Political Change in Europe Module Notes PDF

Preview

Summary

Political Change in Europe Module NotesWeek 1 – IntroductionReadingsBale, T. (2017) European politics: A comparative introduction. Fourth Edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, Chapter 1 (‘Europe – a continent in the making’). “Europe now contains more genuinely democratic states than any other ...

Description

Political Change in Europe Module Notes Week 1 – Introduction Readings Bale, T. (2017) European politics: A comparative introduction. Fourth Edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, Chapter 1 (‘Europe – a continent in the making’).   

 



 



  

 

“Europe now contains more genuinely democratic states than any other continent on earth.” P.1 “Most of our focus will be on the 28 states that make up the EU, as well as inveterate non-joiners like Norway and Switzerland.” P. 1 “Cleavages are splits or divisions in a society that give rise to conflicts that may well be expressed in political form – often, though not necessarily, via the formation of opposing parties representing people on either side of the split.” P. 2 “European countries, and the people who live in them, may be growing a little less unlike one another” p. 2” Thirty Years’ War 1618-1648 – “brought Scandinavian countries into a prolonged armed conflict that also involved the kings and princes of central and western Europe. It also saw France emerge as mainland Europe’s strongest rival to English power, and also as a centralized state with a large bureaucracy and a military maintained to fight wars, many of them aggressive rather than defensive, in what was supposedly the national interest.” P.4 “Competition between Europe’s monarchies, and conflicts over religion, encouraged warfare that needed to be paid for, leading to greater centralization and to international treaties that established some if not all of the borders we know today.” P.5 Late 18th century – ‘balance of power’ – France, Austria, Britain & Prussia. P. 5 “The balance of power is an equilibrium existing between states (or groups of states) when resources – especially military resources – are sufficiently evenly distributed to ensure that no single state can dominate the others.” P. 6 “In continental Europe, a series of failed proto-socialist revolutions in the midnineteenth century gave way in the end to politically more successful (if socially less radical) efforts to achieve representation by democratic means.” P. 6 “By the beginning of the twentieth century, universal (or near-universal) male suffrage had been adopted in many European countries.” P. 6 “Europe’s always fragile balance of power began to harden into the military alliances that ended up driving the continent into the First World War.” P. 6 “With the coming of industry (and industrialized warfare) the tendency of states to seek protective alliances combined with the ideological struggle between capitalism and socialism to produce the Cold War – a stand-off between blocs led by the USA and the USSR that split Europe between a Soviet-ruled east and a west that sought peace and prosperity through European integration.” P. 6 Post WWI: German reparations, redrawing of borders, formation of USSR pp.6-7 EEC formed 1957 – renamed EU – “In 2004, 2007 and 2013, it expanded to take in a total of 28 members” p.9

 



 





    



   

  

