Decisiveness and Fear of Disorder examines how democratic representatives make decisions in crisis situations. By analyzing parliamentary asylum debates from Germany’s Asylum Compromise in 1992-1993 ...and the 2015-2016 refugee crisis, Julius Rogenhofer identifies representatives’ ability to project decisiveness as a crucial determinant for whether the rights and demands of irregular migrants were adequately considered in democratic decision-making. Both crisis situations showcase an emotive dimension to the parliamentary meaning-making process. As politicians confront fears of social and political disorder, they focus on appearing decisive in the eyes of the public and fellow representatives, even at the expense of human rights considerations and inclusive deliberation processes. Rogenhofer shows how his theoretical approach allows us to reinterpret a range of crisis situations beyond the irregular migration context, including democracies’ initial responses to Covid-19, the European Sovereign Debt Crisis, and United States climate politics. These additional case studies help position concerns with decisiveness amid the challenges that populism and technocracy increasingly pose to representative democracies.
In this study, we examine how the security of tenure (proxied by both inter- and intra-party electoral advantage) affects the engagement and political performance of members of parliament (MPs). ...Using data from the lower chamber of parliament in Poland for the period 2005-2019, we provide evidence that intra-party electoral advantage correlates with MPs' efforts and political performance. A more secured position of an MP vis-à-vis their co-partisans leads to a decrease in the number of parliamentary speeches, statements, interpellations, and lower voting turnout. Therefore, it appears that MPs whose political survival is less uncertain work less hard than MPs with a more precarious future.
Where were coups more likely to occur in the US world order? The US has occasionally resorted to coups to realign the foreign policy preferences in allied nations with its own preferences. This ...article explains why coups were more likely in countries where the leaders enjoyed an incumbency advantage that thwarted the ability of potential successors to gain power through regular channels of leadership turnover. That was more likely to be the case in presidential than in parliamentary democracies, and more likely in personalistic, military, or single-party regimes than in autocracies with multiparty legislatures.
The paper clarifies Havel's perception of post-democracy through his various writings and speeches, in comparison with the concepts of post-democracy as proposed by C. Crouch, J. Rancière, R. Rorty, ...S. Wolin, J. Habermas, and Ch. Mouffe. Consequently, Havel's critique of the then Western parliamentary democracy and the very essence of his notion of post-democracy will be thoroughly illuminated. The historical and intellectual circumstances that shaped his thinking on the topic will be analysed as well. Some misinterpretations of Havel's thinking that have emerged in the meantime will also be clarified.
This insightful book brings the study of coalitions and coalition governance in Central and Eastern European democracies up to date, with an analytical focus framed by difficult economic and social ...periods, such as the end of the economic crisis and the Coronavirus pandemic. The volume posits insights from a plethora of experts on party politics and coalition studies from their respective countries, with chapters on Bulgaria, Czechia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Embellished with illustrative tables and extensive datasets throughout, each chapter maps the developments of party system change, covering the coalition life cycle from the early 1990s until the end of 2021, and explores whether there has been transformation of the coalition, governance and dissolutions patterns due to heightened pressures. This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of coalition politics, representative democracy, governance, political parties, European Union politics, East and Central European politics, and comparative politics.
This article argues that the effect of a democratic leader’s electoral margin of victory on their conflict behaviour once in office is highly dependent upon the state’s institutional structure. I ...show that, uniquely in parliamentary democracies, governments that win a larger share of the vote are significantly less likely to initiate disputes abroad. Such governments entail broad coalitions that, combined with the ever-present possibility of governmental collapse and new elections, require leaders to pursue a more cautious, lowest-common-denominator foreign policy. This effect is significantly stronger for right-wing governments. Conversely, in presidential democracies, I find that electoral vote share has no effect on a leader’s subsequent conflict propensity. Vote shares thus function very differently in parliamentary and presidential systems, with important implications for conflict behaviour abroad.
The principle of equal representation is the cornerstone of modern democracy, yet there have been concerns that the benefits of representation can be skewed, advantaging some over others. We argue ...that elected officials will be more responsive to constituents whom they perceive as more like themselves and more likely to be politically active. We examine inequalities in representation in a parliamentary democracy where, intrinsic to the institutional framework, there is a long‐standing reputation for serving constituent needs: the United Kingdom. We also advance the literature by focusing on the expediency of responsiveness and the helpfulness of response. Drawing on a field experiment, we find both an overall high level of responsiveness and helpfulness but also biases affecting MP's responsiveness. Our findings raise important questions about equal access to representation, even in a political system where constituency service is the norm and expectation.
Democracy is rule by people, but not every individual is directly involved in governance. Therefore, open governance must be a minimum standard for democracy. The Open Government Partnership supports ...the practical implementation of open government. Georgia became member in 2011, and implemented numerous reforms to strengthen good governance. This paper will analyze the achievements, key challenges, and the quality of participation, of Georgian national action plans. This will strengthen the practical assessment of open governance in the development process. This paper will examine action plans, monitoring reports, the OGP flagship database, and other sources. Furthermore, readers can find possible answers to the pertinent question of what are the innovative approaches that strengthen the role of citizens in Georgia.
PDF
