Suchergebnisse

Populism is a widespread political phenomenon present in countries across the globe. To explain the success of populist actors and discourses, I claim it is essential to consider the long-term impact of authoritarian legacies on national political culture, individual attitudes, and electoral behavior. In the first section, I discuss the importance of collective memories in molding identities and structures of power. I then present the relevant literature on democratization and authoritarian legacies, explaining how to integrate these strands of literature with the study of populism. In the following section, I examine cases from Europe and Latin America that are suitable to study the populist present through the lenses of collective memories of authoritarian regimes. In the conclusions, I discuss possible directions for future research and suggest that other types of memories, including collective memories about colonialism and civil wars, can have a relevant impact on populism. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Democratization process has become the global demand of the present century. The Millennium Development Goal (MDG) gave credence to this development. Nigeria and South Africa have had checkered history of dictatorship under military rule and obnoxious apartheid policy respectively. Both countries embraced the current wave in the 1990s. The exploration of this development is our central focus. To do this, the paper examined the following: the relationship between type of electoral system and the conduct of elections in Nigeria and South Africa; and the efficacy of majoritarian and proportional representation systems as applied in both countries. Our findings indicated that majoritarian system accounted for electoral irregularities while proportional representation contributed to wide acceptance of polls. The data were generated from the secondary source. We recommended the adoption of the proportional electoral system as practiced in South Africa and absolute constitutionalism for both countries so as to engender the principles of rule of law.

El presente artículo pretende examinar el papel del Derecho y, concretamente, la norma urbanística de Brasil y Colombia en la democratización del acceso al suelo urbano y la vivienda. Tras la lógica del mercado, la población de bajos ingresos no logra acceder a una vivienda, lo que refuerza la segregación socioespacial y muestra la necesidad de la gestión pública del suelo. El análisis de los alcances y límites de las normas se hizo a partir de una contextualización histórica y evaluación de los instrumentos de gestión de suelo acorde con su capacidad de contribuir a la adquisición de inmuebles para la implementación de vivienda de interés social. Se puede afirmar que los instrumentos existentes en los dos países buscan garantizar la función social de la propiedad, afrontar la retención especulativa de inmuebles y promover el reparto equitativo de cargas y beneficios de la urbanización. Sin embargo, la materialización de esos instrumentos se torna limitada debido a la debilidad de la gestión territorial municipal y a causa del conservadurismo del poder judicial. En suma, el análisis planteado puede aportar nuevas estrategias de acuerdo con las necesidades y especificidades de cada país para la construcción de territorios más inclusivos. ; This article aims to examine the role of the Law and, specifically, Brazil and Colombia's urban regulations in the democratization of access to urban land and housing. From a market logic point of view, low-income populations cannot access housing, which reinforces socio-spatial segregation and evidences the need for management in public urban land. The analysis of the scope and limits of the regulations was made from the historical contextualization and evaluation of land management instruments in accordance with their capability to contribute to the acquisition of properties for the implementation of social housing. It can be affirmed that the existing instruments in both countries seek to guarantee the social function of property, to face speculative retention of properties and to promote the equitable distribution of burdens and benefits of urbanization. However, the materialization of these instruments is limited by the weakness of the municipal territorial management and judiciary conservatism. In short, the proposed analysis can contribute to build new strategies based on the needs and specifics of each country to construct more inclusive territories. ; O presente artigo pretende examinar o papel do Direito e, concretamente, a norma urbanística da Colômbia e do Brasil na democratização do acesso ao solo urbano e a moradia. Com a lógica do mercado, a população de baixa renda não consegue ter direito a uma moradia, o que reforça a segregação socioespacial e aponta a necessidade da gestão pública do solo. A análise dos alcances e limites das normas foi feita a partir da contextualização histórica e a avaliação dos instrumentos de gestão do solo de acordo com sua capacidade de contribuir à aquisição de imóveis para a implementação de habitação de interesse social. É possível afirmar que os instrumentos existentes nos dois países procuram garantir a função social da propriedade, enfrentar a retenção especulativa de imóveis e promover uma distribuição equitativa de responsabilidades e benefícios da urbanização. Porém, a materialização desses instrumentos torna-se limitada devido à debilidade da gestão territorial municipal e por causa do conservadorismo do poder judicial. Concretamente, a análise planteada pode aportar novas estratégias de acordo com as necessidades e especificidades de cada país para a construção de territórios mais inclusivos.