Economic post-war boom: “To many in western Europe, the years 1950-73 represented a kind of ‘golden age’” p. 9 “The year 1989 saw revolutions all over eastern Europe, symbolized for many by the fall of the Berlin Wall that had for so long and so cruelly kept apart those living in the capitalist and communist halves of the city.” P.10 “With the collapse of the Soviet Union, CEE countries were free to determine thei own destiny and overwhelmingly plumped for liberal capitalism. Many of them also joined what has become the EU.” P. 10 “European economies vary according to size, resources and history” p. 11 “By dividing wealthy by population, we can see that people in some countries are considerably better off than others, even if we take into account the cost of living.” P. 11 “the unemployment rate in Andalusia in 2015 was the highest in Europe at 35 per cent, whereas in the region which includes the Czech capital city Prague and in Germany’s Upper Bavaria it stood at just 2.5 per cent.” Pp. 12-13 “Most European states, such as the UK and other advanced countries, can be labelled ‘postindustrial’ because the service sector has overtaken the manufacturing sector as the biggest employer in the economy, with agriculture shrinking still further” p. 13 “The economic backwardness associated with communism is not a disadvantage that can be overcome overnight” p.14 “The proverbial wooden spoon goes to Bulgaria and Romania, where liberal reform has been slow and continues to stutter.” P. 16 “Globalization does not spell doom for European economies, although some are adjusting better than others.” P. 16 “Europe’s various welfare state regimes” are either ‘Social-democratic”, “Liberal, Anglo-Saxon”, or “Conservative” p. 18 “Although their governments are still omitted to relatively high social spending, and though poverty – at least until the current economic crisis – has been decreasing, most European countries are far from being classless societies.” P. 21 Gender remains an issue “despite the fact that one of the clearest European social trends of the latter half of the twentieth century was a move into the paid workforce by women” p. 25 “Gender inequality continues to be the norm in Europe, although Nordic countries have made more progress on this score than most.” P. 26 Some countries have adopted gender quotas. P. 26 “until very recently at least, Europe has been a bastion of Christianity” p. 28 “large numbers still profess to believe, and although fewer people attend places of worship regularly, many still use them to mark births, marriages, deaths and so on. Christianity is still dominant, but Muslims (and Jews) make up an important part of Europe’s religious identity.” P. 29 “Religious fundamentalism is by far the strongest predictor of hostility against gays, Jews and, respectively, Muslims (for Christians) or the West (for Muslims).”p.31 “the entire continent contains far more ethnic groups than states” . 32 “Many European states contain ethnic and national minorities. This means a large number of people have multiple attachments. There is also some, albeit limited, evidence of the emergence of a European identity, although this varies between countries.” P. 33



“Shared political values and behaviours, however, do not necessarily result in identical political institutions: as we shall go on to see, the latter are to some extent the product of particular histories and reflections of a social and economic differences” p. 34

Landman, T. (2008) Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics: An Introduction London: Routledge, Chapters 2, 4&5. (4th Edition, 2017, is also available).

Lecture 1 – Introduction 

Right-wing populism: o Right-wing populists win seats and reject democratic values (Freedom House 2018). o The Euroskeptic, anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany became the first far-right party to enter Germany’s legislature since 1945.

o In Austria, the similarly Islamophobic Freedom Party finished third in parliamentary elections and entered a governing coalition headed by the conservative People’s Party. o In Hungary and Poland, populist leaders continued to consolidate power by uprooting democratic institutions and intimidating critics in civil society.



Strategies of Comparative Research o Comparing many countries (quantitative analysis) o Comparing few countries (focussed comparison)   

Systematic comparison of a few countries. MSSD – seeks to identify the key features that are different among similar countries and which account for the observed political outcome. MDSD – compares countries that do not share common features apart from the political outcome to be explained and one or two explanatory factors seen to be important for that outcome.

o Single-country studies as comparison 



A single country study is considered comparative if it uses concepts that are applicable to other countries and/or seeks to make larger inferences that stretch beyond the original country used in the study (Landman 2008, 28). Types: theory-building, theory-testing (theory-confirming/theory-infirming), deviant / outlier cases.

Week 2 – Democratization in Europe Lecture 2 

What is democratization?

o o o

Transition from authoritarian to democratic political systems. Democratization studies – studies of how democracies emerge and endure. Main questions:  



Electoral v. Liberal Democracy o o



Schumpeter (1943) defined democracy as a ‘method’ for making decisions. This method involves the selection of leaders through competitive elections. Dahl’s definition is what come to understand as liberal democracy. In 1971 he proposed the idea of polyarchy, characterised by: “Free and fair elections; the election of government officials who are responsible for policy decisions; an inclusive suffrage; the right of al adult citizens to run for public office; freedom of expression; alternative information; and associational autonomy”.

Authoritarianism o o o

o 

Are there certain preconditions for the establishment and maintenance of democracy? Who are the agents of democratization?

A non-democratic (authoritarian) regime is ‘rule by other means than democracy’ (Brooker 2014; p.1). There are military regimes, personalist regimes, single party regimes, hybrids (Geddes 1999). Electoral authoritarianism: some authoritarian states still have elections as a way of legitimizing the system, but these elections are usually not democratic – no international observers, manipulation etc. (e.g. Russia). Closed authoritarianism: no elections at all.

