Titlebook: Stirring Up Hatred; Myth, Identity and O Jen Neller Book 2023 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to S

照相机

书目名称Stirring Up Hatred影响因子(影响力)




书目名称Stirring Up Hatred影响因子(影响力)学科排名




书目名称Stirring Up Hatred网络公开度




书目名称Stirring Up Hatred网络公开度学科排名




书目名称Stirring Up Hatred被引频次




书目名称Stirring Up Hatred被引频次学科排名




书目名称Stirring Up Hatred年度引用




书目名称Stirring Up Hatred年度引用学科排名




书目名称Stirring Up Hatred读者反馈




书目名称Stirring Up Hatred读者反馈学科排名

Indicative

Myth, Identity, Order,nts for identities, affects, values and how they relate to each other. Attention to myths in the parliamentary debates therefore illuminates how arguments about the stirring up hatred offences coalesced around particular constructs of identity and ‘good’ order.

小步走路

Progress and Tradition: Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008,ated along side religious hatred in Part IIIA of the Public Order Act 1986. As with the religious hatred debates, opposition to the new offences resulted in compromise. However, their enactment was made possible by a reinterpretation of law on incitement and recourse to the myth of a clash of civilisations.

ear-canal

Decoloniality and Deneoliberality: A Six-Point Toolkit,al and neoliberal logics within hate speech law and for advancing towards more egalitarian and dignitarian alternatives. Ultimately, it is argued that such alternatives require forward-looking processes of identification, dynamic visions of order and wider and less polarising means of accountability and redress.

错

Book 2023rough a critical discourse analysis of key excerpts of parliamentary Hansard, the book constructs a detailed genealogy of the offences from the perspectives that shaped them. A novel application of theory on ‘myth‘ is used to navigate the complex arguments and to trace ideas about identity and order

气候

Introduction,ional legal contexts, the curiosities that initiated the project and the methods adopted to pursue them. I introduce a novel approach of exploring myths within parliamentary discourse as a way of tracing how ideas about identity and order have persisted and evolved throughout the life of the offences.

MODE

Peace and Liberty: Public Order Act 1936,ence to racial and religious prejudice in s 5 of the Act, the POA36 created an offence that could be used just as easily against those resisting racism as against those promoting it. Thus, the ability of the state to pacify outbreaks of disorder was a stronger motivation for the POA36 than the protection of Jews.

完成才会征服

Class and Control: Public Order Act 1986,gans, protesters and picketers. The unruliness of these subjects rendered their exercises of freedom detrimental to ‘the community’ and ‘the peace’ and was argued to justify wider police powers of pacification.

synovial-joint

Being and Believing: Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006,r tolerance and integration. While what amounts to stirring up hatred might be different in relation to race and religion, the different thresholds are found to be an unsatisfactory political compromise.

extinguish