AbstractThis study uses the case study of a 'transitioning' country, Turkey, in exploring institutional endurance and change. In this context it uses the framework of Arend Lijphart's majority and consensus democracy in order to uncover patterns of institutional evolution and persistence which have implications for the nature of its democratic transition. This is achieved through a step-by-step exploration of the key dimensions of democracy discussed by Lijphart. This empirical study seeks to demonstrate that despite the introduction of anti-majoritarian institutions in 1961, Turkey has never consolidated consensus democracy. Instead, since 1982 the trend has been a move towards a system more in line with the majoritarian regime established under the 1924 constitution. As such, the study offers a useful case study of the dynamics of political transformation in the face of institutional persistence, suggesting a need for tracing the history if we are to identify institutional patterns in contrast to the more generalized democratization frameworks.

Intro -- 1.1 Einleitung -- 1.2 Machtpolitik: "Der Staat ist eine «Maschine» der Repression… " (Marxistisch-Leninistische Theorie) -- 1.3 Unbewusstheit in der Macht -- 1.4 Staatspolitik und Macht -- 1.5 Die Rolle der Wissenschaft in der unbewussten Macht -- 2.1 Der "äthiopische Staat" und die Ideologie des Ähtiopienismus -- 2.2 Das Ende der Ära von Yohannes IV und die Geburt des Ähtiopienismus -- 2.3 Menelik II - verlängerter Arm der Kolonialmächte -- 2.4 Einleitung zu "Groß- Äthiopien" -- 2.5 Die Machtergreifung von Menelik II und der Aufstieg der Ideologie des Ähtiopienismus -- 2.6 Vergleich der Oromo-Demokratie, des Gada-Systems, mit dem "Fetha-Nagast" -- 2.7 Äthiopien - Aufstieg zur Kolonialmacht -- 3.1 Der wachsende islamistische Fundamentalismus im Gegensatz zur Demokratie der westlichen Länder -- 3.2 Das ägyptische Militär als Revolutionär und als Reaktionär: 1952/2011 -- 3.3 Die ägyptische Revolution von 1952 -- 3.4 Die revolutionäre demokratische Basis-Bewegung und deren Niederlage -- 3.5 Der Einfluss der USA auf das ägyptische Militär nach dem Camp David Abkommen: Kleptokratie des Militarismus statt Demokratie -- 3.6 Schlussfolgerung und Ausblick: "Mehr Demokratie wagen" (Willy Brandt).

This paper examines the main elements of the democratization policy of the European Union & analyses how this policy has been implemented in Cuba since 1996. The paper applies an analytical framework that links the two variables that Levitsky & Way have developed to study the international dimension of regime change: linkage & leverage to the West. The hypothesis put forward is the following: The combination of unanimity & the lack of common will to act before the process of democratization has started, holds back the development of a more active European policy with Cuba. In addition, the democratization policy of the EU is designed more as a policy of democratic consolidation than as a policy of regime change or transition. References. Adapted from the source document.

The first wave of democratization in the United States - the removal of property and taxpaying qualifications for the right to vote - was accompanied by the disenfranchisement of African American men, with the political actors most supportive of the former also the most insistent upon the latter. The United States is not unique in this respect: other canonical cases of democratization also saw simultaneous expansions and restrictions of political rights, yet this pattern has never been fully detailed or explained. Through case studies of the USA, the UK, and France, Disenfranchising Democracy offers the first cross-national account of the relationship between democratization and disenfranchisement. It develops a political institutional perspective to explain their co-occurrence, focusing on the politics of coalition-building and the visions of political community coalitions advance in support of their goals. Bateman sheds new light on democratization, connecting it to the construction of citizenship and cultural identities

With the widespread movement toward democratization that characterized the first post-Cold War decade, why did some nondemocratic regimes undergo a transition toward a democratic political system, but others not? Why have some transitions succeeded completely, but others resulted in only limited political reform? Renske Doorenspleet addresses these questions, providing a systematic theoretical and empirical analysis of variations in transitions to democracy. Doorenspleet interweaves a discussion of key concepts, the major theoretical approaches to democratization, and statistical analyses to illuminate the influence of structural primarily economic and social factors on democratic transitions. She also explores the notion of "waves" of democratization. Though focusing on the 1989-2001 period, she offers a wealth of new evidence covering two centuries of democratic transitions around the globe

