30
17
On the concept of dialogism, see Holquist, 1991.
18
For Hansen and King, there are three main reasons why ideas could serve an actor’s strategic
interests: providing cover for what this actor would like to do anyway; enhancing this actor’s profile
and reputation; and, helping to build winning political coalitions (Hansen and King, 2001: 259).
19
The concept of ideological repertoire refers to a relatively coherent set of cultural symbols and
political representations mobilized during policy debates to frame the issues and shape public
opinion. In a way, ideological repertoires are to frames what policy paradigms are to alternatives;
frames are embedded in a repertoire like alternatives are embedded in a paradigm. Yet, a society
usually has one common ideological repertoire while policy paradigms are frequently in competition
against one another.
20
As opposed to the technical and epistemological assumptions at the foundation of policy
paradigms, frames are located at the foreground of the policy debate: Campbell, 1998: 385.
21
In a sense, the need for policymakers to frame issues using culturally accepted repertoires shows
that ‘public opinion matters’. On the role of public opinion, see Burstein, 1998.
22
Frames may also serve as ideological weapons oriented against enacted or proposed policies. In his
book The Rhetoric of Reaction, for example, Albert O. Hirschman (1991) analyzes three types of
conservative frames that have been used since the 18th century to undermine the support for
egalitarian reforms and, more generally, left-wing political projects.
23
As noted by Sewell, structures cannot exist without some sort of personal autonomy and historical
contingency, and social actors sometimes do more than reproducing the social and political ‘rules of
the game’ (Sewell, 1992).
Convention