Sicherheit, Sicherheitspolitik und Militär

Bredow, Wilfried von

doi:10.1007/978-3-658-05333-8

Cited by 10 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This view has been present in public and academic debates in most Western countries: foremost in the US, where the current debate started two decades ago with the influential study of Feaver and Kohn (2001), but also in European countries like the UK (Strachan, 2003) and France (Vennesson, 2003). In Germany, the diagnosis of an insufficient societal support for the armed forces is widely shared in the military (Würich & Scheffer, 2014), in the literature (Clement, 2007, p. 136–137; Feldmeyer, 2005, p. 72; Münkler, 2007; Reichelt & Meyer, 2010; von Bredow, 2015, p. 263), and among politicians (Köhler, 2005; Königshaus, 2010; Robbe, 2010, 2013; Steinmeier, 2020). With regard to the situation in Germany, Fleckenstein (2000, p. 88) already stated two decades ago: “Yes to the Bundeswehr, but without me!” (c.f., Collmer, 2002, p. 163; Heins & Warburg, 2004, p. 126; van der Meulen, 2004).…”

Section: “Support Our Troops”—who Does and Why?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When confronted with these results, the proponents of the civil–military gap thesis regularly dismiss the value of survey results and respondents’ attitudes. For them, the public approval expressed in the polls is without substance and remains meaningless for the everyday life of ordinary citizens (Allen & Braun, 2013, p. 73; Bacevich, 2013, p. 4–5; Brooks, 2016; Reichelt & Meyer, 2010; von Bredow, 2015). Allegedly, the high levels of trust are a mere acclamation produced by surveys with no actual behavior following.…”

Section: “Support Our Troops”—who Does and Why?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Just Paying Lip Service? Public Trust and Public Support for Armed Forces in Germany

Biehl

2022

Armed Forces & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article presents an empirical analysis of whether, how, and why people are active to either support or protest against the Bundeswehr. Public opinion polls consistently report high levels of trust in the military. According to the social-psychological approach of participation theory, this trust should lead to corresponding actions. However, the literature on civil–military gaps claims that the majority of people pay mere lip service to soldiers rather than actively support the armed forces. No active support despite high levels of trust? In an effort to empirically test the level and the determinants of the public’s support for and protest against the military, an activity scale was included in a representative opinion poll in Germany. The analyses show that a fairly large part of the German population engages in activities that support the Bundeswehr and that public trust in the military predicts that supportive behavior. Importantly, trust in the armed forces remains a strong predictor of citizens’ activities related to the armed forces even when controlling for numerous other factors. Taken together, these findings contradict the widely shared view of a civil–military gap and instead provide empirical evidence for the social-psychological approach of participation theory.

show abstract

Section: “Support Our Troops”—who Does and Why?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: “Support Our Troops”—who Does and Why?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Just Paying Lip Service? Public Trust and Public Support for Armed Forces in Germany

Biehl

2022

Armed Forces & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…De tre samtaleutdragene som analyseres i artikkelen er hentet fra det niende av totalt ti undervisningsopplegg. De muntlige aktivitetene i denne timen var knyttet til et tekst utdrag fra ungdomsromanen Hun & han (von Bredow, 2015). Boken handler om 12-årige Alicia, som mottar en venneforespørsel på Facebook fra det som angivelig er 17-åringen Lucas.…”

Section: Undervisningskontekst Og Samtaledataunclassified

Forhandling om tekst og kontekst. En studie av 7. trinns-elevers meningsforhandling i intendert utforskende gruppesamtaler

Kvistad¹,

Kjelaas²,

Matre³

2021

NJLR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Denne artikkelen undersøker hvordan et utvalg elever forhandler om mening i gruppesamtaler i norskfaget. Materialet er hentet fra en kasusstudie i en klasse der det ble gjennomført et ti-ukers undervisningsforløp med mål om å fremme elevenes samtaleferdigheter og spesifikt samtaleformen utforskende samtale (eng. exploratory talk) (Mercer & Littleton, 2007). Med et sosiokulturelt og dialogisk rammeverk, og bruk av begrepene samtaleramme (Goffman, 1974) og kontekstualiseringssignaler (Gumperz, 1982), analyseres tekstsamtaler i tre grupper mot slutten av undervisningsforløpet. Vi finner at elevene orienterer seg mot ulike samtalerammer og tar i bruk ulike interaksjonelle og innholdsmessige ressurser, slik at utforskingen blir mer sammensatt, kreativ og lekpreget enn det som ofte beskrives i teori og empiri om utforskende samtale (jf. f.eks. Mercer et al., 2019). Artikkelens formål er å belyse elevenes mangfoldige meningsforhandling, samt å diskutere ulike forståelser av hva utforskende samtale er og kan være i samtaler mellom elever. English abstract Negotiation about text and context. A study of students’ peer interaction in intended exploratory group talk This article examines how a sample of seventh-grade students (12–13 years) negotiate meaning in peer group talk in Norwegian L1 lessons. The data is collected from a single case study in one classroom, where ten lessons were conducted to promote talk skills, specifically exploratory talk (Mercer & Littleton, 2007). With a sociocultural and dialogical framework, and the concepts of frame (Goffman, 1974) and contextualisation cues (Gumperz, 1982), we analyze text discussions in three peer groups from the end of the intervention. We find that the students orient themselves towards different talk frames and use different interactional resources and knowledge references, so that their ways to shared understanding become more complex, creative, and playful than what is often described in theory and empirical data on exploratory talk (cf. Mercer et al., 2019). The purpose of the article is to shed light on the complexity of students’ meaning negotiation, as well as to discuss different notions of what exploratory talk may entail in peer groups.

show abstract

The Order of Violence. Norms and Rules of Organized Violence and the Civil-Military Paradox

Bredow¹

2018

Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sicherheit, Sicherheitspolitik und Militär

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Just Paying Lip Service? Public Trust and Public Support for Armed Forces in Germany

Just Paying Lip Service? Public Trust and Public Support for Armed Forces in Germany

Forhandling om tekst og kontekst. En studie av 7. trinns-elevers meningsforhandling i intendert utforskende gruppesamtaler

The Order of Violence. Norms and Rules of Organized Violence and the Civil-Military Paradox

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About