This article is researching actual problems of democracy in Eastern Europe. Author analysis basic conceptual approaches to the problem of democracy and democratization in Latin America and Eastern Europe. The original essays are divided into three parts. Part One introduces a wide range of concepts and theories of democratization in general. Part Two is thematic; it focuses on dimensions of democratization that have been highlighted in the Eastern European context: legacies of communism, the role of economic reforms, the choice of political institutions, nationalism, and international influences on the democratization of Central and Eastern Europe. Part Three takes up the single most important controversy in post-communist studies how democratic are post-socialist democracies? The collection is very up-to-date, and covers the latest work in both democratization and area studies. ; This article is researching actual problems of democracy in Eastern Europe. Author analysis basic conceptual approaches to the problem of democracy and democratization in Latin America and Eastern Europe. The original essays are divided into three parts. Part One introduces a wide range of concepts and theories of democratization in general. Part Two is thematic; it focuses on dimensions of democratization that have been highlighted in the Eastern European context: legacies of communism, the role of economic reforms, the choice of political institutions, nationalism, and international influences on the democratization of Central and Eastern Europe. Part Three takes up the single most important controversy in post-communist studies how democratic are post-socialist democracies? The collection is very up-to-date, and covers the latest work in both democratization and area studies.

Die gegenwärtige Transformationsforschung zu demokratischen politischen Regimen zeichnet sich durch einen Gegensatz zwischen den traditionellen Modernisierungs- und Strukturtheorien einerseits und den Akteurs- und Prozeßanalysen andererseits aus. Um diesen Gegensatz zu überwinden, wird im vorliegenden Beitrag ein theoretischer Rahmen entwickelt, mit dessen Hilfe die beiden Ansätze integriert werden können. Der Autor betrachtet die Entstehung und Stabilisierung von demokratischen Regimen aus einer akteurtheoretischen Perspektive, wobei die Mobilisierung und Organisierung von Bevölkerungssegmenten zu organisierten kollektiven Akteuren im Rahmen ihrer jeweiligen politischen Interessen im Mittelpunkt stehen. Die Eliteninteressen und -strategien werden in ihrem Verhältnis zu den jeweils relevanten Bevölkerungsgruppen untersucht und an einem empirischen Beispiel über das Abstimmungsverhalten von Abgeordneten im preussischen Abgeordnetenhaus anlässlich einer Abstimmung über die Einführung des allgemeinen, gleichen Wahlrechts in Preußen im Jahre 1918 verdeutlicht. Es wird vor allem danach gefragt, welchen demokratisierenden Gehalt eine derartige Wahlrechtsänderung gehabt hätte und ob die den einzelnen Bevölkerungssegmenten zugeschriebenen sozial konstruierten Interessen das Abstimmungsverhalten der Abgeordneten erklären können. ; Contemporary attempts to explain the development and consolidation of democratic regimes can be divided into elite- and actor-centered perspectives on the one hand and modernization- and structural theories on the other hand. The article develops a theoretical perspective that links elite action to social structures. Elites are regarded as representatives of the interests of certain population segments, though they have some latitude in the definition of these interests and the pursuit of their own interests. The development and consolidation of democratic regimes therefore depends on the interests and power resources of specific elites and of the population segments they represent. In a study on Prussian deputies' voting behavior on the reform of the Prussian three-class franchise it can be shown that the theoretical framework improves the explanation of elite actions and of the development of an elite consensus on democratic norms.

Among the Eastern European democratization processes of the 1989 period, Hungary stands out as the least dramatic transition in the region. Whereas other countries experienced massive demonstrations in favor of democratic demands, or violent upheavals resulting in the execution of dictators, Hungary experienced neither and has been referred to as an 'uncomplicated' case. While some mobilization from below did occur, the Hungarian transition was characterized by elites - new and old – and the intentional exclusion of the population at large. Why did the democratization process unfold this way, and why did a seemingly stable regime give up without a fight? These are some of the questions this report seeks to answer. ; The research project 'Mobilizing for Democracy: Democratization Processes and the Mobilization of Civil Society' is funded by European Research Council (ERC) Advanced Grant. (Grant Agreeement no: 269136.)