Huntington’s three waves of democratization: o o o

First (1828-1926): Britain, France, USA. Second (1943-1962): India, Israel, Japan, West Germany, Austria, Italy. Third (1974-1991): Southern and Eastern Europe, Latin America, parts of Africa.    

Portugal in 1974, Greece in 1974, Spain in 1975 Many scholars were taken by surprise when communism fell from 1989-1991. What contributed to these changes? Huntington provides some ideas:

     

The deepening legitimacy problems of authoritarian regimes. Military defeats. Economic factors: economic development. The Catholic Church – especially important in Poland and Spain. The Church decided that it did not side with authoritarian regimes any longer in the late 20th century. External Actors – the European Union (or ECC). The countries knew that they would benefit economically by gaining access to wealthier countries if they democratized and joined the EU. Demonstration effects (snowballing). ‘Political leaders and publics have to act’ (p.107).



In search of causal mechanisms: o

o



Theories of democratization: o

o

o



‘Empirical theory seeks to establish causal relationships between two or more concepts (variables) in an effort to explain the occurrence of observed political phenomenon’ (Landman 2005: 15). There are many theories of democratization. One of the most prominent is the modernization theory, which argues that when a country develops economically (urbanisation, education, rising middle class etc), society changes and this fosters democratization.

The structuralist approach - regime change is preconditioned by certain structural factor like economic development, class struggle or cultural patterns, and the international linkage (Lipset 1959; Moore 1966; Almond & Verba 1963; Hutnington 1991; Lake 1996; Levitsky & Way 2010). The agency approach – emphasizes the importance of political choice and strategy of political actors (Przeworski 1991; Karl and Schmitter 1991; Schmitter, O’Donnell, Whitehead 1986). The eclectic approach – the state- civil society – international context (Grugel & Bishop 2014).

Prospects for further democratization in Europe: o

Authoritarianism in Belarus:        

o

The Western Balkans:   



The president has absolute power. Alexander Lukashenka secured his 5th term in 2015 in a non-competitive presidential race. Involvement in political activism is risky – can result in fines, loss of jobs, confiscation of property etc. Government owns and controls the internet. (Freedom House 2018). Why didn’t Belarus transition to democracy in the 1990s? How can we explain its authoritarian stability? Agency is one potential explanation – the role of Lukashenka. International context is another – the historical links between Belarus and Russia and their close development. However, Russia had close links with other countries which have now democratized – is the international context a sufficient explanation?

In 1999: Albania 3.5, Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) 5, Macedonia 3. 2018 (Freedom House Index): 3, (2.5, 3), 3.5 respectively. They are all now deemed electoral democracies except Serbia, which is deemed a liberal democracy. Will electoral democracies become liberal democracies in the Western Balkans?

Stages of democratization:

o o

o

Liberalization – in a nondemocratic setting, a mix of policy and social changes occur, e.g. less media censorship, release of political prisoners (Linz and Stepan 1996). Transition – successful realization of a free election, convening of a new parliament, or installation of a new president in office would be such a moment. Writing of the constitution is central (Linz 1990; 121). Consolidation – behaviourally, attitude, and constitutionally.

Seminar 2 Preparation – Country Examples 

Poland: o

The government's inability to forestall Poland's economic decline led to waves of strikes across the country in April, May and August 1988.

o

In an attempt to take control of the situation, the government gave de facto recognition to the Solidarity union, and Interior Minister Czesław Kiszczak began talks with its leader Lech Wałęsa on August 31.

o

These talks broke down in October, but a new series of negotiations, the "round-table" talks, began in February 1989. These talks produced an agreement in April for partly open parliamentary elections.

o

The June election produced a Sejm (lower house), in which one-third of the seats went to communists and one-third went to the two parties which had hitherto been their coalition partners. The remaining one-third of the seats in the Sejm and all those in the Senate were freely contested; the majority of these were by candidates supported by Solidarity.

