Explore the vast range of titles available.

President Vladimir Putin is a figure of both fear and fascination in the Western imagination. In the minds of media pundits and commentators, he personifies Russia itself - a country riven with contradictions, enthralling and yet always a threat to world peace. But recent propaganda images that define public debate around growing tensions with Russia are not new or arbitrary. Russia and the Media asks, what is the role of Western journalism in constructing a new kind of Cold War with Russia? Focusing on British and US media coverage of moments of crisis and of co-operation between the West and Russia, McLaughlin exposes how such a Cold War framework shapes public perceptions of a major, hostile power reasserting itself on the world stage. Scrutinising events such as the Ukraine/Crimea crisis, the Skripal Poisoning and Russia's military intervention in Syria - as well as analysing media coverage of the 2018 Russian presidential election and build up to the 2018 World Cup - Russia and the Media makes a landmark intervention at the intersection of media studies and international relations.

Despite the growing body of research on authoritarian regimes, few studies address the issues of their legitimization through exaggerating external threats and constructing enemy images. Targeting the gap in the literature, this article explores the discursive strategies of ‘evilization’ and demonization of the ‘other’, with a focus on their implications for legitimating and sustaining the authoritarian regimes in post-Soviet space. Examining the cases of Russia and Azerbaijan, the qualitative, comparative analysis presented in this article uncovers a series of essential similarities between the regimes’ legitimization strategies. Findings suggest that there has been a strong tendency in both Russian and Azerbaijani discourses to ‘externalize’ major problems facing the countries and scapegoat ‘evil forces’ as their main causes. Frequent appeals to the external threats have been accompanied by a heightened emphasis on the necessity of strong presidential power, with ‘strongmen’ that are capable of withstanding the enemies’ conspiracies. Remarkably, one of the core similarities between the two regimes is their unstoppable drive towards monarchical presidencies.

In a new era of global conflict involving non-state actors, At War with Words offers a provocative perspective on the role of language in the genesis, conduct and consequence of mass violence. Sociolinguistics meets political science and communication studies in order to examine interdependence between armed conflict and language. As phenomena attributed only to humans, both armed conflict and language are visible on two axes: language as war discourse, and language as a social policy subject to change by the victorious. In this unique volume, internationally known contributors provide original data and new insights that illuminate roles of text and talk in creating identities of enemies, justifications for violence, and accompanying propaganda. Incorporating contexts from around the world, this collection's topics range from a radio talk show hosts' inflammatory rhetoric to the semantic poverty of the lexicon of mass destruction. The first eight chapters discuss war texts. How does language serve as a vehicle to incite, justify, and resolve an armed conflict? Case studies from the US to China, and from Austria to Ghana detail such a progression to, through, and from war. The book's second part reflects the understanding of language as a symbol of power achieved by a victorious side in war. Five chapters discuss cases from Okinawa, Croatia, Cyprus, Palau, and Northern Ireland. Edited by a sociolinguist and a political scientist, At War with Words includes chapters by Michael Billig, Paul Chilton, Ruth Wodak and a dozen other prominent linguists and communications scholars. This book will be of interest to linguists, media scholars and political scientists, but is also accessible to any reader interested in language and war. Teachers will find particular chapters useful as course material in discourse analysis, language policy, war and peace studies, conflict resolution, mass communication, and other related disciplines.

This book is a comprehensive exposition of the interaction of a national (the Serbian people) and a religiou (the Orthodox Christian faith) content, in the formation of a distinctive national identity and a mode of being. Its interdisciplinary approach, drawing on sociology, social anthropology, theology, political theory, Balkan historiography, and Serbian folklore, is deployed to provide a powerful and original analysis of how Serbian Orthodoxy has resulted in the sacralisation of the Serbian nation by framing the parameters of its existence. Addresses the following questions: what 'makes' a Serb? Are meaningful assumptions possible by introducing Serbian Orthodoxy as the primal point of reference? Why does religion appear to have an especially strong appeal?

