Beyond ethnic entrenchment and amelioration: an analysis of non-sectarian social movements and Lebanon’s consociationalism
Beyond ethnic entrenchment and amelioration: an analysis of non-sectarian social movements and Lebanon’s consociationalism
复制标题
超越种族巩固和改善：对非宗派社会运动和黎巴嫩联合主义的分析
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Nagle
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Nagle
关于联合体权力分享的研究在它是否为和平建设提供了一个成功的模式或反而加剧了敌对的种族分裂方面存在分歧。在这些辩论中，非教派运动要么被忽视，要么被视为被边缘化、被拉拢、被剥夺权力和因权力分享而丧失权力的行为体。本文将重点从“要么”或“要么”的分析中转移出来，分析联合主义对巩固或削弱民族分裂的能力。另外，它还审查了权力分享对一系列问题和群体产生影响的不同方式，以及非族裔社会运动作为回应而产生的不同参与模式。权力分享创造了各种动态，可能导致霸权主义的顺从，建设性的接触，或跨越种族分裂的社会运动行为者的积极抵抗。使用黎巴嫩作为一个案例研究，本文探讨了运动，处理性，私有化和公共产品，这些问题是由联合机构形成的，但很少纳入权力分享的研究。
ABSTRACT Research on consociational power-sharing divides on whether it provides a successful model for peacebuilding or instead exacerbates antagonistic ethnic divisions. In these debates, non-sectarian movements are either invisible or rendered as actors marginalized, co-opted, stripped of agency and disempowered by power-sharing. This article moves the focus away from “either” “or” analyses of consociationalism measuring its capacity to entrench or weaken ethnic divisions. Alternatively, it examines the different ways power-sharing effects a range of issues and groups and the varying modes of engagement generated by non-ethnic social movements in response. Power-sharing creates various dynamics that can result in either hegemonic compliance, constructive engagement, or active resistance by social movement actors that cross-cut ethnic cleavages. Using Lebanon as a case study, the paper examines movements that deal with sexuality, privatization, and public goods, issues that are shaped by consociational institutions but rarely incorporated in power-sharing research.