Progressive and reactionary rhetoric in the municipal reform debate in New South Wales, Australia

Drew, J; Grant, B; Campbell, N

Progressive and reactionary rhetoric in the municipal reform debate in New South Wales, Australia

Drew, J

Grant, B

Campbell, N

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Australian Journal of Political Science, 2016, 51 (2), pp. 323 - 337
Issue Date:: 2016-04-02

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Accepted Manuscript VersionAdobe PDF (521.02 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Drew, J https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3579-5758	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Grant, B https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8055-6046	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Campbell, N	en_US
dc.date.available	2020-05-25T19:09:13Z
dc.date.issued	2016-04-02	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Australian Journal of Political Science, 2016, 51 (2), pp. 323 - 337	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1036-1146	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/41361
dc.description.abstract	© 2016 Australian Political Studies Association. Albert Hirschman's rhetoric of reaction is a potentially powerful typology of the arguments made by both proponents and opponents of reform (1991. The rhetoric of reaction: Perversity, futility, jeopardy. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press). However, scholars have identified a number of gaps in the typology, in particular that it has struggled to explain the lines of rhetoric associated with disputed empirical evidence. This paper reviews Hirschman's typology before applying it to the contentious municipal amalgamation debates currently unfolding in New South Wales, Australia. We then examine the lines of attack open to progressives and reactionaries on the basis of empirical data. We conclude that the use of empirical data opens new lines of rhetoric for both ‘progressives’ and ‘reactionaries’ generally, but that both information costs and complexity significantly affect the timing and penetration of the arguments.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Australian Journal of Political Science	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1080/10361146.2016.1154926	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Political Science & Public Administration	en_US
dc.title	Progressive and reactionary rhetoric in the municipal reform debate in New South Wales, Australia	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	2	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	51	en_US
utslib.for	1605 Policy and Administration	en_US
utslib.for	1606 Political Science	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Research)
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Research)/lnstitute for Public Policy and Governance
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - IPPG - Institute for Public Policy and Governance
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.issue	2	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	51	en_US

Abstract:

© 2016 Australian Political Studies Association. Albert Hirschman's rhetoric of reaction is a potentially powerful typology of the arguments made by both proponents and opponents of reform (1991. The rhetoric of reaction: Perversity, futility, jeopardy. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press). However, scholars have identified a number of gaps in the typology, in particular that it has struggled to explain the lines of rhetoric associated with disputed empirical evidence. This paper reviews Hirschman's typology before applying it to the contentious municipal amalgamation debates currently unfolding in New South Wales, Australia. We then examine the lines of attack open to progressives and reactionaries on the basis of empirical data. We conclude that the use of empirical data opens new lines of rhetoric for both ‘progressives’ and ‘reactionaries’ generally, but that both information costs and complexity significantly affect the timing and penetration of the arguments.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/41361