Suchergebnisse

In parliament, populist parties express their positions almost every day through voting. There is great diversity among them, for instance between left-wing and right-wing populist parties. This gives rise to the question: is the parliamentary behaviour of populists motivated by their populism or by their position on the left/right spectrum? This article compares the parliamentary voting behaviour of the Dutch SP and PVV, the only left-wing and right-wing populist parties that have been in a Western European parliament for more than four years. We find that for their voting behaviour the left/right position of these populist parties is more important than their shared populism. Only on one core populist issue (opposition to supranational institutions) do we find strong similarity in their voting behaviour.

POLITICAL OBSERVERS HAVE FOR YEARS ARGUED ABOUT THE PROPER LOCATION OF THE RADICAL LEFT AND THE RADICAL RIGHT ON THE FAMILIAR LEFT-RIGHT (OR LIBERALCONSERVATIVE) CONTINUUM. ALTHOUGH THE CONVENTIONAL VIEW HOLDS THAT THE TWO CAMPS DIVERGE SHARPLY AND BELONG AT OPPOSITE ENDS OF THE CONTINUUM, SOME OBSERVERS BELIEVE THAT THEY RESEMBLE EACH OTHER SO CLOSELY IN CERTAIN CRUCIAL POLITICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT TO CLASSIFY THEM AT OPPOSITE POLES IS GROSSLY MISLEADING. CONTROVERSY OVER THIS ISSUE WAS FUELLED BY THE PUBLICATION IN 1950 OF THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY. THE AUTHORS OF THE RESEARCH BELIEVED, IN EFFECT, THAT THOSE WHO EMBRACED THE DOCTRINES OF THE FAR RIGHT WERE LIKELY TO SCORE HIGH ON THE F SCALE (THEIR KEY MEASURE OF 'AUTHORITARIANISM'), WHILE THOSE WHO LEANED TO THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT WERE LIKELY TO SCORE LOW. CRITICS OF THIS CONCLUSION AND OF THE RESEARCH ON WHICH IT WAS BASED COMPLAINED THAT THE F SCALE WAS OBVIOUSLY BIASED IN IDENTIFYING AUTHORITARIANISM AS CHARACTERISTIC MAINLY OF THE RIGHT WHILE FAILING TO REGISTER THE AUTHORITARIANISM OF THE LEFT.

Excerpted from his work, "Terrorism in the United States and the potential threat to nuclear facilities." Particularly new groups in the Northeast. Revolutionary Armed Task Force, United Freedom Front, Armed Resistance Unit.

Nationalization of industry undertaken by the Mitterand regime has expanded the national sector of France's economy to 25% of total business activity; within this context, the lack of comprehensive, coherent economic policy constitutes the most serious problem of the new government. Beyond a need for planning, there is a corresponding need for reflection on the proper goals of a socialist-run economy. The nature of the firm in a nationalized economy is explored, & it is asked whether nationalizing monopolies & directly controlling key sectors of the economy are not obsolete concepts; nationalizing the "chiefs" is considered in this context. Traditional justifications for nationalization are found inadequate, & it is suggested that, rather than proceeding with nationalization & centralized planning based on a manager-specialist-directed model of economic life, the Socialist Party should reexamine the fundmental organization of work itself & take on the challenge of evaluating the possibility of autogestion -- a self-managed economy that would restructure power/property relations at the base. J. Weber.