Suchergebnisse

Frontmatter -- Contents -- List of Tables -- List of Figures -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction Beyond Sacred and Secular: A Comparative Analysis of Religious Politics in Israel and Turkey -- Part One. Paradox of Modernity? The Conundrum of Religion in Politics -- 1. Politics of Religion: Competing and Coalescing Conceptualizations -- 2. Religion in the Making of the Israeli and Turkish Nation-States: Incomplete Debates and Continuing Institutional Reformations -- Part Two. Ideologues or Pragmatists? The Ideas and Ideologies of Religious Politics -- 3. Representing the Sacred in Mundane Politics: The Ideologies and Leaders of Mafdal and Shas -- 4. Representing Islam in Secular Politics: The Ideologies and Leaders of the Nationalist Action, the National View, and the Justice and Development Parties -- Part Three. The Popular Roots of Religious Parties -- 5. Between Zionism and Judaism? Religious Party Supporters in Israel -- 6. Between Laicism and Islam? Religious Party Supporters in Turkey -- Conclusion. Sacro-Secular Encounters: A Comparative Model of Religious Parties -- Notes -- Index

Studies of populist parties typically focus either on discourse, policies, or institutional captures (e.g., constitutional reforms). Yet the analysis of each in isolation risks thwarting our understanding of populists' electoral success. Discursive practices and institutional captures of populist parties are not separate processes but their successes depend on each other. The resiliency of populist parties relies not only on overt but also insidious captures. Silent, gradual captures become effective through populist performances, deployment of excluded discourses and the extension of benefits to marginalized groups. Analysis of the recent transformation of Turkey's oldest locally elected representative institution, mukhtars, illustrates how populist policies turn nonpartisan institutions into partisan ones through insidious captures and deployment of religious discourse. While empowering some groups, expanding political discourse and access to the state, such practices also limit nonpartisan representation, and turn political questions into normative issues, exacerbating the ongoing polarization and authoritarian control of ruling parties.

Please see the attached review.

"The Inclusion-Moderation Thesis: An Overview" published on by Oxford University Press.

Whether religious parties' inclusion in electoral competition moderates or polarizes their positions remains an enigma as deductive accounts yield contradictory results. This analysis questions the institution- and ideology-centered approaches to party change and shows that dichotomizing religious parties as moderate or extreme and moderation as a monolithic process obscures religious parties' role in democracy. When scholars view moderation as consisting of behavioral and ideological dimensions and examine it through an inductive analysis of Israel and Turkey's religious parties, several modes of moderation emerge with different democratic outcomes. While some bolster procedural democracy, others thwart the expansion of liberal democracy.

Sultan Tepe is assistant professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Chicago.