In this third edition, The Global Public Relations Handbook: Theory, Research, and Practice offers state-of-the-art discussions of the global public relations industry, blending research-based theory with practice, and presented in essays from both academics and practitioners. This edition's 28 essays in three sections take into account changes in the global communication landscape especially in the last ten years. The first section contains essays that provide conceptual linkages between public relations and international political systems, economic systems and levels of development, societal culture, different media systems including digital media, and activism. Essays in the second section discuss the communication of various global actors such as corporations (including family-owned enterprises), non-profits, governments (and public sector enterprises), global public relations agencies, IGOs such as the European Union and NATO and \"informal\" organizations such as hactivist groups, terrorists, and failed states. The third section discusses key global communication issues such as climate change, character assassination as a communication tool, internal communication, risk and crisis communication, public affairs, and public diplomacy. This will be an essential resource for students and researchers of public relations, strategic communication, and international communication.

The terrorist attack on 22 July 2011 in Norway shocked the nation and the world. Anders Behring Breivik became the ultimate lone wolf terrorism case. This case study explores why terrorism is difficult to predict generally and more specifically the insight that the Breivik case provides about motivation and ideological worldview, counterjihad, terrorist tradecraft and the lessons for preventing such attacks in the future.

The U.S. government has essentially two choices when dealing with adversarial states: isolate them or engage them. Isolate or Engage systematically examines the challenges to and opportunities for U.S. diplomatic relations with nine intensely adversarial states—China, Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, U.S.S.R./Russia, Syria, Venezuela, and Vietnam: states where the situation is short of conventional war and where the U.S. maintains limited or no formal diplomatic relations with the government. In such circumstances, \"public diplomacy\"—the means by which the U.S. engages with citizens in other countries so they will push their own governments to adopt less hostile and more favorable views of U.S. foreign policies—becomes extremely important for shaping the context within which the adversarial government makes important decisions affecting U.S. national security interests. At a time when the norm of not talking to the enemy is a matter of public debate, the book examines the role of both traditional and public diplomacy with adversarial states and reviews the costs and benefits of U.S. diplomatic engagement with the publics of these countries. It concludes that while public diplomacy is not a panacea for easing conflict in interstate relations, it is one of many productive channels that a government can use in order to stay informed about the status of its relations with an adversarial state, and to seek to improve those relations.

Intimate Enemies is a brilliant study of the transformation of Bolshevik Party ideology, language, and power relations during the crucial period leading up to Stalin's seizure of power. Combining extensive research in recently opened Soviet archives with an insightful rereading of intra-Party struggles, Igal Halfin uncovers this evolution in the language of Bolshevism. This language defined the methods for judging true party loyalty-in what Halfin describes as an examination of the 'hermeneutics of the soul,' and became the basis for prosecuting the Party's enemies, particularly the \\u201cintimate enemies\\u201d within the Party itself. Halfin argues that Bolshevism-which claimed sole access to truth and morality-ultimately demonized its enemies, and became in effect a theology that facilitated a monumental power shift.

Until today, Carl Schmitt has been notorious for what he called \"decisionism\" (\"Dezisionismus\"). This article investigates Carl Schmitt’s decisionism by making some annotations to the current understanding of this concept. Often it is held that the concept has the same meaning in both the legal and political context, yet this is not the case. At the same time, it is debated whether Carl Schmitt’s decisionism is a form of legal positivism or rather a supra-positivism. The article argues that Carl Schmitt’s decisionism has both a legal and a political dimension. It points out that it cannot clearly be classified as positivistic or suprapositivistic. In this context the article draws parallels to other principles that are significant for Carl Schmitt’s theory, i.e. to the friend-foe principle (\"Freund-Feind-Unterscheidung\") and to the principle of concrete rules (\"Konkretes Ordnungsdenken\"). The article seeks to show that Carl Schmitt’s decisionism neither provides convincing solutions for legal and political questions nor improves the quality of law and politics.

This paper draws out certain complexities in Carl Schmitt’s theory on the concept of the political through a joint reading of The Concept of the Political (1932) and Theory of the Partisan (1963). The paper argues that the distinction between conventional, real and absolute enmity as brought forward in Theory of the Partisan cannot easily be applied in practice since the decision whether the situation at hand consitutes the extreme case in which one’s opponent forms an existential threat to the (way of) being of one’s collective is taken by the people involved in the conflict themselves and is thus always in a fundamental sense subjective. The paper illustrates this complexity through an analysis of two case studies: the 1994 Rwandan genocide and the United States’ War on Terror.