Previous articleNext article FreeEditor’s NoteContested FramesRoger KarapinRoger KarapinEditor-in-Chief Search for more articles by this author Editor-in-ChiefPDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmailQR Code SectionsMoreFrames are everywhere in political life. They can be used to interpret public problems and solutions, but also the identity and worthiness of political actors. They can be deployed both on immediate policy issues and on meta-issues concerning the political system itself. Where frames are used deliberately, to try to gain adherents to a particular interpretation of reality, there is also contestation over frames, even if it is only implicit. Much scholarly work focuses on their use by challengers to power, whether social movements or outsider political parties. But in their framing efforts, challengers respond to the dominant frames propagated by power holders or the mainstream culture, and those in power can develop counter-frames in response to new movements. Contestation over frames can occur in many settings, including through the tactics of protest movements, claims made in election campaigns, the construction of media accounts, and the ways policies are presented by governments. Adding a layer of complexity, scholars and other observers may develop their own frames to interpret the results of that contestation.This issue opens with a symposium edited by Anna Grzymala-Busse on “Global Populisms and the European Experience.”1 The symposium offers a wide-ranging examination of the rise of populist parties to positions of power in recent decades, focusing mainly on Europe and on right-wing populism, with comparison to left-wing populism in Latin America. Following an introduction by Gryzmala-Busse, which sets the stage and defines the terms of the symposium, the contributions discuss how populists frame the meaning of “the people,” immigration, and the transfer of authority to the European Union, and they trace the causes of recent populist successes in types of capitalism (Roberts), dissatisfaction with democracy (Berman), party convergence on economic policy (Lynch), the loss of national sovereignty to the European Union (McNamara), and the rise of immigration and identity politics (Vachudova).2 The symposium also includes an article that examines in detail the consequences of unchecked populist rule for democratic institutions and norms in Poland and Hungary (Grzymala-Busse) and ends with a concluding article by Gryzmala-Busse.3Next, Joe Mello, in “The Right Stuff?,” analyzes the relation between the frames used in nine ballot campaigns on same-sex marriage in the United States from 2008 to 2012, contesting the common interpretation that equal-rights frames were less successful than family-oriented frames.4 In “Pathos, Poverty, and Politics: Booker T. Washington’s Radically Reimagined American Civilization,” Michael Richards challenges the prevailing conservative accommodationist frame for interpreting political thought, revealing in its place Washington’s democratic vision of equality and reciprocity between the races.5 Finally, Luke Plotica, in “The Fight for (Free) Time,” contests the deep framework of clock-time that structures recent work examining the temporal dimension of justice, and argues that justice requires not just more free time for individuals, but also the inclusion of alternative temporal practices and frameworks.6 Notes 1. Anna Grzymala-Busse, ed., “Symposium on Global Populisms and the European Experience,” Polity 51 (2019): 631–723.2. Anna Grzymala-Busse, “Introduction,” Polity 51 (2019): 631–40; Kenneth M. Roberts, “Bipolar Disorders: Varieties of Capitalism and Populist Out-Flanking on the Left and Right,” Polity 51 (2019): 641–53; Sheri Berman, “Populism is a Symptom Rather than a Cause: Democratic Disconnect, the Decline of the Center-Left, and the Rise of Populism in Western Europe,” Polity 51 (2019): 654–67; Julia Lynch, “Populism, Partisan Convergence, and Mobilization in Western Europe,” Polity 51 (2019): 668–77; Kathleen R. McNamara, “When the Banal Becomes Political: The European Union in the Age of Populism,” Polity 51 (2019): 678–88; and Milada Anna Vachudova, “From Competition to Polarization in Central Europe: How Populists Change Party Systems and the European Union,” Polity 51 (2019), 689–706.3. Anna Grzymala-Busse, “How Populists Rule: The Consequences for Democratic Governance,” Polity 51 (2019): 707–17; and Gryzmala-Busse, “Conclusion,” Polity 51 (2019): 718–23.4. Joe Mello, “The Right Stuff? Assessing the Use of Rights Discourse in Same-Sex Marriage Ballot Measure Campaigns,” Polity 51 (2019): 724–48.5. Michael Richards, “Pathos, Poverty, and Politics: Booker T. Washington’s Radically Reimagined American Civilization,” Polity 51 (2019): 749–79.6. Luke Phillip Plotica, “The Fight for (Free) Time,” Polity 51 (2019): 780–806. Previous articleNext article DetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Polity Volume 51, Number 4October 2019Contested Frames The Journal of the Northeastern Political Science Association Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/705571HistoryPublished online September 23, 2019 © 2019 Northeastern Political Science Association. All rights reserved.PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.
Read full abstract
Oct 31, 2019
Luolin Zhao + 1
Open Access
