The SPD in a balancing act between government responsibility and conviction—Migration in parliamentary party competition

Atzpodien, Dana Siobhan

doi:10.1007/s12286-020-00445-6

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The SPD could not implement the substantive avoidance strategy used by the Christian Democratic parties after using constitutional arguments to argue for the opening of marriage in the red-green coalition. This struggle is in line with the observation that the SPD found itself torn between its ideological position and government responsibility, which was also evident in the parliamentary negotiation on migration policy (Atzpodien, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

ReconcilingIntra‐PartyandIntra‐CoalitionDissent in Morality Politics: Parliamentary Debates on Marriage Equality in the German Bundestag

Atzpodien

2023

Swiss Political Sci Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyses parliamentary debates on marriage equality in Germany to understand what factors shape how parties deal with morality politics argumentatively. I argue that the internal divisions of parties and their coalition parties are crucial for the argumentation strategies used in parliamentary debates on morally charged wedge issues. Internally divided parties and parties that must be loyal to coalition partners confronted with internal divisions are likely to employ a discursive avoidance strategy to mitigate the potential for intra‐party and intra‐coalition polarization. To test this empirically, I examine the speeches of the German Bundestag on the Life Partnership Act in 2000 and Marriage for All in 2016 and 2017. The qualitative content analysis confirms my argument: The internally divided CDU and its coalition partners applied avoidance strategies by framing the issue primarily around constitutional principles and using procedural arguments, rather than framing the discourse as an issue of morality politics.ZusammenfassungDer Artikel analysiert parlamentarische Debatten zur Anerkennung gleichgeschlechtlicher Partnerschaften und Ehen in Deutschland, um zu verstehen, welche Faktoren die Argumentationen von Parteien im Wettbewerb um Moralpolitik beeinflussen. Ich argumentiere, dass die interne Spaltung von Parteien und ihrer Koalitionsparteien entscheidend für die Argumentationsstrategien ist, die in parlamentarischen Debatten über moralisch aufgeladene „wedge issues “verwendet werden. Intern gespaltene Parteien und Parteien, die loyal zu Koalitionspartnern sein müssen, die mit internen Spaltungen konfrontiert sind, verwenden eine diskursive Vermeidungsstrategie, um das Potenzial für eine innerparteiliche und koalitionsinterne Polarisierung abzuschwächen. Das Argument wird anhand einer qualitativen Inhaltsanalyse von Reden von Abgeordneten des Deutschen Bundestages zum Lebenspartnerschaftsgesetz im Jahr 2000 und zur Ehe für Alle im Jahr 2016/2017 bestätigt: Die innerparteilich zerstrittene CDU und ihre Koalitionspartner wendeten Vermeidungsstrategien an, indem sie das Thema in erster Linie in Zusammenhang mit verfassungsrechtlichen Grundsätzen thematisieren und prozedurale Argumente verwendeten, anstatt den Diskurs als eine moralpolitische Frage zu gestalten.RésuméCet article analyse les débats parlementaires afin de comprendre les facteurs qui façonnent la manière dont les partis traitent la politique morale sur le plan argumentatif. Je soutiens que les divisions au sein des partis et entre les partis d'une coalition représentent un facteur décisif dans les stratégies d'argumentation utilisées dans les débats parlementaires sur les questions morales portant à controverse (« wedge issues »). Les partis divisés en interne et les partis devant rester loyaux envers leurs partenaires de coalition, eux‐mêmes confrontés à des divisions internes, sont susceptibles d'employer une stratégie discursive d'évitement pour atténuer le potentiel de polarisation intra‐parti et intra‐coalition. Pour tester cela empiriquement, j'examine les discours du Bundestag allemand sur la loi relative au partenariat de vie enregistré en 2000 et celle instituant le mariage pour tous en 2016/17. L'analyse qualitative de ces textes confirme mon argument: La CDU, divisée en interne, et ses partenaires de coalition ont appliqué des stratégies d'évitement en abordant la question principalement autour des principes constitutionnels et en utilisant des arguments procéduraux, plutôt que de cadrer le discours comme une question de politique morale.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

ReconcilingIntra‐PartyandIntra‐CoalitionDissent in Morality Politics: Parliamentary Debates on Marriage Equality in the German Bundestag

Atzpodien

2023

Swiss Political Sci Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The SPD in particular tends to put forward more moderate positions on law-and-order and immigration as a more centrist party. In addition, the SPD was part of the grand coalition government with the CDU/CSU at the time of the panel survey, which created pressures for Social Democrats to move further to the right on immigration (Atzpodien, 2020).…”

Section: Panel Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Electoral Politics of Immigration and Crime

Alizade

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concern that immigration worsens crime problems is prevalent across Western publics. How does it shape electoral politics? Prior research asserted a growing left-right divide in immigration attitudes and voting behavior due to educational realignment. In contrast, I argue that leftist voters are more conservative on immigrant crime than leftist parties, which can drive highly-educated progressives (so-called `cosmopolitans') to right-wing parties. I demonstrate this voter-party mismatch using survey data from 14 Western European countries linked with expert ratings of party positions. A panel survey from Germany further shows that concern about immigrant crime increases vote intention for the center right among voters of the Greens – the party of leftist cosmopolitans. A conjoint experiment among German voters replicates this defection effect and shows that it persists even if the center right stigmatizes immigrants or adopts conservative socio-cultural issue positions. Repercussions of immigration can in fact drive leftist cosmopolitans to the right.

show abstract

Party Competition in Migration Debates: The Influence of the AfD on Party Positions in German State Parliaments

Atzpodien¹

2020

German Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The SPD in a balancing act between government responsibility and conviction—Migration in parliamentary party competition

Cited by 3 publications

References 40 publications

ReconcilingIntra‐PartyandIntra‐CoalitionDissent in Morality Politics: Parliamentary Debates on Marriage Equality in the German Bundestag

ReconcilingIntra‐PartyandIntra‐CoalitionDissent in Morality Politics: Parliamentary Debates on Marriage Equality in the German Bundestag

The Electoral Politics of Immigration and Crime

Party Competition in Migration Debates: The Influence of the AfD on Party Positions in German State Parliaments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About