The data are used to build an index of campaign professionalism which significantly improves previous measures by giving more attention to various campaign strategies instead of focusing only on material resources. However, contrary to our theoretical reasoning, the political left turns out to harbour the most professional parties. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors.
- Andreas Jungherr.
- Germany - Wikipedia.
- Media Democracy - Donges - - Major Reference Works - Wiley Online Library!
Any queries other than missing content should be directed to the corresponding author for the article. Volume 62 , Issue S1. If you do not receive an email within 10 minutes, your email address may not be registered, and you may need to create a new Wiley Online Library account. If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username. Tools Export citation Add to favorites Track citation.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe | Biography, Works, & Facts | opanubyderob.tk
Share Give access Share full text access. Share full text access. Please review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article. Get access to the full version of this article. View access options below. You previously purchased this article through ReadCube.
Institutional Login. Massenmedien als politische Akteure; Konzepte und Analysen. Die Akteursperspektive in der politischen Kommunikationsforschung; Fragestellungen, Forschungsparadigmen und Problemlagen.
People also read
Adam Eds. Melischek, J. Wilke Eds. McQuail Eds. Washington: Congressional Quarterly Press. Schmitt Eds. Connex Report Series Nr. Publizistik, 52 1 , Obstacles or motors of Europeanization? German media and the transnationalization of public debate. Communications, 31 , Imhof, R.
Jarren Eds. Blum, P. Gysin Eds. Medien und politische Kultur pp. Bern: Haupt Verlag. Bentele, H. Soziale Kontrolle. Latzer Eds. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft. Hermann Eds. Langenbucher, C. Ridder, U. Steininger Eds. Balzer, M. Rafat Eds. Weischenberg, H. Ferree, W. Gamson, J. Political Communication, Public Relations aus politikwissenschaftlicher Sicht.
Szyszka Eds. Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen und berufliches Handeln pp. Esser, F. New York: Cambridge University Press. Neidhardt, F. Eilders, F. Geschlossene Gesellschaft? Akteursensembles und Akteursbewertungen in Pressekommentaren. Deutschlands Kommunikationseliten aus der Innensicht , edited by L. Retrieved from Berlin: WZB-discussion papers. Retrieved from Projekt "PolitikOn".
Politische Kommunikation im internationalen Vergleich; Grundlagen, Anwendungen, perspektiven. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag. Koopmans, R. Towards a Europeanised Public Sphere? Comparing Political Actors and the Media in Germany. Fossum, P. Transformations of the European Union. In Verein der Freiburger Wirtschaftswissenschaftler Ed. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Politische Kommunikationskultur; ein theoretisches Konzept zur vergleichenden Analyse politischer Kommunikationssysteme. Tenscher Eds. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft. Politische Bildung, 4 , Jandura Eds.
Sprecher: Kommunikationsleistungen gesellschaftlicher Akteure. Pauley has given an overall presentation of the history of Austrian antisemitism. Boyer published not only a profound study on the emergence of antisemitism in the Austrian Christian Social Party, 21 but also - most recently - a thoughtful biography of the most important Austrian antisemite Karl Lueger. Furthermore this Dreyfus case has even been studied by James F. Brennan as a symptom of a European public opinion.
Log in to Wiley Online Library
In recent decades fundamental works on the rise of antisemitism in other European countries have been published too, including Russia 37 , Britain 38 , Poland 39 and Hungary 40 ; a comparative perspective however is still lacking. Already in on the other hand, the founding director of the Center for Research on Antisemitism, Herbert A.
Strauss, had opened the focus to Europe as a whole and edited a two-volume collection of seminal essays on the history of antisemitism which was no longer limited to the German-speaking regions, but provided an overview of historical research on antisemitism in Britain, France, Hungary, Poland and Russia from to the outbreak of the Second World War.
Of particular importance for this perspective, serving as guiding hypotheses, were theories, taken from social and political sciences, on the mechanisms at work in group conflicts, the creation of stereotypes, discrimination and political mobilization as well as economic crises and social change. This shift in orientation reveals the new concern with social tensions, economic dislocations, political mobilizations and how conflicts of interests are decided. Three questions take centre stage: firstly, the presence and impact of antisemitic networks and the role played by the media in the political public sphere.
The issue here is to determine in which countries and in which political constellations antisemitism could become a political force, in which concrete situations it proved popular and found an echo in society, and what were the causes for its failure. Secondly, aspects of social history are to be discussed on the basis of a European comparison. The key focus here is to ask in which strata of society and in which cultural milieus the language of antisemitism found approval and where was it rejected, which social groups were the pillars of the antisemitic movement, and to what extent antisemitism needs to be understood as a social movement.
In the case of Germany, it has already been established that the antisemitic movement was primarily made up of the old and new middle classes Mittelstand , sections of the bourgeoisie holding socially conservative views, together with parts of the rural population who were susceptible to antisemitic propaganda.
For the comparative perspective this means asking if and under which conditions these social classes also gravitated towards political antisemitism in other countries, or if and why there were other supporting groups. The third problem is the specific social practice, including anti-Jewish violence, which is an aspect that has increasingly attracted the attention of research in recent years. Besides these thematic aspects, this issue is also concerned with addressing the debates taking place in historical studies on whether a new political history is required, or whether the established political version needs to be complemented by cultural history, and how these debates can be made fruitful for research into antisemitism.
When antisemitism is seen as a political movement from cultural historical perspective then the conventional themes associated with political history are of less concern. Thus for instance the political ideas of antisemites or the antisemitic political parties, as the conventional approach undertook to do, will not be inquired.
