Introduction: the politics of blame in an era of uncertainty
Introduction: the politics of blame in an era of uncertainty
From coping with Covid-19 through to the politics of presidential elections, from the emergence of populist pressures through to the management of rising inequality, and from the repair of historical injustices through to the outbreak of new international conflicts – to mention just a few relevant topics – the analysis of modern politics and governance is increasingly framed through a focus on one simple question: ‘Who’s to blame?’
Answering this question is, however, rarely straightforward. Temporal dimensions, bureaucratic complexity, multi-levelled relationships and the existence of often deep emotional dynamics in fast-moving environments can serve to complicate the attribution of responsibility. The existence of a powerful and arguably increasingly aggressive ‘negativity bias’ within modern societies also frames the allocation of blame with a certain tone and texture that explains its links to notions of ‘naming’, ‘shaming’ and increasingly ‘gaming’. This, in turn, flows through into broader and often socio-cultural questions about scapegoating, sacrificial lambs and ‘saying sorry’, and less of a focus on questions concerning the politics of praise, positivity and credit-claiming.
Engaging with blame-based questions and achieving a rounded understanding of the politics and governance of blame has in the past been hampered by the existence of a rather scattered and fragmented knowledge base. Islands of theorising and distinct seams of scholarship have rarely been connected, while a focus on nation states and democratic systems has tended to obscure the allocation of blame in authoritarian regimes or across international boundaries.
Through a focus on ‘gaps’, ‘traps’, ‘challenges’ and ‘opportunities’ this major collection reaches across traditional disciplinary, historical and institutional boundaries – and challenges a number of ‘self-evident truths’ and foundational assumptions - in order to offer a full, original and integrated account of the politics and governance of blame.
blame, uncertainty, risk, government
Rhodes, R.A.W.
cdbfb699-ba1a-4ff0-ba2c-060626f72948
2024
Rhodes, R.A.W.
cdbfb699-ba1a-4ff0-ba2c-060626f72948
Rhodes, R.A.W.
(2024)
Introduction: the politics of blame in an era of uncertainty.
In,
Flinders, Matthew, Rhodes, Roderick, Dimova, Gergana, Hinterleitner, Marcus and , Kent Weaver
(eds.)
The Politics of Blame in an Era of Uncertainty.
Oxford.
Oxford University Press.
Record type:
Book Section
Abstract
From coping with Covid-19 through to the politics of presidential elections, from the emergence of populist pressures through to the management of rising inequality, and from the repair of historical injustices through to the outbreak of new international conflicts – to mention just a few relevant topics – the analysis of modern politics and governance is increasingly framed through a focus on one simple question: ‘Who’s to blame?’
Answering this question is, however, rarely straightforward. Temporal dimensions, bureaucratic complexity, multi-levelled relationships and the existence of often deep emotional dynamics in fast-moving environments can serve to complicate the attribution of responsibility. The existence of a powerful and arguably increasingly aggressive ‘negativity bias’ within modern societies also frames the allocation of blame with a certain tone and texture that explains its links to notions of ‘naming’, ‘shaming’ and increasingly ‘gaming’. This, in turn, flows through into broader and often socio-cultural questions about scapegoating, sacrificial lambs and ‘saying sorry’, and less of a focus on questions concerning the politics of praise, positivity and credit-claiming.
Engaging with blame-based questions and achieving a rounded understanding of the politics and governance of blame has in the past been hampered by the existence of a rather scattered and fragmented knowledge base. Islands of theorising and distinct seams of scholarship have rarely been connected, while a focus on nation states and democratic systems has tended to obscure the allocation of blame in authoritarian regimes or across international boundaries.
Through a focus on ‘gaps’, ‘traps’, ‘challenges’ and ‘opportunities’ this major collection reaches across traditional disciplinary, historical and institutional boundaries – and challenges a number of ‘self-evident truths’ and foundational assumptions - in order to offer a full, original and integrated account of the politics and governance of blame.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 2024
Keywords:
blame, uncertainty, risk, government
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 492129
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/492129
PURE UUID: f4644d66-a28a-4dec-ba27-3b231ebdb52e
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 17 Jul 2024 16:46
Last modified: 13 Sep 2024 01:45
Export record
Contributors
Editor:
Matthew Flinders
Editor:
Roderick Rhodes
Editor:
Gergana Dimova
Editor:
Marcus Hinterleitner
Editor:
Kent Weaver
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics