Neoliberalism, alternatives and (de)politicisation: Analysis of political discourse during the coronavirus crisis

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11230%2F25%3A10488082" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11230/25:10488082 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=iGlYxUb1qP" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=iGlYxUb1qP</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09579265241253854" target="_blank" >10.1177/09579265241253854</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Neoliberalism, alternatives and (de)politicisation: Analysis of political discourse during the coronavirus crisis

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

This study denaturalises the prevailing belief that crises bolster neoliberalism. It contends that context matters deeply - particularly in the lead-up to elections - and that not all politicians advocate a neoliberal agenda. Furthermore, it uncovers the cyclical relationship between (de)politicisation and coronavirus crisis in Czechia. The research employs discursive historical approach and critical discourse analysis to answer following research questions: 1) During the coronavirus crisis, did elite and expert discourse reinforce neoliberal hegemony or promote alternatives? 2) How did this manifest in their discourse? and 3) Was the crisis (de)politicised? The results show that the discourse of elites did not deepen neoliberalisation, since other discursive themes appeared. Politicians mostly used strategy of argumentation and intensification to legitimise measures, which the study describes in detail. Regarding (de)politicisation, a cycle occurred where the crisis was not politicised initially, but when vaccines were addressed, the crisis became a source of political conflict. With a new government coming in, the data suggest depoliticisation again.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Neoliberalism, alternatives and (de)politicisation: Analysis of political discourse during the coronavirus crisis

Popis výsledku anglicky

This study denaturalises the prevailing belief that crises bolster neoliberalism. It contends that context matters deeply - particularly in the lead-up to elections - and that not all politicians advocate a neoliberal agenda. Furthermore, it uncovers the cyclical relationship between (de)politicisation and coronavirus crisis in Czechia. The research employs discursive historical approach and critical discourse analysis to answer following research questions: 1) During the coronavirus crisis, did elite and expert discourse reinforce neoliberal hegemony or promote alternatives? 2) How did this manifest in their discourse? and 3) Was the crisis (de)politicised? The results show that the discourse of elites did not deepen neoliberalisation, since other discursive themes appeared. Politicians mostly used strategy of argumentation and intensification to legitimise measures, which the study describes in detail. Regarding (de)politicisation, a cycle occurred where the crisis was not politicised initially, but when vaccines were addressed, the crisis became a source of political conflict. With a new government coming in, the data suggest depoliticisation again.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50401 - Sociology

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GA22-00800S" target="_blank" >GA22-00800S: Under Pressure: krize, emoce a politické transformace kolem změny klimatu</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2025

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Discourse and Society

ISSN

0957-9265

e-ISSN

1460-3624

Svazek periodika

36

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

20

Strana od-do

78-97

Kód UT WoS článku

001234254800001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-86000796395