صورة الغلاف المحلية
صورة الغلاف المحلية
عرض عادي

Framing the threat : how politicians justify their policies / Imke Kohler.

بواسطة:نوع المادة : نصنصالناشر:Berlin ; Boston : De Gruyter/Oldenbourg, 2019وصف:xi, 279 pagesنوع المحتوى:
  • text
نوع الوسائط:
  • computer
نوع الناقل:
  • online
تدمك:
  • 9783110622140
  • 9783110626056
الموضوع:تصنيف مكتبة الكونجرس:
  • JA85.2.U6
موارد على الانترنت:
المحتويات:
Part I: Research Design -- 1. Introduction -- Part II: Theoretical Framework and Methodology -- 2. Constructivism -- 3. Discourse Theory -- 4. Security Discourse -- 5. Mode of Conduct -- Part III: Empiricism -- 6. Bush’s Security Discourse and Policies -- 7. Obama’s Security Discourse and Policies -- Part IV: Conclusion -- 8. Findings and Implications -- References
ملخص:There is great power in the use of words: words create most of what we consider to be real and true. Framing our words and narratives is thus a tool of power - but a power that also comes with limitations. This intriguing issue is the topic of Framing the Threat, an investigation of the relationship between language and security and of how discourse creates the scope of possibility for political action. In particular, the book scrutinizes and compares the security narratives of the former US presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. It shows how their framings of identity, i.e., of the American 'self' and the enemy 'other' facilitated a certain construction of threat that shaped the presidents' detention and interrogation policies. By defining what was necessary in the name of national security, Bush's narrative justified the operation of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay and rendered the mistreatment of detainees possible - a situation that would have otherwise been illegal. Bush's framings therefore enabled legal limits to be pushed and made the violation of rules appear legitimate. Obama, in contrast, constructed a threat scenario that required an end to rule violations, and the closure of Guantanamo for security reasons. According to this narrative, a return to the rule of law was imperative if the American people were to be kept safe. However, Obama's framing was continually challenged, and it was never able to dominate public discourse. Consequently, Framing the Threat argues Obama was unable to implement the policy changes he had announced.
المقتنيات
نوع المادة المكتبة الحالية رقم الطلب رابط URL حالة تاريخ الإستحقاق الباركود حجوزات مادة
مصدر رقمي مصدر رقمي UAE Federation Library | مكتبة اتحاد الإمارات Online Copy | نسخة إلكترونية رابط إلى المورد لا يعار
إجمالي الحجوزات: 0

Includes bibliographical references (pages 224-279).

Part I: Research Design -- 1. Introduction -- Part II: Theoretical Framework and Methodology -- 2. Constructivism -- 3. Discourse Theory -- 4. Security Discourse -- 5. Mode of Conduct -- Part III: Empiricism -- 6. Bush’s Security Discourse and Policies -- 7. Obama’s Security Discourse and Policies -- Part IV: Conclusion -- 8. Findings and Implications -- References

There is great power in the use of words: words create most of what we consider to be real and true. Framing our words and narratives is thus a tool of power - but a power that also comes with limitations. This intriguing issue is the topic of Framing the Threat, an investigation of the relationship between language and security and of how discourse creates the scope of possibility for political action. In particular, the book scrutinizes and compares the security narratives of the former US presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. It shows how their framings of identity, i.e., of the American 'self' and the enemy 'other' facilitated a certain construction of threat that shaped the presidents' detention and interrogation policies. By defining what was necessary in the name of national security, Bush's narrative justified the operation of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay and rendered the mistreatment of detainees possible - a situation that would have otherwise been illegal. Bush's framings therefore enabled legal limits to be pushed and made the violation of rules appear legitimate. Obama, in contrast, constructed a threat scenario that required an end to rule violations, and the closure of Guantanamo for security reasons. According to this narrative, a return to the rule of law was imperative if the American people were to be kept safe. However, Obama's framing was continually challenged, and it was never able to dominate public discourse. Consequently, Framing the Threat argues Obama was unable to implement the policy changes he had announced.

اضغط على الصورة لمشاهدتها في عارض الصور

صورة الغلاف المحلية
شارك

أبوظبي، الإمارات العربية المتحدة

reference@ecssr.ae

97124044780 +

حقوق النشر © 2026 مركز الإمارات للدراسات والبحوث الاستراتيجية جميع الحقوق محفوظة