Using data from the Comparative Manifestos Project, we compare the policy positions of left and right parties with regard to immigration across 18 West European countries between 1975 and 2005. We test two main hypotheses: First, we expect that mainstream parties will exploit anti-immigrant sentiments in the electorate regardless of extreme right competition. This would indicate that the extreme Right is not the only driving force behind the recent ‘anti-immigrant turn’ of electoral politics in Western Europe. Second, we expect the mainstream Left to become increasingly critical towards immigration as its mainstream and/or extreme right competitors intensify their populist rhetoric. Being ‘tough’ on immigration is thus not a prerogative of the Right. We conclude that the impact of the extreme Right on the electoral behaviour of mainstream right parties has been overstated in previous studies
Although there is growing research interest in populist radical right (PRR) parties in Western Europe, little attention has been paid to the case of Spain ? a country where these parties are almost non-existent or irrelevant from an electoral and political point of view. In a nutshell, we maintain that in contemporary Spain there is real demand for PRR parties, but three supply-side factors are impeding their electoral breakthrough and persistence: the cleavage structure of the country, the strategy of competition of the mainstream right and the electoral system. At the same time, we postulate that at least in the case of Spain the Great Recession has not improved the electoral odds of the PRR as such but rather facilitated the emergence of leftist populist forces
In this article it is argued that citizens take into account the degree of a government's political autonomy to implement particular policies when expressing their views on satisfaction with democracy (SWD) but, in order to do so, they need to perceive it. When citizens directly observe the external constraints that reduce their government's autonomy, then variations in levels of regime satisfaction may no longer be exclusively about government performance – as widely argued by political economists – but also about democratic choice. The argument develops after comparing the existing scenarios in the Eurozone before and after the Great Recession. Citizens only began to perceive their own lack of choice to decide between policy alternatives when the sovereign debt crisis broke out in May 2010, the date of the first Greek bail‐out. It is then when citizens started to update their beliefs about the functioning of democracy as a system in which alternative policies can be adopted as bail‐out deals were signed between national governments from the Euro periphery and the Troika. This updating process towards the way democracy works explains the increasing gap in the levels of SWD between bailed‐out economies and the rest of the countries in the Eurozone. Empirical confirmation for this claim is found after analysing Eurobarometer surveys from 2002 to 2014 and using a two‐step difference‐in‐difference analysis that combines individual and aggregate data.
We propose a methodology for measuring political parties' centre–periphery preferences and positions. The proposal is based on an extension of the Manifesto Project's methodology that allows us to analyse manifestos in multi-level settings (i.e. manifestos written for sub- and supra-state electoral arenas). This adaptation requires extending the Manifesto classification scheme to include territorial preferences together with policy preferences specific to each electoral level. It has two major objectives: on the one hand, it allows us to apply content analysis to manifestos written for all possible electoral levels; on the other, it measures parties' centre–periphery preferences beyond the widely used and uninformative categories of ‘centralization/decentralization’ and ‘nationalism’. We have applied our methodology to Spanish state-level and regional-level manifestos between 2009 and 2012 with encouraging results
This paper is an exploratory analysis of the efficacy of parliamentary representation as a means to moderate ethnic conflict in new democracies. We agree with many others that the interests of an ethnic minority group are better protected when the group has access to decision makers, can block harmful government policies, and can veto potentially damaging decisions. Parliamentary representation, however, does not always allow for an effective representation of those who are not in government. Seats in the legislature may be of little use in a parliament where the executive dominates the policy process at all stages. This paper focuses on the new democracies of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union between 1990 and 2000. We use the number of parliamentary seats obtained by the ethnic minority group as our main independent variable and the MAR index of ethnic protest and rebellion as our dependent variables. In addition, we employ the system of government (i.e., parliamentary versus presidential) as a proxy indicator of the degree of influence that parliamentary parties have over decision-making. A cross-section-time-series regression analysis shows that the ameliorative effect of parliamentary representation over ethnic conflict is stronger in those legislatures where the ethnic group has effective influence over decision making. It is also shown that representation within national parliaments has no ameliorative effects over violent secessionist conflicts. When the ethnic minority's demands are too radical, parliamentary representation is simply an inadequate instrument.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.