Search

Are border walls and fences becoming an increasingly accepted and legitimate way of coping with the challenges of the refugee crisis and mass migration in Europe? The article addresses this question by examining how Serbian and Croatian public intellectuals reacted to the dramatic impact of Hungary's decision to fortify its southern border in September 2015. The analysis of salient argumentative strategies reveals how their criticism of wall building was embedded in specific discourses of values, historical narratives, and the topos of “Fortress Europe.”

Most works on populism framed in a discourse-analytic perspective focus on the features of populist discourse itself, contributing greatly to the understanding of the phenomenon. However, a full understanding of populism should also consider the ways in which notions of populism are constructed, negotiated, reproduced, and popularised in public discourse, as this contributes greatly to forming public opinion at large and peoples responses to populism itself. For this reason, the chapter addresses discourses about populism, with a focus on editorials dealing with Brexit in the British and Italian press. Although their position of supremacy in orienting public opinion has been partly mined by talk shows, blogs, and social media at large, opinion pieces remain one of the most important sites in which intellectuals (generally senior journalists) publicly share their views trying at the same time to influence the opinion of the readers. Based on an original framework integrating categories from critical discourse studies, argumentation theory, and the study of heteroglossia/dialogism, the analysis focuses on the ways in which editorialists define and evaluate populism and populists, the argumentative topoi they employ to support their standpoints, and whether and how they engage alternative viewpoints. In our view, all these aspects concur to expand or reduce the space of dialogue created by the text, and hence, we claim, the ability of the readers to feel included, and see their positions represented, in the broader discussion. The risk is that if no dialogue is opened at all with the people who uphold populist views, intellectual discourse will fail to involve them as interlocutors in a critical discussion, thus making them more receptive (or vulnerable) to populist propaganda.

Over the past two decades, queer has grown into an established critical approach to social science. Correspondingly, the term 'queer' has emerged as a recognised brand in the language of academia. This paper examines the potential risks that such linguistic institutionalisation poses for queer as a critical and emancipatory endeavour. Building on Billig's argument (2013) that the bias towards 'big nouns' in academic discourse tends to further entrench the power of academic elites, I draw a parallel between queer and CDA (Critical discourse analysis) as two emerging academic brands in order to determine whether queer is one such big noun and how this may affect the very capacity of queer scholars to commit themselves to critique and self-critique. I conclude by outlining a modest proposal to ensure that the term 'queer' remains available to be appropriated by whoever shares the premises and the aspirations underlying the queer project.

We study the impact of electricity divestments in a stylised model where a dominant producer faces a competitive fringe with the same cost structure and is forced to sell some of its capacity. For a given demand level, the divestment which achieves the greatest reduction in prices can be several times more effective in reducing prices than a divestment of base load (or low-cost) plants. We extend this theoretical result to the case with variable electricity demand by considering a numerical example based on data from the Italian market.

We study alternative market power mitigation measures in a model where a dominant producer faces a competitive fringe with the same cost structure. We characterise the asset divestment by the dominant firm which achieves the greatest reduction in prices. This divestment entails the sale of marginal assets whose cost range encompasses the post-divestment price. A divestment of this type can be several times more effective in reducing prices than divestments of baseload (or low-cost) assets. We also establish that financial contracts (modeled as Virtual Power Plant schemes) are at best equivalent to baseload divestments in terms of consumer welfare.

According to the constructivist approach to nationalism, mass education systems not only constitute a key marker of modern state-ness, but also perform a crucial function within the nation-building process itself. Namely, state education is the apparatus through which a state’s societal culture is inculcated into the new gen-erations of citizens. The teaching of history in schools, in this respect, takes up the vital task of disseminating a state’s national, or official, history. An eloquent illus-tration is that of the ‘new’ countries emerged from the dissolution of the Yugoslav Federation. Here, the willingness to do away with the socialist legacy, and the need to construct ‘new’ national memories to uphold each country’s engagement in the nation-building process, have resulted in deep changes in the content of education. In particular, the contents of history teaching – that is, what is written in the text-books – have been rearranged according to markedly ethno-centric perspectives, through both the retrieval and re-formulation of past events in a new national nar-rative and the endorsement of stereotyping. As a result, history teaching is very likely to promote intolerance and foster animosity between national groups. Re-markably, such phenomenon has found marked disapproval within the human rights discourse. International documents articulating the right to education, in fact, ascribe to the educational enterprise the fundamental task of promoting tol-erance and mutual understanding among peoples and nations. Drawing on this principle, the international community has carried out a number of initiatives aim-ing at reforming history education in the region of South Eastern Europe, in par-ticular through the revision of the textbooks.