Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Populism 2007 For Pozorblog

2,279 views

Published on

Populism in East Central Europe

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Populism 2007 For Pozorblog

  1. 1. The Dynamics of Populism in Slovakia and the Czech Republic Kevin Deegan-Krause Wayne State University Detroit, Michigan, USA
  2. 2. A Brief Agenda <ul><li>Populism in General </li></ul><ul><li>Definitions </li></ul><ul><li>Consequences </li></ul><ul><li>Populism and Issue Dimensions </li></ul><ul><li>Populism in Slovakia and the Czech Republic </li></ul><ul><li>A Brief History of Slovak and Czech Populism </li></ul><ul><li>Slovak and Czech Populism Today </li></ul><ul><li>Bad Guesses About the Future </li></ul>
  3. 3. Populism in General: Definitions My Ally + Voters = Popul ar My Opponent + Voters = Popul ist
  4. 4. <ul><li>Inherent Pathology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Lang: Over simplification </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Papadopolous: Over promising </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tismaneanu: False reality </li></ul></ul>Populism in General: Definitions
  5. 5. <ul><li>Empirical Analysis </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Kurt Weyland: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ left-out” voters, direct appeal, bypassing institutions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Margaret Canovan: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ appeal to the people, against the power structure” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cas Mudde: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ pure people v. corrupt elite” </li></ul></ul>Populism in General: Definitions
  6. 6. <ul><li>Organizational </li></ul><ul><li>Strong leader who seeks </li></ul><ul><li>direct tie with voters </li></ul><ul><li>Stylistic </li></ul><ul><li>Appeals that are moralistic </li></ul><ul><li>and idiosyncratic </li></ul><ul><li>Programmatic </li></ul><ul><li>Attacks all elites per se </li></ul><ul><li>on behalf of “the people” </li></ul>Populism in General: Definitions <ul><li>Not </li></ul><ul><li>Consensual leadership </li></ul><ul><li>or party institutionalization </li></ul><ul><li>Not </li></ul><ul><li>Pragmatic compromise </li></ul><ul><li>or systematic programs </li></ul><ul><li>Not </li></ul><ul><li>Attacks only on some elites </li></ul><ul><li>or on behalf of some groups </li></ul>
  7. 7. Populism in General: Definitions Programmatic Weak Institutions Strong Leader Organizational Moralistic Idiosyncratic Stylistic Against All Elites On Behalf of All people
  8. 8. Populism in General: Definitions <ul><li>Is “Populism” a concept worth using? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>On one hand </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>It is tainted </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>There is little inherent linkage </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>On the other hand </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Everybody does it </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Connection practical if not inherent </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Populism in General: Consequences <ul><li>Is Populism worth fearing? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Canovan’s Shadow of democracy. These characteristics have positives and negatives. </li></ul></ul>Strong leader Direct Approach Morality Selectivity Opposing “Bad” Elites Defending the People Strong leader Weak Institutions Moralism Idiosyncracy Opposing “Good” Elites Pandering to the Mass
  10. 10. Populism in General: Consequences <ul><li>Is Populism worth fearing? Defining “The People” </li></ul>Imprecise terminology to cover the notion of an undefined “us” who need the trains to run on time, and a “them” who block it in the name of democratic procedures that we simply cannot afford “ The People” Not “The People” Compatible Position Poor Rich Economic Left Co-ethnics Domestic ethnic groups and co-ethnic “traitors” Nationalism Radical Right Co-citizens Foreign powers and their domestic “agents” Isolationism Euroskepticism Anti-Americanism Believers Non-believers Fundamentalism Well-behaved Criminals Law and Order “ The Besieged” “ The Obstructionists” Authoritarianism
  11. 11. Populism in General: Issue Divides <ul><li>Populism and Other Issues: Petr Ucen’s Analysis </li></ul>Other Issue Positions of Populist Parties Nationalist 70% Authoritarian 60% Xenophobic 43% Social 37% None 30%
  12. 12. Populism in General: Issue Divides <ul><li>Populism and Other Issues: Petr Ucen’s Analysis </li></ul>Issue Combinations of Populist Parties Authoritarian/National 60% Authoritarian/Xenophobic 43% Xenophobic/National 43% Social/National 37% Social/Authoritarian 27% Social/Xenophobic 10%
