60%(5)3 out of 5 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 250 - 252 out of 281 pages.
generated through the negative dynamic of conspiracy theories in the service of building national ‘cohesion’ in domestic space. While the PRC is strong in economic and military terms, its regime security as ‘fragile superpower’ is more tenuous (Shirk, 2008). Hence soft power in China takes on more negative forms that are directed at a domestic audience. Yet according to Nye’s version of soft power, foreign audiences are crucial; if soft power products are not attractive to them, then the soft power strategy is unsuccessful. Certainly, we could follow the current academic trend to celebrate how China has adopted and adapted the soft power concept to suit its needs. But if a goal is to turn enemies into friends, then it is not working very well. Here the PRC is a ‘partial power’ whose global influence is broad, but thin (Shambaugh, 2013, p. 268). This is a major problem for soft power in hard states.
2ac – warming discourse goodIncreased engagement in public discourse over climate change inﬂuencesthe way we think about climate change Brian Shreck &Arnold Vedlitz 16– Brian is a part of the National Wind Institute & Department of Political Science, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, USA and Arnold is part of the Bush School of Government and Public Service, Institute for Science, Technology and Public Policy, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA (“The Public and Its Climate: Exploring the Relationship Between Public Discourse and Opinion on Global Warming,” 11 July 2016, 29:5, 509-524, DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2015.1095380) hk For the past 25 years, democratic theorists have been advocating models of democracy in which public deliberation and public discourse are thecornerstones of democratic legitimacy. To this end, deliberative democrats argue that citizens ought to participate in a meaningful way in the deliberation and discussion of proposed laws and policies. Embedded in these normative theories is a set of empirical assumptions and prerequisite conditions.This study has presented an empirical examination of some of the observable implications of deliberative theory. As we have shown here, the answers to these questions carry direct implications for how democratic societies solve scientifically complex, politically contested policy issues, which include not just climate change, but also other environmental, science, and technology issues.We have found that while high levels of engagement in public discourse are positively associatedwith holding a strong belief in the reality of anthropogenic climate change, they are not associated with strong beliefs on the denial end of the spectrum. Meanwhile, while objectively measured knowledge is negatively associated with strong denial of the reality of climate change, self-assessed knowledge is strongly positively associated with strong beliefs on both sides of the issue. However, with engagement in public discourse, we see a slightly different pattern when we look at preferences for climate change-related policies. Here,