What is at issue rather is to determine if and to what extent the new concepts and lines of inquiry emerging from such an interpolation of traditional political history with dimensions gleaned from cultural and micro-historical perspective can actually contribute to gain a new understanding of the phenomenon of antisemitism. The new focus on a cultural history of the political sphere or of politics sees politics primarily as a process of communication; politics is understood as a process of negotiations, of negotiating positions in a public arena, and as such, the new perspective includes a performative dimension.
Regarding antisemitism this means analyzing any antisemitic expression or presence in the public realm as a form of communicative action. Moreover, this new perspective on political history emphasizes the ritual character of the political and the significance of signs and symbols. For examining the rise of antisemitism, this involves determining how antisemites socially constitute their antisemitic worldview — that is, which signs and symbols were drawn on to express it.
Here politics and language enter into a relationship that is mutually determining, with one educing the other and vice versa; this means that in the new approach to political history the two manifestations of antisemitism — as historical semantic and socio-political movement — are seen as correlated and inextricably tied to one another. The new language of antisemitism enabled new antisemitic experiences, and the rhetoric of antisemitism spawned a new antisemitic political culture. Antisemitic words and phrases became antisemitic politics.
Antisemitism was expressed in concrete speech acts just as much as in social practices and performative acts; it was given expression in open actions as in wordless reservations. New political history perspectives not only enable a new definition of what is political, they make it possible to determine what is political in antisemitism, and to perceive how social, economic, religious, cultural and moral issues are all transformed into political ones.
Therefore in antisemitic rhetoric Jews could be stigmatized as scapegoats for social conflicts, and they had become the target of the antisemitic political movement. Politics in the sense of the new approach in historical research is to be essentially defined as communication, as a process of positioning and negotiating as well as the communicative shaping of collectively binding values and norms. In the case of antisemitism this allows us to reconstruct immanently how antisemites arrived at their antisemitic values and norms, namely through their own communication processes.
Seeking to determine the political dimension of antisemitism does not mean limiting the inquiry solely to antisemites. The new political history aims to explain how antisemites influenced and shaped the whole political culture of their society with their language and public presence — and not just their own antisemitic milieu. The goal of the essays in this issue is thus to make the concept of political culture fruitful for research on antisemitism.
The scholarly interest is focused on whether, and if so in which sense, we may speak of an antisemitic faction, if the fabric of its milieus was coherent and unified, or whether internal divisions and divergences predominated amongst the antisemites. At the same time, the way in which the language of antisemitism left its mark on the respective political culture as a whole is explored. Along with the cultural historical dimensions of political antisemitism, the European dimensions are also of chief concern in examining the development of antisemitism into a political movement.
In this respect the key issue is to determine what was specific about antisemitism in Germany. Not only was the new term coined here in , but the new form of animosity towards Jews first crystallized, too, into a political movement in Germany. What was singular in German antisemitism can only be discerned by way of a comparative analysis of antisemitism in other European countries.
Achieving this entails asking if German antisemitism had come to prominence already in the formative phase of antisemitism thanks to specific characteristics, or if rather a set of features prevailed across Europe in this phase. Our interest was thus focused on the European character of antisemitism, namely the questions if and to what extent this occurrence was genuinely European, and to what extent antisemitism needs to be understood as a European phenomenon.
Europe is a community linked together by multifaceted experiences, and as such, our concern is to determine if and to what extent the antisemitic political movement operated in a European public sphere, and how the various national and regional spheres overlapped or what separated them. In a remarkably short time the new catchphrase of antisemitism was circulating in all European languages, while almost all of the new editions of the various national encyclopedias since included an entry on antisemitism.
Wolf showed how the political antisemitism forming in the s became a European movement. From its starting point in Germany the movement spread to various regions of the Habsburg Monarchy, took hold in France, before assuming particularly violent forms in Russia and Romania. Despite this early diagnosis by Wolf, there is still a striking lack of works taking a comparative approach on a European scale or studies focusing on the European dimensions of antisemitism. In particular there is no attempt to undertake a European-wide synthesis of the origins and rise of antisemitism, nor on the question of the unity and diversity in its development.
These desiderata are all the more astonishing considering that, following their first public appearances in the Berlin movement and the subsequent process of political party formation in Germany and Europe, the antisemitic agitators of the s undertook attempts to establish themselves as a European movement. Although they ultimately failed and the European congresses they organized ended in disaster, the question remains if this failure did not after all display European features and the antisemitic movement nonetheless bore a pan-European signature.
Just how European was political antisemitism? The essays collected here are to serve as building blocks for an answer to the question whether we need to speak of a European antisemitism or of different paths of antisemitism in Europe. Are we dealing with several national and regional antisemitic movements, or may we speak of an antisemitic movement in Europe?
Is the phenomenon of this new hostility towards Jews in fact a sum of several national antisemitisms, where emphasis must be placed on the differences and the similarities assigned less importance, or is it a genuinely European antisemitism? Furthermore, the essays represent an initial attempt to answer the question of whether the European-wide reception of the term antisemitism and the debates on the new hostility observable in all European countries are to be understood as a moment when a European public was formed.
The question is: is antisemitism to be seen as a collective European syndrome? Naturally enough the following essays cannot cover all of the aforementioned dimensions of political antisemitism. As already indicated this includes issues emerging from conventional political history, the formation of political parties or political ideas. For Germany, this new cultural historical perspective on antisemitism has been presented in a huge amount of studies. Already in the mid 50s, Hans-Christian Gerlach studied some of these cultural aspects regarding the political antisemitism in Imperial Germany in his unpublished dissertation.