Immigration and support for redistribution: survey experiments in three European countries

In times of increasing globalisation scholars put considerable efforts into understanding the consequences of immigration to the welfare state. One important factor in this respect is public support for the welfare state and redistribution. This article presents results from a unique survey experiment and a panel study in three European countries (Norway, Germany and the Netherlands) in order to examine whether and how individuals change their preference for redistribution when faced with immigration. Theoretically, citizens with high incomes should be especially likely to withdraw their support for redistribution because they fear the increased fiscal burden, whereas other types of citizens might ask for more compensation for the increased labour market risks caused by immigration. The empirical evidence reveals that only respondents with high incomes and those who face low labour market competition withdraw support for redistribution when faced with immigration.     

Dilemmas and Disappointments: Progressive Politics 1896–2016

Attempts at a Labour–Liberal Democrat Progressive Alliance came to nothing prior to the 1997 general election. The original idea of progressivism, first mooted in Britain in 1896, was an American one. Suggestions for a progressive alliance in the UK came from Lloyd George in 1914, and then again in 1931, each time with little effect. Nothing emerged after 1945 until the Lib–Lab pact negotiated by Callaghan and Steel in 1977, which led to electoral misfortune for both and the rise and fall of the SDP. In 2010 a coalition between the Lib Dems (under Clegg) and the Conservatives was always much the more likely option. Most Labour people no longer saw the Lib Dems as a party of the left. The Coalition Agreement in 2010 showed the idea of an alliance to be a centrist, elitist one with little grass‐roots support. Such an alliance would flourish through abstract pressure groups rather than popular democracy, especially with a Labour party led by Corbyn. In the US and the UK, progressivism went badly wrong in its politics: Theodore Roosevelt's New Nationalist campaign of 1912 divided American reformers fatally, as did Lloyd George's postwar Coalition in Britain after 1918. Now, even after Brexit, a progressive alliance seems further away than ever. The story of the ‘Progressive Dilemma’ remains one of unrealistic projects, invariably disappointed.     

The blind spots of liberal citizenship and integration policy

Governments across Europe have stepped up their efforts to manage social diversity politically, often specifically targeting Muslim populations. Lewicki interrogates the policy tools that the British and German governments deploy to ‘integrate’ an increasingly stigmatized and racialized population, zooming in on whether and how they problematize patterns of inequality. Complicating the ‘one country, one citizenship’ rationale of the citizenship regime literature that assumes a one-dimensional interpretation of history, cultural identity, political institutions or legal norms, she points to four salient liberal citizenship discourses that currently frame policies of diversity management. These are civic republicanism, multiculturalism, civic universalism and cosmopolitanism. Her analysis demonstrates that all four liberal citizenship discourses have blind spots when it comes to problematizing structural hierarchies and the logics of racism. Over the last two decades, liberal citizenship and integration policy frameworks have thus contributed to the retention of binary distinctions between superior citizens and inferior Others, distinctions that can now easily be exacerbated and used for mobilization by right-wing populist movements.     

The (im)plausibility of racism in Europe: policy frameworks on discrimination and integration

ABSTRACT

Rodríguez Maeso and Araújo analyse the reproduction of a dominant understanding of racism in policy discourses of integration and discrimination used by monitoring agencies in Portuguese and European Union (EU) institutional contexts. More specifically, they question the political concern over racism and discrimination vis-à-vis the idea of Europe ‘becoming increasingly diverse’ and the need to gather ‘evidence’ of discrimination. To that end, they examine periodic reports issued by EU monitoring agencies since the 1990s—paying specific attention to reporting on school segregation of Roma pupils in Portugal—and national integration policies and initiatives that, since the 2000s, have targeted mainly Roma and black families and youth. They argue that the dominant discourse of integration and cultural diversity conceives of racism as external to European political culture, and as a ‘factor’ of the ‘conflictive nature’ of social interactions in ethnoracially heterogeneous settings. This paves the way for calls for the ‘strengthening of social cohesion’—on the assumption that policy initiatives need to act on the ‘characteristics’ of so-called ‘vulnerable’ populations—whereas institutional arrangements and everyday practices remain unchallenged.     

