Rightful Resistance in Rural China (Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Rightful Resistance in Rural China (Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Rightful Resistance in Rural China (Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics) book. Happy reading Rightful Resistance in Rural China (Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Rightful Resistance in Rural China (Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Rightful Resistance in Rural China (Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics) Pocket Guide.

Durkheim Emile Suicide. Glencoe, II : Free Press. Frakt Phyllis M. Gamson William A. Belmont, CA : Wadsworth. Wuhan : Huazhong Univ.

Account Options

Goldstone Jack A. Sewell William H. Tarrow Sidney and Tilly Charles eds. Silence and Voice in the Study of Contentious Politics. Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Heilmann Sebastian and Perry Elizabeth J. Cambridge, MA : Harvard Univ. Oxford : Oxford Univ. Chinese Society: Change Conflict and Resistance. Berkeley, CA : Univ. Chicago, IL : Univ. Ithaca, NY : Cornell Univ. Migdal Joel S.

Minzner Carl F. Nathan Andrew J. Oi Jean C. Bernstein, Thomas P. Taxation without Representation in Rural China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bestselling Series

Blecher, Marc. CrossRef Google Scholar.

China, Europe on path of expanding pragmatic cooperation under B&R Initiative

Cai, Fang et al. Cai, Yong-Shun. Chao, Kang. Chen, Aimin.

Chen, Feng. Crowley, Steven. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Dittmer, Lowell and William Hurst. Duara, Prasenjit. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield. Eckholm, Erik.

Eisinger, Peter K. Volume 67, Number 1 March : 11— Fonow, Mary Margaret. Goffman, Erving. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Goodman, David S.

Religion, Resistance, and Contentious Politics in China (中国的宗教、抵抗与抗争政治)

Hendrischke and Feng eds. London: Routledge. Gu, Jinling. Guowuyuan Fazhan Yanjiu Zhongxin. Hung, Eva P. Hurst, William. Moreover, the project proponents also began to actively engage in framing. They found a skilful spokesman in physicist Fang Shimin, who was instrumental in a de-legitimation campaign that framed the opposition and their arguments as irrational, unscientific, elitist, or self-serving.

Scientific knowledge is effectively under the control of the authorities, and engaging in a scientifically informed debate is therefore impossible. Only because of the high stakes and high profile of these large-scale projects was it possible to initiate a nationwide media debate on them, which in turn made successful resistance possible. We may assume that the average industrial project with support from the largely unchecked authority of local Party secretaries has a very slim chance of being challenged by the mechanisms Mertha outlines.

Rightful Resistance in Rural China - Kevin J. O'Brien, Lianjiang Li - Google книги

While this does not negate the importance of his analysis, it may indicate that the cases are critical in a different way that remains to be defined. For example, the author maintains that the main function of frames is to mobilise p. However, this function seems not entirely apparent in his analysis.

Who is actually mobilised by the frame that defeated the project in Dujiangyan?

  1. A Short History of the Modern Media.
  2. Politicization of Religion, the Power of Symbolism: The Case of Former Yugoslavia and its Successor States?
  3. Political Science | The Politics of Protest | Amherst College?
  4. The Politics of Protest!
  5. Rightful Resistance in Rural China : Kevin J. O'Brien : .

The frame might have resonated, but how do we know that p. Yet, Mertha also hints at another function of frames when he introduces the concept. What is decisive seems to be the de-legitimising function rather than resonance, not to mention the mobilisation part of the equation. However, the relationship between framing, political power, the state, and its legitimatory discourse is still a largely neglected issue in framing theory.

The approach is primarily concerned with the discursive interaction between social movement actors and their potentially mobilisable constituent audience. This might call for theoretical expansion beyond framing in future analyses of discursive resistance in China. However, this reviewer thinks both approaches share a common key insight that might deserve further attention. Both monographs highlight how power can be subverted by the means of language, by juxtaposing the actual practice of power with legitimatory principles of higher order that the Chinese state claims guide the exercise of its authority.

The more public this attack with legitimatory claims, the stronger the political momentum. Convincing accounts of successful resistance against powerful opponents must explain how the seemingly powerless may overcome the powerful. Mainstream scholarship from contentious politics, for example, solves this basic problem by empowering actors with resources resource mobilisation or political opportunities that make the coercive capacity of the state less of a threat.

Since the s, framing theory adds discursive meaning-work as an aid to mobilising supporters. What all these concepts have in common is that they perceive power and its resistance essentially in material terms. When contenders have resources, exploit opportunities, or appear in large numbers, it seems more plausible that they can overcome a materially powerful opponent.