  13. 13. Populism in General: Issue Divides <ul><li>Populism and No Other Issues? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Petr Ucen </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Alan Sikk </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. Populism in General: Issue Divides Programmatic Weak Institutions Strong Leader Organizational Moralistic Idiosyncratic Stylistic Against All Elites On Behalf of All people Anti-elite program hard to sustain while in power
  15. 15. Populism in General: Issue Divides Programmatic Weak Institutions Strong Leader Organizational Moralistic Idiosyncratic Stylistic Against All Elites On Behalf of All people Anti-elite program hard to sustain while in power
  16. 16. <ul><li>Dynamics: Populism’s Tragic Flaw </li></ul>Time in power  Populism in General: Issue Divides Populist Programmatic Appeal
  17. 17. <ul><li>Dynamics: Compensating for Populism’s Tragic Flaw </li></ul>Time in power  Populism in General: Issue Divides Populist Programmatic Appeal Clientelistic or Other Appeal
  18. 18. <ul><li>Dynamics: Compensating for Populism’s Tragic Flaw </li></ul>Time in power  Populism in General: Issue Divides Populist Programmatic Appeal Other Programmatic Appeal Clientelistic or Other Appeal
  19. 19. <ul><li>Dynamics: Permanence </li></ul>left right Populism in General: Issue Divides
  20. 20. <ul><li>Dynamics: Permanence </li></ul>national cosmopolitan Populism in General: Issue Divides
  21. 21. <ul><li>Dynamics: The permanence of the ephemeral </li></ul>non-populist populist Populism in General: Issue Divides
  22. 22. Time in power  Populism in General: Issue Divides <ul><li>Dynamics: The permanence of the ephemeral </li></ul>Populist Party 1 Populist Party 2 Populist Party 3
  23. 23. <ul><li>Macro Level Evidence? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Rapid Decline Once in Power </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rapid Replacement </li></ul></ul>Populism in General: Issue Divides
  24. 24. <ul><li>Macro Patterns: Rapid Decline Once in Power </li></ul>Populism in General: Issue Divides
  25. 25. <ul><li>Macro Patterns: Rapid Replacement-Lithuania </li></ul>Populism in General: Issue Divides Colored boxes denote new parties
  26. 26. <ul><li>Macro Patterns: Rapid Replacement-Bulgaria </li></ul>Populism in General: Issue Divides
  27. 27. <ul><li>Macro Patterns: Rapid Replacement-Estonia </li></ul>Populism in General: Issue Divides
  28. 28. <ul><li>Macro Patterns: Rapid Replacement-Latvia </li></ul>Populism in General: Issue Divides
  29. 29. Populism in Slovakia and the Czech Republic
  30. 30. Populism in SK and CZ: Assessment
  31. 31. Populism in SK and CZ: Assessment Programmatic Weak Institutions Strong Leader Organizational Moralistic Idiosyncratic Stylistic Against All Elites On Behalf of All people Framework
  32. 32. Populism in SK and CZ: Assessment Moralistic Against All Elites On Behalf of All people Idiosyncratic Stylistic Weak Institutions Strong Leader Organizational Programmatic Framework
  33. 33. Populism in SK and CZ: Assessment Moralistic Against All Elites On Behalf of All people Idiosyncratic Stylistic Weak Institutions Strong Leader Organizational Programmatic ZRS 1994 Score=18 or 100% SDL 1994 Score=12 or 50% Example
  34. 34. Populism in SK and CZ: (Tentative) Assessment
  35. 35. Populism in SK and CZ: (Tentative) Assessment Year Characteristic HZDS KDH DU SDK SDKU ANO SNS SDL ZRS SOP Smer KSS SMK 1992 strong leader 3 2         2 2         1 avoids constraining organization 2 2         2 1         2 places morality over pragmatism 3 3         2 2         3 offers idiosyncratic program 2 1         2 1         1 claims to represent &quot;whole people&quot; 3 1         3 3         2 attacks all elites 2 1         2 2         2 Sum 15 10         13 11         11 1994 strong leader 3 2 2       3 2 3       1 avoids constraining organization 1 1 2       2 1 3       1 places morality over pragmatism 3 3 2       3 2 3       3 offers idiosyncratic program 2 1 2       2 1 3       1 claims to represent &quot;whole people&quot; 3 1 2       3 3 3       2 attacks all elites 2 1 2       2 2 3       2 Sum 14 9 12       15 11 18       10 1998 strong leader 3     2     3 1   2     1 avoids constraining organization 1     2     2 3   3     1 places morality over pragmatism 2     2     3 2   2     3 offers idiosyncratic program 2     2     2 1   3     1 claims to represent &quot;whole people&quot; 3     2     3 2   3     2 attacks all elites 2     1     2 1   2     2 Sum 13     11     15 10   15     10 2002 strong leader 3 1     2 3 3       3 1 1 avoids constraining organization 2 1     2 3 3       3 2 1 places morality over pragmatism 2 3     2 3 3       2 3 3 offers idiosyncratic program 2 1     1 2 3       3 1 1 claims to represent &quot;whole people&quot; 2 1     2 3 3       3 2 2 attacks all elites 3 1     1 2 3       3 3 2 Sum 14 8     10 16 18       17 12 10 2006 strong leader 3 1     2   3       3   1 avoids constraining organization 2 1     2   2       2   1 places morality over pragmatism 1 3     2   3       2   3 offers idiosyncratic program 3 1     1   3       2   1 claims to represent &quot;whole people&quot; 2 1     2   3       3   2 attacks all elites 3 1     1   3       3   2 Sum 14 8     10   17       15   10
