The Role of Marketing in Politics

ABSTRACT

Political marketing is an exciting new area. Research produced over the last decade has been pioneering in showing the applicability of marketing to politics. However, this article argues that the field now needs to move in a different direction if we are to reach political marketing's full potential. Political marketing needs a comprehensive approach: it can be applied not just to party-electoral behaviour but also legislatures, local government, the media, and public services, with both concepts and techniques from marketing, and an understanding from political science literature as well as management studies. The article, therefore, maps out the route to be taken to reach the end of the rainbow and the pot of gold that the political marketing field potentially offers.     

The Politics of Recognition versus the Politics of Hatred

Hatred of America expressed in the 11 September attack is more than matched by the hatred by Americans for Islamists expressed in the war on Afghanistan, the War against Terror and the threatened wars against the 'Axis of Evil'. It is argued here that there is a pattern of self-reinforcing hatred operating in the world set in motion by the actions of the United States, particularly by George Bush Snr, and embraced and used by George Bush Jr to reinforce and further develop this pattern. To oppose this it is necessary to understand how hatred is generated, how this system operates and how Bush is exploiting it, and then to provide an alternative. It is argued this requires a new story of civilisation as the quest for justice understood as true recognition to oppose to the myths based on hatred promulgated by Bush. In terms of this story, the extreme economic, social, political and military policies of Bush and the myths used to justify them should be recognised for what they are, the challenge of barbarism to civilisation.     

Federalism and The Politics of Tobacco

Late in 1998, the United States acquired a new regime of tobaccocontrol engineered by the states' attorneys general. Nearlyall of them had filed lawsuits against the major cigarette manufacturers,allegedly with the aim of recouping Medicaid costs attributableto smoking. Despite latent differences of culture and interestin regard to tobacco control, all of the states eventually joinedin settlements with the industry that exacted large paymentsand restricted the industry's advertising and marketing practices.This article explains how it was possible for many differentpolities to agree on the settlement terms, and asks what thecase shows about the impact of federalism on tobacco policymaking.It concludes that tobacco policymaking in the 30 years priorto the lawsuits (1964–1994) was more consonant with constitutionalprinciples and not ineffective in achieving control.     

The Politics of 'Cyberconflict'

The turn of the century witnessed the emergence of a new kind of conflict named 'cyberconflict', meaning conflict in computer-mediated environments (cyberspace). This article seeks to introduce the key terms and themes of cyberconflict and argue that two different trends occur: one between ethnic or religious groups fighting in cyberspace, as they do in real life; and second, between a social movement and its antagonistic institution (hacktivism).     

The Politics of England

Party political interest in the so‐called ‘English Question’ has grown in recent years, due to the enmeshing of constitutional issues with a growing political and public affiliation with and expression of English national identity and culture. More recently, attention has shifted to the decentralisation of government within England. The ‘English Question’ is thus defined by two interconnected but distinctive ‘English Questions’. This article will assess whether, in seeking to find answers for these ‘English Questions’, the Conservatives and Labour are establishing a more distinctive ‘politics of England’. It will first consider the extent to which the politicisation of English identity and civic society have stimulated a more nationally framed political culture and party politics, and then assess whether constitutional reforms undertaken in Westminster, especially the introduction of EVEL, and regional devolution initiatives within England might facilitate greater party political engagement with an emergent ‘politics of England’.     

The Politicization of Marriage in Contemporary American Public Policy: The Defense of Marriage Act and the Personal Responsibility Act

The sexuality politics terrain in the United States is currently marked by a complex and contradictory set of developments‐non-traditional family structures are becoming more common, popular opinion is moving in a more tolerant direction, and the lesbian and gay rights movement has enjoyed some victories, but conservative family values and patriarchal heterosexual marriage have been vigorously promoted by influential right-wing social movements and more deeply institutionalized through important public policy initiatives and court decisions. This article considers the theoretical implications of these developments with respect to the conceptual approaches to citizenship and sexuality. It then analyses two major pieces of federal legislation in depth: the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the Personal Responsibility Act (PRA). DOMA effectively encourages the states to ban same-sex marriages. The PRA is generally considered as a welfare 'reform' law that imposes compulsory 'workfare' schemes and time limits for benefit recipients. It nevertheless has a significant sexual regulation dimension. Both the religious right's campaign against same-sex marriage and the welfare reformers' attack on the rights of single mothers contribute to a reactionary politicization of marriage. In conclusion, the article contends that it is only insofar as lesbian and gay rights issues are understood more broadly as but one aspect of sexual regulation and citizenship rights struggles that we can develop more effective ways of advancing the sexual liberation movement as a whole.     

中国古代政治发展中的亲缘政治

亲缘政治是中国古代政治发展的基本特点,亲亲、尊尊则是亲缘政治中权力配置、权力运行和利益安排秩序的基本原则.这种亲缘政治原则决定了中国古代政治制度和行政管理体制的构建和发展,决定了中央君主统治权力和各亲缘集团层级权力的协调和统治治理的有序性和有效性.而各亲缘集团力量的发展变化又会改变原权力结构关系和统治治理秩序,井导致一个个王朝统治的兴亡和更迭,成为历代王朝兴亡发展的周期规律.     

The Politics of Immigration and Public Health

The Conservative party's recent proposal to introduce compulsory medical examinations for immigrants should it win the upcoming election marks a departure in the politics of immigration and public health. For many years, the public health impact of immigration was kept out of party competition and successive governments pursued a voluntaristic approach to health checks. In this article, I outline the political history of immigration and public health, and consider the implications of attempts to raise the subject onto the public agenda. I argue that recent developments militate against a calm and balanced approach to the genuine public health concerns associated with immigration, which threatens not only to stigmatise immigrants and stoke anti-immigrant popular opinion, but also prevent the development of effective policies. In particular, the introduction of compulsory examinations may create perverse incentives for migrants to circumvent legal channels and thereby actually increase public health risks.     

The Racialization of British Politics

The idea of 'race' was an important part of the post-1945 political and ideological context within which migration from the New Commonwealth began. This is demonstrated by an analysis of an important policy document which provides a foundation upon which to evaluate the character and significance of racism in the subsequent political process. This evaluation contrasts and comments upon rival accounts of the impact of racism offered by writers who have analysed official government files from the period. The paper concludes by arguing against a conception of racism which presumes that it is a constant and unchanging ideological bloc within the British political process.     

The Politics of Reading Nietzsche

Over recent years, an extraordinary number of interpretations of Nietzsche's work has appeared. I ask why he has become such an important figure in contemporary political debate and whether any dominant concerns can be elicited from the diverse readings of his texts. My response to both questions is that because Nietzsche has been identified, by Habermas among others, as the founding father of poststructuralism, this is where debate between postmodernists and their critics is being staged. I distinguish between recent philosophical and political interpretations but argue that in both cases, what is at stake are political questions regarding authority, legitimacy and consensus. In the latter part of the article I consider attempts at reconstructing a postmodern politics out of Nietzsche's philosophy, but express some doubts about such a project.