Between left and right: A discourse network analysis of Universal Basic Income on Dutch Twitter

Abstract

Universal Basic Income (UBI) found its way back to media and policy agendas, presented as an alternative to the social investment policies omnipresent in Europe. In spite of the apparent appeal, however, UBI faces a discursive and political stalemate that seems hard to overcome. In an attempt to understand this tension, we explore the discursive coalitions surrounding UBI in a debate on Dutch Twitter. We use discourse network analysis to (a) cluster discussants endorsing similar positions and (b) see which political elites endorse these positions. We find that the known schism between the liberal and egalitarian interpretations of UBI is driven by ambivalence towards its redistributive implications. Moreover, we observe a turn towards social investment frames amongst UBI advocates, who centrally argue that UBI is activating and deregulating social security. This change in framing, however, seems to have little visible impact on elite coalition formation. Green-left elites remain overrepresented amongst proponents, while liberal and conservatives are opposed, and the socialist party remains divided on the issue. Thus, while the implementation of a ‘full’ UBI seems blocked by redistributive concerns, the social investment turn may be the political compromise that explains the popular appeal and political success of UBI inspired experiments.

Basic income as a pandemic social protection instrument: Lessons from Maricá, Brazil

“…6. The difficulty of turning public support into a robust constituency and political coalition is a noted concern in the political economy of basic income literature (De Wispelaere, 2016a;Vlandas, 2021;Gielens, Roosma and Achterberg, 2023). 7.…”

A basic income for every crisis? Building blocks of a political economy framework

“…Persistent political competition also features prominently in several of the basic income experiments, with coalitions of ‘strange bedfellows’ explaining, in part, the limitations built into many of these trials. 7 Persistent ideological division also helps explain the difficulty of translating large aggregate support for basic income into actual policy: where support is substantial but fractured across different political parties, coalition dynamics may continue to impede actual progress on the policy front (Gielens et al, 2023; Vlandas, 2021).…”

Fewer obligations for welfare recipients, more social and economic activities? Results from an experiment with less conditional welfare regimes

“…The criticism on the Participation Act and the general proposition that a less conditional SA system, based on trust and autonomy, could be a general improvement compared to a workfare approach, led to a number of similar randomised social experiments in Dutch municipalitiessometimes seen as part of the global wave of experiments with welfare, based on or inspired by the universal basic income (Groot et al, 2019;Gielens et al, 2023). In these Dutch real-life experiments, the Participation Act regime serves as a control group and is compared with alternative, less conditional treatments that give recipients more autonomy (Groot et al, 2019;Betkó et al, 2019;Edzes et al, 2021).…”