  36. 36. Populism in SK and CZ: (Tentative) Assessment
  37. 37. Populism in SK and CZ: (Tentative) Assessment Year Characteristic ODS ODA US SZ KDU- CSL CSSD KSCM LSU HSD- SMS SPR- RSC Dek. Od. 1992 strong leader 2 2     1 3 1 2 2 3   avoids constraining organization 2 2     1 2 1 2 2 3   places morality over pragmatism 2 2     3 2 3 2 2 3   offers idiosyncratic program 1 1     1 1 1 1 2 3   claims to represent &quot;whole people&quot; 2 2     1 2 2 2 1 3   attacks all elites 1 1     1 3 3 2 2 3   Sum 10 10     8 13 11 11 11 18   1996 strong leader 2 2     1 3 1     3   avoids constraining organization 1 2     1 1 1     3   places morality over pragmatism 2 2     3 2 3     3   offers idiosyncratic program 1 1     1 1 1     3   claims to represent &quot;whole people&quot; 2 2     1 3 2     3   attacks all elites 1 1     1 3 3     3   Sum 9 10     8 13 11     18   1998 strong leader 3   2   1 3 1         avoids constraining organization 2   2   1 1 1         places morality over pragmatism 2   2   3 2 3         offers idiosyncratic program 1   1   1 1 1         claims to represent &quot;whole people&quot; 2   2   1 2 2         attacks all elites 1   1   1 3 3         Sum 11   10   8 12 11         2002 strong leader 3   1   1 2 1       2 avoids constraining organization 2   2   1 1 1       3 places morality over pragmatism 2   2   3 2 3       3 offers idiosyncratic program 1   1   1 1 1       3 claims to represent &quot;whole people&quot; 2   2   1 2 2       3 attacks all elites 2   1   1 1 3       3 Sum 12   9   8 9 11       17 2006 strong leader 2     3 1 2 1         avoids constraining organization 2     2 1 1 1         places morality over pragmatism 2     3 3 2 3         offers idiosyncratic program 1     2 1 1 1         claims to represent &quot;whole people&quot; 2     2 1 3 2         attacks all elites 2     3 1 1 3         Sum 11     15 8 10 11        
  38. 38. Populism in SK and CZ: Assessment
  39. 39. Populism in SK and CZ: Issue Divides
  40. 40. <ul><li>Is There a Populism Issue Divide? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What would we expect to see if there were? </li></ul></ul>Populism in SK and CZ: Issue Divides
  41. 41. <ul><li>Macro Patterns: Rapid Replacement? </li></ul>Populism in SK and CZ: Issue Divides
  42. 42. <ul><li>Macro Patterns: Rapid Decline Once In Power? </li></ul>Populism in SK and CZ: Issue Divides ZRS SOP ANO Smer
  43. 43. <ul><li>Micro Patterns: Satisfaction followed by disillusion </li></ul>Populism in SK and CZ: Issue Divides
  44. 44. <ul><li>Departing members of ANO more likely than continuing members to believe that: </li></ul><ul><li>Powerful do not care about me (16%) </li></ul><ul><li>Elections offer a chance for people like me to have a say (16%) </li></ul><ul><li>Politicians behave with restraint (13%) </li></ul>Populism in SK and CZ: Issue Divides
  45. 45. Departing members of Smer not more likely than continuing members to believe the same propositions Populism in SK and CZ: Issue Divides
  46. 46.  Populism in SK and CZ: Issue Divides <ul><li>Macro Patterns: Rapid Decline Once in Power </li></ul>
  47. 47. <ul><li>Macro Patterns: Rapid Decline Once in Power </li></ul>Populism in SK and CZ: Issue Divides
  48. 48. <ul><li>Has Smer “routinized” its populism? </li></ul><ul><li>Evidence: </li></ul><ul><li>In institutional development </li></ul><ul><ul><li>New party organization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>New name: Smer-Social Democracy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Choice of redistribution tolerant partners </li></ul></ul><ul><li>In the electorate </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Leftist leanings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Poor v. rich </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Stronger redistributionist profile among all voters </li></ul></ul>Populism in SK and CZ: The Future
  49. 49. Has Smer Routinized Populism? ZRS ANO Smer Time  Non-Routinized Populism Populism in SK and CZ: The Future
  50. 50. ZRS ANO Smer New Party or Parties Time  Non-Routinized Populism Has Smer Routinized Populism? Populism in SK and CZ: The Future
  51. 51. ZRS ANO Smer Routinized Populism Time  SOP Has Smer Routinized Populism? Populism in SK and CZ: The Future
  52. 52. All material used here availalable at www.pozorblog.com Kevin Deegan-Krause Wayne State University Detroit, Michigan, USA [email_address]

×