o

The failure of the communists at the polls produced a political crisis. The round-table agreement called for a communist president, and on July 19, the National Assembly, with the support of a number of Solidarity deputies, elected General Wojciech Jaruzelski to that office. However, two attempts by the communists to form governments failed.

o

On August 19, President Jaruzelski asked journalist/Solidarity activist Tadeusz Mazowiecki to form a government; on September 12, the Sejm voted approval of Prime Minister Mazowiecki and his cabinet. For the first time in more than 40 years, Poland had a government led by non-communists. In December 1989, the Sejm approved the government's reform program to transform the Polish economy rapidly from centrally planned to free-market, amended the constitution to eliminate references to the "leading role" of the Communist Party, and renamed the country the "Republic of Poland" May 1990 Elections – completely free. First free parliamentary elections – 1991. Over 100 parties participated. Gov. of Prime Minister Jan Olszewski first fully free and democratic Polish gov. since 1926.

o

o o o



Italy: o o

18th century revolution. 1958 – French fifth republic approved strengthening authority of presidency and executive

Seminar 2 1) How can we explain the process of democratization in Europe? 2. Are all European democracies consolidated? 3. How can we explain authoritarian stability in Belarus? 4. What are the prospects for further democratization in Europe? a. Will Belarus become democratic? b. Will electoral democracies become liberal democracies in the Western Balkans? Week 3 – Democratic quality and democratic backsliding in Europe Lecture 3  

Democratic quality = democratic performance. Democratic backsliding = deconsolidation. o o o o



Scholars have been speaking of democratic deficit for a long while. Issue of political participation: citizens are not so engaged (as demonstrated by voter turnout and membership of political parties. Satisfaction with democracy and trust in politicians have declined. Democratic deficit = “the gap between aspirations for democracy … and satisfaction with democratic performance…” (Norris 2011, 5)

Democratic backsliding: “democratic backsliding is a decline in the quality of democracy”, and is “incremental within-regime change” (Waldner & Lust 2018, 95). o “Democratic backsliding can constitute democratic breakdown or simply the serious weakening of existing democratic institutions” (Bormeo 2016, 6) – broader definition. o The first part of this latter definition is problematic – democratic backsliding is analytically separate from democratic breakdown. The first definition has more conceptual clarity. Democratic breakdown refers more to regime changes from democratic to authoritarian. o

o 

Democratic deconsolidation: o

According to Linz and Stepan (1996, 5), a consolidated democracy means:

o

Behaviorally: no political groups seriously attempt to overthrow the democratic regime.  Attitudally: citizens believe that democratic procedures are the most appropriate way to govern collective life.  Constitutionally: governmental and nongovernmental forces become subject to democratic laws and procedures. Democracy may be deconsolidating when a “sizeable minority of citizens… 



loses its belief in democratic values, becomes attracted to authoritarian alternative



o



And starts voting for ‘antisystem’ parties, candidates or movements that flout of oppose constitutive elements of liberal democracy” (Foa and Mounk 2017, 9).

If we use the concept of deconsolidation, the focus is on ideas, beliefs, and the way that people vote. Democratic backsliding as a concept provides a broader scope for research.

If “democratic backsliding is a decline in the quality of democracy”, what is the quality of democracy? o

o o

According to Lijphart (1999), the quality of democracy is the degree to which a political system meets such democratic norms as representativeness, accountability, equality and participation. Diamond and Morlino (2005, xi) suggest that the analysis of the quality of democracy is an empirical check on how ‘good’ a democracy. Assessing democratic performance: 

Lijphart (1999) Patterns of Democracy   



Diamond and Morlino (2004, 2005).    



Used a procedural approach. Representation. Participation. Competition. Accountability. Examined incremental changes in the above areas across time.

Costa Pinto et al 2012   

o

Procedural dimensions of democratic quality (rule of law, participation, competition, electoral accountability etc.) Substantive dimensions: freedom and equality. The results dimension: responsiveness. The difficulty here is that there are no benchmarks for measurement provided (no operationalization) so we cann...