the streets, they also awoke less frequent demonstrators. What brought all these people to the streets? Are their motivations the same for participation in all demonstrations? We compare participants in two types of mobilisations against austerity: those called particularistic (which are reactions to particular anti-austerity issues), and those universalistic (which address much broader issues such as questioning the political system). We also compare two typologies of participants taking into account their participation history: regular and occasional protesters. Employing a two-by-two design defined by type of demonstration (Particularistic vs. Universalistic) and the individual’s participation history (Occasionals vs. Regulars), we found that the differences between demonstrations were smaller than those within types of protesters. Nevertheless, even in this period of hardship, motivation to participate in particularistic or universalistic protests differ depending on the perceptions of political system, ideological positioning and organisational embeddedness. Interaction analyses showed that different levels of identity, trust in institutions and satisfaction with democracy are crucial in driving people to participate in different types of demonstrations as occasionals or regulars.
机译:最近的经济危机在欧洲掀起了一波新的抗议浪潮,动员了数千人。紧缩措施不仅使“通常的嫌疑犯”走上了街头,而且还唤醒了不常出现的示威者。是什么把所有这些人带到了街头?他们参加所有示威活动的动机是否相同?我们比较了紧缩政策的两种动员参与者:称为特殊主义的动员(对特定的反紧缩问题的反应)和具有普遍性的动议(解决更广泛的问题,例如质疑政治制度)。我们还会根据参与者的参与历史比较参与者的两种类型:定期抗议者和偶尔抗议者。根据示威类型(特殊主义与普世主义)和个人的参与历史(偶发与常规)定义的两比二设计,我们发现示威之间的差异小于抗议者类型之间的差异。然而,即使在这个艰难时期,参加特殊主义或普世主义抗议的动机也有所不同,这取决于对政治制度,意识形态定位和组织嵌入的看法。互动分析表明,不同层次的身份认同,对机构的信任和对民主的满意度对于驱使人们偶尔或定期参加不同类型的示威游行至关重要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

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