Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/21204
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGlencross, Andrew-
dc.date.accessioned2014-11-07T23:26:12Z-
dc.date.issued2009-07-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/21204-
dc.description.abstractThis article analyses the 2005 French referendum debate on the EU Constitutional Treaty as an instance of depoliticization. Particular emphasis is placed on the argumentative strategy of President Chirac as, despite the treaty's focus on institutional reform, he eventually chose to justify the document in terms of social policy: an ultimately unconvincing strategy because voters believed it was contradicted by current EU policy priorities. On this evidence, pace Glyn Morgan, prioritizing a justification of EU finality over that of institutions and policies does not seem appropriate. Rather, the priority for integration is to overcome elites' strategies of depoliticization during referendum campaigns.en_UK
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell-
dc.relationGlencross A (2009) The Difficulty of Justifying European Integration as a Consequence of Depoliticization: Evidence from the 2005 French Referendum, Government and Opposition, 44 (3), pp. 243-261.-
dc.rightsThe publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.-
dc.subjectEU Constitutionen_UK
dc.subjectreferendumen_UK
dc.subjectde-politicizationen_UK
dc.subjectFranceen_UK
dc.titleThe Difficulty of Justifying European Integration as a Consequence of Depoliticization: Evidence from the 2005 French Referendumen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.rights.embargodate2999-12-31T00:00:00Z-
dc.rights.embargoreasonThe publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository therefore there is an embargo on the full text of the work.-
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2009.01287.x-
dc.citation.jtitleGovernment and Opposition-
dc.citation.issn0017-257X-
dc.citation.volume44-
dc.citation.issue3-
dc.citation.spage243-
dc.citation.epage261-
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublished-
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereed-
dc.type.statusPublisher version (final published refereed version)-
dc.author.emailandrew.glencross@stir.ac.uk-
dc.contributor.affiliationPolitics-
dc.rights.embargoterms2999-12-31-
dc.rights.embargoliftdate2999-12-31-
dc.identifier.isi000266875300002-
Appears in Collections:History and Politics Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Glencross_GOOP_Article_Final.pdf100.52 kBAdobe PDFUnder Permanent Embargo    Request a copy


This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.