Politics

Domestic politics theories of international political economy and the recent disruptions in international cooperation and trade apparently induced by domestic discontent have shown the crucial role domestic forces play in influencing governmental preferences. This article contributes to this theoretical school, first, by assessing seminal works on the ideational, material, and institutional dimensions of domestic politics, and second, by conceptualising the ‘societal approach’ to fill a major gap in domestic politics theorising. The societal approach asks under which conditions value-based societal ideas, domestic institutions, and material interests matter in shaping governmental preferences. When do ideas prevail over interests and vice versa? How do they interact with each other and with domestic institutions? The societal approach includes all three domestic variables as potential driving forces for governmental preferences and conceives them both as individual and as interacting forces. Most importantly, it complements domestic politics theories by proposing hypotheses on the conditions for the influence of each variable on governmental preferences. The article brings together previously conceived parts of the societal approach and considerably expands it.

Turkey under the AKP governments constitutes an exemplary case for understanding how centralized religion, authoritarianism, and economic logic of neoliberalism interrelate. AKP uses state-guided religion to legitimize its neoliberal economic policies and create docile, economized citizens. This article specifically focuses on how pious Muslims resist AKP’s religious neoliberalism by focusing on actions and deliberations of Labor and Justice Platform members. Our discussion, which consists of face-to-face interviews with the members of this social movement, delineates the group’s justice-oriented, egalitarian, and pluralist orientation of Islam and depicts their dialogues with power – embodied in AKP’s domination of Islamic discourse in Turkey. We discuss how group members reinterpret religious concepts such as kader (fate), kısmet (destiny), and sabır (patience) that the AKP uses as micro-discursive mechanisms to create economically compliant citizens. We also discuss the specific frames of resistance they develop in order to break out from the resilience and adaptation that AKP has embedded in its narratives of economy and work. These frames include a sharp criticism of market Islam, a challenge to political Islam and dissent against state Islam. Theoretically, the article refers to neoliberal governmentality and explores its contestation – an understudied concept in Foucauldian studies.

In this article, we use an adapted version of Wayne Sandholtz’s cycle of normative change to examine the dynamics of contestation of norms against incapacitating chemical agents and riot control agents, often imprecisely grouped together under the term ‘non-lethal chemical weapons’. We draw on a concept-driven analysis of statements and in-depth interviews with individual stakeholders to track the gradual development of the issue towards norm change within the Chemical Weapons Convention. Our findings highlight several key factors conducive to normative change, particularly the role of the Dubrovka incident as the ‘deviant event’, discursive decoupling of the two classes of chemicals, and new framing and ‘rebranding’ of incapacitating chemical agents as ‘CNS-acting chemicals’. At the same time, we also examine factors that significantly slowed down attempts by norm entrepreneurs to attract attention to the issue, such as the saliency of the use of chemical weapons in Syria, which effectively sidelined the problem of ‘non-lethal’ agents in the overall debate.

Are prime ministers held accountable for their government’s performance? The personalisation of parliamentary elections and subsequent voting behaviour based on the personality of party leaders questions the accountability of elected governments. In this article, I analyse the confounding of prime ministers’ leader effects by voters’ evaluation of government performance to examine whether prime ministers are held accountable for the performance of their government. I use individual-level data from British, Danish, and German elections and a natural experiment at the German state level to show that voters hold prime ministers personally accountable. The findings constitute an important extension of electoral accountability and have implications for the study of personalisation and presidentialisation in parliamentary democracies.

Deliberative exercises may reinvigorate civic life by building citizens’ capacity to engage in other types of civic activities. This study examines members of a citizens’ panel (n = 56) who participated in a 6-day deliberative event on climate change and energy transition in Edmonton, Alberta (Canada), in 2012. We compared panellists’ civic engagement, political interest, and political knowledge with those of the general population using a concurrent random digit dialling survey conducted 2.5 years after the event (n = 405). Panellists are more likely to talk about politics, and volunteer in the community compared to their counterparts in the larger population. Examining three points in time, we reveal a trajectory of increasing political knowledge and civic engagement. Finally, we examine the mechanisms that mobilize panellists into greater civic engagement. This study illustrates how deliberative events could strengthen engagement in civic and political life, depending on the degree to which deliberation was perceived to have occurred.

It remains unclear what institutional characteristics determine the publication of press releases by constitutional courts. Research has revealed that courts use press releases to disseminate information; however, little is known about when exactly courts choose to publish a press release on a ruling. By focusing on institutional elements, this study argues that press releases form a part of judicial public relations and are used to enhance openness and transparency surrounding specific court rulings. This argument is tested empirically via a novel dataset on the activities of the German Federal Constitutional Court. Based on 1131 senate rulings decided between 1996 and 2018, this study demonstrates that proceeding types and changes to the status quo are the main characteristics that determine the publication of court press releases, whereas intra-judicial and internal conflicts are revealed to be less influential.

Expert surveys provide a standardized way to access and synthesize specialized knowledge, thereby, enabling the analysis of a diverse range of concepts and contexts that might otherwise be difficult to approach systematically. However, while studies of public opinion have long argued that cognitive biases represent potential problems when it comes to the general population, less attention has been paid to similar issues among expert respondents. This study examines one form of cognitive bias, hindsight bias. Hindsight bias refers to the tendency to retrospectively exaggerate one’s foresight of a particular event. We argue that hindsight bias is a potential problem when it comes to retrospective evaluation due to the difficulty involved in separating our assessments of the pre-crisis period from the knowledge that a crisis occurred. Using disaggregated data from the Varieties of Democracy Project, we look for evidence of hindsight bias in coders’ evaluations of the periods that preceded major crises of democracy. We find that coder disagreement is significantly higher in pre-crisis scenarios than in our control group. Concerningly, despite this disagreement, coders remain similarly confident in their assessments. This represents a potential problem for those who seek to use these data to study democratic breakdowns and transitions.

In the 2017 Czech parliamentary election, the Czech Pirate Party (Pirates) gained 10.79% of the votes – an unprecedented success, compared to most of the pirate parties across Europe. However, as their electoral gain varies widely across the Czech Republic’s territory, this article analyses all (more than 6000) Czech municipalities in the elections of 2010, 2013, and 2017 to explain this variation. Overall, the success of the Pirates was driven especially by obtaining much more support in larger municipalities with younger populations (although not only those aged 18–24 but also older ones), lower unemployment, higher turnout, and lower support for leftist parties. Thus, from a spatial perspective, the patterns of Pirate voting largely resembled long-term spatial support for Czech rightist parties and we can conclude that the Pirates made considerable inroads to regions which had historically been strongholds of the Civic Democratic Party, as the former main party of the right, but also strongholds of minor right-wing (‘liberal centre’) parties of the 1990s and early 2000s. Success of the Pirates thus was based especially on votes from municipalities located in more developed areas, where the Pirates received many more votes than in structurally disadvantaged regions.