La cuestión abierta de las tres Ppolarización, populismo y posverdad en perspectiva emotivista

  1. Rodríguez Sáez, Arturo 1
  2. Robles Morales, José Manuel 2
  1. 1 Universidad Internacional de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad Internacional de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/029gnnp81

  2. 2 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

Revista:
Isegoría: Revista de filosofía moral y política

ISSN: 1130-2097

Any de publicació: 2023

Número: 69

Tipus: Article

DOI: 10.3989/ISEGORIA.2023.69.09 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAccés obert editor

Altres publicacions en: Isegoría: Revista de filosofía moral y política

Resum

Polarization, populism, and post-truth form three fundamental socio-political phenomena to understand how politics is being oriented in demo liberal systems. Political polarization is usually understood as a dynamic process of activation of the divisions between two or more social groups during public debates that can end with a communicative rupture or failed communication. Although specialists do not agree when it comes to defining populism, they can be understood as a concrete way of building the people through a discourse that opposes the people to the anti-people. Post-truth would refer to an ongoing cultural trend where factual truths are diminished in favour of subjectively experienced truths. These phenomena tend to be perceived by a good part of society and the academic world as a serious threat to the pluralistic and reflexive foundations of democracy. However, this consideration is normatively decanted. This article tries to explore a different frame of reference, emotivism, and how, from this angle, the three key concepts make sense: polarization, populism, and post-truth.

Referències bibliogràfiques

  • Aslanidis, P. (2016). “Is Populism an Ideology? A Reflection and a New Perspective”. Political Studies, 64 (1): 88-104.
  • Bazzocchi, C. (2020). “Il populismo è sempre di destra”. Rivista Di Filosofia, Storia e Scienze Umane, 8(1): 268-305.
  • Cambridge University Press (2020) Cambridge Dictionary. Cambridge. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/
  • Castells, M. (2009). Comunicación y Poder. Madrid: Alianza
  • D’Ancona, M. (2017). Post Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back. London: Ebury Press.
  • De la Torre, C. (2017). Populismos. Una inmersión rápida. Barcelona: Ediciones Tibidabo.
  • Englebetsen, G. (2006). Bare facts and naked truths: a new correspondence theory of truth. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company.
  • Ferraris, M. (2019). La posverdad y otros enigmas. Madrid: Alianza Editorial
  • Freeden, M. (2003). Ideology. Oxford: Oxford University Press
  • Guevara, J. A., Atienza, J., Gómez, D. y Robles, J. M. (2023). “Polarization and incivility in digital debates on women’s rights in Spain. Not just a matter of machismo”, Journal of Gender Studies, 32, 18-32.
  • Habermas, J. (2010). Teoría de la Acción Comunicativa. Madrid: Trotta,
  • Hernández Marcos, M. (2018). “El victimismo, un nuevo estilo de vida. Intento de caracterización”. Eikasía: revista de filosofía, 82, 237-266.
  • Hume, D. (2014). Tratado de la naturaleza humana. Madrid: Alianza.
  • Keyes, R. (2004). The Post-truth Era: Dishonesty and Deception in Contemporary Life. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
  • Laclau, E. (2016). La razón populista. Madrid: Fondo de Cultura Económico.
  • Maldonado, A. (2016). La democracia sentimental. Políticas y Emociones en el siglo XXI. Barcelona: Página Indómita.
  • Mazzoleni, G. (2014). “Mediatization and Political Populism”. En: J. Strömbäck y F. Esser (Eds.), The Mediatization of Politics: Understanding the Transformation of Western Democracies: 42-56. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • McIntyre, L. (2020) Posverdad. Madrid: Cátedra.
  • McPherson, C. B. (2003). La democracia liberal y su época. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
  • Moffit, B. (2016). The Global Rise of Populism. Performance, Political Style, and Representation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  • Mouffe, C. (2019). Por un Populismo de Izquierda. Madrid: Siglo XXI.
  • Mudde, C. (2004). “The Populist Zeitgeist”. Government and Opposition, 39(4): 542-563.
  • Ortí, A. (1988). “Para Analizar el Populismo: Movimiento, Ideología y Discurso Populistas. (El caso de Joaquín Costa: populismo agrario y populismo españolista imaginario)”. Historia Social, 2: 75-98
  • Ostiguy, P. (2017). “Populism: A Socio-Cultural Approach”. En: C. Rovira, P. Taggart, P. Ochoa y P. Ostiguy (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Populism: 73-97. Oxford: Oxford University Press
  • Oxford University Press (2016). Word of the Year 2016. Oxford Languages: https://bit.ly/3a8D79p
  • Prior, M. (2013). “Media and political polarization”. Annual Review of Political Science, 16, 101-127.
  • Robles, J. M. y Córdoba, A. (2019). Digital Political Participation, Social Networks and Big Data: Disintermediation in the Era of Web 2.0. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Sánchez Berrocal, A. (2021). “Populismos”. Eunomía. Revista en Cultura de la Legalidad, 20, 292-309.
  • Schroeder, R. (2018). Social Theory After the Internet. London: University College London Press.
  • Stevenson, Charles, L. (1944). Ethics and Language. Yale: Yale University Press.
  • Stroud, N. J. (2017). “Selective Exposure Theories”. En The Oxford Handbook of Political Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Vallespín, F. y Martínez Bascuñán, M. (2017). Populismos. Madrid: Alianza.
  • Villacañas, J. L. (2015). Populismo. Madrid: La Huerta Grande
  • Wagner, A. (2022). “Retos filosóficos de las sociedades digitales: esbozo de un enfoque sistémico”. Dilemata, 38, 13-29.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet