Introduction

This chapter analyses the framing of the three public debates over globalization and the thematic structure of these crucial issues of the new cleavage. How do political actors justify their opposition and support of globalization, and, ultimately, how do they cue citizens' views? Throughout this volume, we have suggested that the new cleavage is driven by two different logics, an economic one and a cultural one. The economic logic articulates opposition to globalization by emphasizing the negative consequences of economic competition, and by reframing cultural and political conflicts in such a way as to intensify economic confrontation. The cultural logic, by contrast, stresses the negative consequences of cultural diversity and political integration, and interprets economic conflicts related to globalization in cultural terms. Our principal aim in analysing the framing of the globalization debates is to see where and under what circumstances the cultural logic or the economic logic comes to prevail.

So far, we largely have taken for granted – based on theoretical considerations and the actual location of the issues in the political space – that immigration and European integration are dominated by the cultural logic and that the economic logic prevails in the case of economic liberalization. However, the three issues are potentially multi-faceted, and we therefore expect substantial differences in the way the new cleavage is articulated not only across but also within issues. In a first step, the present chapter sets out to open these ‘black boxes’ of the three globalization issues by breaking them up into the relevant sub-issues. This more fine-grained conceptualization will enable us to formulate more specific expectations regarding the predominant logic, which we can then assess empirically.