Political parties or party systems? Assessing the ‘myth’ of institutionalisation and democracy

No matter the region of the world under study, party (system) institutionalisation has been traditionally considered to be a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for the survival of democracy. Despite being one of the most quoted statements in the democratisation literature, the few studies looking at the relationship between institutionalisation and democratic endurance have found no evidence of the ‘almost magical’ powers of the former. This article revisits the abovementioned research question by making use of an original dataset covering all European democracies between 1848 and 2014. The main findings are threefold: (1) it is not the institutionalisation of political parties but the institutionalisation of party systems as a whole that has fostered the prospects for democratic survival in Europe; (2) there is a threshold of systemic institutionalisation which, once reached, will avoid democratic collapse; and (3) systemic over-institutionalisation does not seem to be so perilous for the survival of democracy.     

Technocratic attitudes: a citizens’ perspective of expert decision-making

Despite repeated appointments of technocratic governments in Europe and increasing interest in technocracy, there is little knowledge regarding citizens’ attitudes towards technocracy and the idea of governance by unelected experts. This article revisits normative debates and hypothesises that technocracy and democracy stand in a negative relationship in the eyes of European citizens. It tests this alongside a series of hypotheses on technocratic attitudes combining country-level institutional characteristics with individual survey data. While findings confirm that individual beliefs about the merits of democracy influence technocratic attitudes, two additional important factors are also identified: first, levels of trust in current representative political institutions also motivate technocratic preferences; second, historical legacies, in terms of past party-based authoritarian regime experience, can explain significant cross-national variation. The implications of the findings are discussed in the broader context of citizen orientations towards government, elitism and the mounting challenges facing representative democracy.     

Welfare Performance in Southern Europe: Employment Crisis and Poverty Risk

The Great Recession has had a deep impact on employment levels and on income inequality in the Southern European countries (Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy). It has given rise to a new stage in the discussion on the distinctiveness of a possible ‘Mediterranean’ variant of welfare capitalism. This paper analyses the performance of the Mediterranean cluster during the Great Recession period in its two main dimensions, labour market participation and poverty risk, and to what extent that performance has evolved in a divergent or convergent manner. Firstly, it portrays the main changes in this variant of welfare capitalism during the last two decades. The second and third sections, respectively, provide a comparative profile of the employment crisis suffered by these countries and of its impact on poverty risks. Finally, the main institutional traits are discussed, explaining the relative performance of welfare capitalism in this cluster of countries.     

Introduction to the Special Issue: New Forms of Intolerance in European Political Life

This introduction summarizes the contributions to the Special Issue that focus on the spread of intolerant and racist discourses in Denmark, Italy, Spain, Greece, and Hungary. Through a comparative approach, the issue argues that what has been decisive in this process is the role played by mainstream political parties that perceive intolerance against the “other” as the natural outcome of the failure of previous tolerant policies on immigrants and minorities. Even if brought forward with different argumentation in each case, intolerance is introduced in all five countries as a principled position under the pretext of protecting European citizens’ rights.     

Lost in transition,found in recession? Satisfaction with democracy in Central Europe before and after economic crises

For decades, research on democracy has produced evidence that the peoples of countries in Central Europe are less satisfied with the way democracy works in their countries than people in Western Europe. Using the data from the European Social Survey (ESS) I explore, how satisfaction with the way democracy works (SWD) changed in these countries between 2004 and 2014 and test the impact of satisfaction with the present state of the economy and trust in parliament on SWD. Results of the analysis reveal that people in Central Europe are still less satisfied with the democratic performance on average than people in Western Europe, but their satisfaction is on the rise especially in countries where the economy performs well, economic performance brings better standard of living, and people share a sense of economic optimism. Results also suggest that in countries where economic optimism is low, political evaluations of “crises in democracy” may play a larger role in explaining satisfaction with democratic performance.     

Market Power Europe—A Constructive Critique

Market Power Europe (MPE) constitutes an important contribution to the literature on the global role and actorness of the EU. In order to develop MPE as a theory, this contribution provides an assessment of how Russia, the USA and China have converged towards three EU trade policies in 2013. The analysis finds that MPE fails to account for important dynamics related to externalization in the three cases. In order to improve MPE analytically, the article suggests that MPE should include three intervening variables to account for the EU’s ability to externalize its policies and act as MPE in practice.