Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Editor’s Choice May 2021: COVID-19 and the Poli...

Links

View graph of relations

Editor’s Choice May 2021: COVID-19 and the Politics of Fear

Research output: Exhibits, objects and web-based outputsBlog

Published

Standard

Editor’s Choice May 2021: COVID-19 and the Politics of Fear. Johnson, Matthew (Author); Flinders, Matthew (Author); Degerman, Dan (Artist). 2021.

Research output: Exhibits, objects and web-based outputsBlog

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Johnson, Matthew (Author) ; Flinders, Matthew (Author) ; Degerman, Dan (Artist). / Editor’s Choice May 2021: COVID-19 and the Politics of Fear. [Blog].

Bibtex

@misc{9fd852fc84d949e1ad98d6692aa57d58,
title = "Editor{\textquoteright}s Choice May 2021: COVID-19 and the Politics of Fear",
abstract = "This Editor{\textquoteright}s Choice features contributions examining the (mis-)management of the pandemic. A year ago, we (Flinders, Degerman and Johnson) came together out of shared concern for the place of emotions in politics and shared belief that many orthodoxies on fear as an instrument of public administration were just wrong. As the pandemic worked its way through communities and countries across the globe, it became increasingly clear that long-standing rejections of fear as a negative or pre-political emotion failed to grasp not just its adaptive evolutionary value, but the vital role it can play in enabling societies to deal with crises. We set out the ways in which key frames of analysis had been rendered inadequate by the pandemic. Our conclusion was that, as a consequence, there was space for new scholarship on the politics of fear. This issue is the most substantive iteration of that work.",
author = "Matthew Johnson and Matthew Flinders and Dan Degerman",
year = "2021",
month = may,
day = "7",
language = "English",

}

RIS

TY - ADVS

T1 - Editor’s Choice May 2021: COVID-19 and the Politics of Fear

AU - Johnson, Matthew

AU - Flinders, Matthew

A2 - Degerman, Dan

PY - 2021/5/7

Y1 - 2021/5/7

N2 - This Editor’s Choice features contributions examining the (mis-)management of the pandemic. A year ago, we (Flinders, Degerman and Johnson) came together out of shared concern for the place of emotions in politics and shared belief that many orthodoxies on fear as an instrument of public administration were just wrong. As the pandemic worked its way through communities and countries across the globe, it became increasingly clear that long-standing rejections of fear as a negative or pre-political emotion failed to grasp not just its adaptive evolutionary value, but the vital role it can play in enabling societies to deal with crises. We set out the ways in which key frames of analysis had been rendered inadequate by the pandemic. Our conclusion was that, as a consequence, there was space for new scholarship on the politics of fear. This issue is the most substantive iteration of that work.

AB - This Editor’s Choice features contributions examining the (mis-)management of the pandemic. A year ago, we (Flinders, Degerman and Johnson) came together out of shared concern for the place of emotions in politics and shared belief that many orthodoxies on fear as an instrument of public administration were just wrong. As the pandemic worked its way through communities and countries across the globe, it became increasingly clear that long-standing rejections of fear as a negative or pre-political emotion failed to grasp not just its adaptive evolutionary value, but the vital role it can play in enabling societies to deal with crises. We set out the ways in which key frames of analysis had been rendered inadequate by the pandemic. Our conclusion was that, as a consequence, there was space for new scholarship on the politics of fear. This issue is the most substantive iteration of that work.

M3 - Blog

ER -