世界経済・社会統計 = World development indicators

Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe.

Persistent poverty, economic decay, and lack of opportunities are at the root of considerable discontent in declining and lagging-behind areas the world over. Poor development prospects and an increasing belief that these places have ‘no future’ – as economic dynamism has been posited to be increasingly dependent on agglomeration economies – have led many of these so-called ‘places that don’t matter’ to revolt against the status quo. The revolt has come via an unexpected source: the ballot-box in a wave of political populism with strong territorial, rather than social foundations. I will argue that the populist wave is challenging the sources of existing well-being in both the less-dynamic and the more prosperous areas and that better, rather than more, place-sensitive territorial development policies are needed in order to find a solution to the problem. Place-sensitive development policies need, however, to stay clear of the welfare, income-support, and big investment projects of past development strategies if they are to be successful and focus on tapping into untapped potential and on providing opportunities to those people living in the places that ‘don’t matter’.

/pdf/the-revenge-of-the-places-that-don-t-matter-and-what-to-do-15nra2dx55.pdf

The revenge of the places that don’t matter (and what to do about it)

Although there is a lively academic debate about contemporary populism in Europe and Latin America, almost no cross-regional research exists on this topic. This article aims to fill this gap by showing that a minimal and ideological definition of populism permits us to analyse current expressions of populism in both regions. Moreover, based on a comparison of four prototypical cases (FN/Le Pen and FPO/Haider in Europe and PSUV/Chavez and MAS/Morales in Latin America), we show that it is possible to identify two regional subtypes of populism: exclusionary populism in Europe and inclusionary populism in Latin America.

/pdf/exclusionary-vs-inclusionary-populism-comparing-contemporary-b4jyxt16ha.pdf

Exclusionary vs. Inclusionary Populism: Comparing Contemporary Europe and Latin America

The sudden and perhaps unexpected appearance of populist parties in the 1990s shows no sign of immediately vanishing. The lion’s share of the research on populism has focused on defining populism, ...

/pdf/how-populist-are-the-people-measuring-populist-attitudes-in-57eawly5u0.pdf

How Populist Are the People? Measuring Populist Attitudes in Voters

This article pushes forward our understanding of populism by developing one of the more underappreciated definitions of populism, populism as discourse It does so by creating a quantitative measur

Is Chávez Populist?: Measuring Populist Discourse in Comparative Perspective

Political parties provide a crucial link between voters and politicians. This link takes a variety of forms in democratic regimes, from the organization of political machines built around clientelistic networks to the establishment of sophisticated programmatic parties. Latin American Party Systems provides a novel theoretical argument to account for differences in the degree to which political party systems in the region were programmatically structured at the end of the twentieth century. Based on a diverse array of indicators and surveys of party legislators and public opinion, the book argues that learning and adaptation through fundamental policy innovations are the main mechanisms by which politicians build programmatic parties. Marshalling extensive evidence, the book�s analysis shows the limits of alternative explanations and substantiates a sanguine view of programmatic competition, nevertheless recognizing that this form of party system organization is far from ubiquitous and enduring in Latin America.

/pdf/latin-american-party-systems-1bh2o3eo7l.pdf

Latin American Party Systems

1. Introduction 2. Chavismo, populism, and democracy 3. Measuring the populist discourse of Chavismo 4. Party system breakdown and the rise of Chavismo 5. The causes of populism in comparative perspective 6. Populist organization: the Bolivarian circles in Venezuela 7. Populist policy: the missions of the Chavez government 8. Conclusion Appendix A: the populist speech rubric Appendix B: test of the sampling technique Appendix C: test of interaction effects.

/pdf/venezuela-s-chavismo-and-populism-in-comparative-perspective-6s385e3g2u.pdf

Venezuela's Chavismo and Populism in Comparative Perspective

With Chavez, the people rule. Slogan in the 2000 presidential campaign To understand Chavismo, we need to know more about the movement's origins and how it is depicted by other scholars. We also need to learn more about the basic concepts – populism, worldview, and discourse – that I will be using to describe and analyze Chavez and his movement. This chapter provides these conceptual and empirical foundations. While the emphasis of this chapter is largely on categorization, it provides the basis for and anticipates the causal arguments in subsequent chapters. The main argument of this chapter is that the scholarly literature places Chavismo on an inadequate unidimensional spectrum of democratic procedure. Democracy, of course, is a fundamental objective for policymakers and citizens today, and in this book I employ the minimal procedural definition of democracy that many political scientists currently use: competition over ideas and candidates (“contestation”), broad participation, and at least a minimal set of rights to make these other conditions effective (Dahl 1971 ; Collier and Levitsky 1997). This is a definition centered on, though not limited to, the conduct of free and fair elections. Using this definition, we can classify Chavez's Bolivarian government as a semidemocratic regime headed in an increasingly authoritarian direction. But to see what really makes Chavismo distinct from other democratic regimes and from the previous political system in Venezuela, we must complement this behavioral or material dimension with a cultural or normative one that considers the moral justifications for democracy. This dimension is defined primarily by two political worldviews or discourses: populism and pluralism.

Venezuela's Chavismo and Populism in Comparative Perspective: Chavismo, Populism, and Democracy

For several years the Circulos Bolivarianos were a key organized com- ponent of the movement supporting President Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and the question of their democratic qualities a source of considerable controversy, but until recently there was little data to test the competing claims of supporters and opponents. We report the results of a survey of 110 members of Circulos and several interviews carried out in four Venezuelan states during June and July 2004. After providing basic information on the Circulos, we analyze their ten- dency to contribute to a democratic civil society. We find that respondents had highly democratic goals and methods; however, their organizations embodied a charismatic mode of linkage to Chavez that undermined their ability to become institutionalized. In addition, although the Circulos performed valuable social work, they often reinforced clientelistic relations between Chavez and the voters, and they did not significantly enhance the level of pluralism in the broader civil society.

Kirk A. Hawkins

Papers

Is Chávez Populist?: Measuring Populist Discourse in Comparative Perspective

Latin American Party Systems

Venezuela's Chavismo and Populism in Comparative Perspective

Venezuela's Chavismo and Populism in Comparative Perspective: Chavismo, Populism, and Democracy

Dependent Civil Society: The Circulos Bolivarianos in Venezuela