Suchergebnisse

This article analyses the way that the notion of religion is understood and used in election manifestos of populist and nationalist right-wing political parties in Germany and the Netherlands between 2002 and 2021. In order to pursue such enquiry, a discourse on the nature of manifestos of political parties in general and election manifestos specifically is required. Election manifestos are important socio-scientific and historical sources. The central question that this article poses is how the notion of religion is included in the election manifestos of three Dutch (LPF, PVV, and FvD) and one German (AfD) populist and nationalist parties, and what this inclusion reveals about the connection between religion and populist parties. Religious keywords in the election manifestos of said political parties are researched and discussed. It leads to the conclusion that the notion of religion is not central to these political parties, unless it is framed as a stand against Islam. Therefore, these parties defend the Jewish-Christian-humanistic nature of the country encompassing the separation of 'church' or faith community and state, the care for the historical and cultural heritage of church buildings, and the subordination of the freedom of religion to the freedom of expression. The election manifestos also reveal that Buddhism and Hinduism are absent in the discourses of these political parties.

This article is about the way that the notion of religion is understood and used in election manifestos of populist and nationalist right-wing political parties in Germany and the Netherlands between 2002 and 2021. In order to pursue such enquiry, a discourse on the nature of manifestos of political parties in general and election manifestos specifically is required. Election manifestos are important socio-scientific and historical sources. The central question that this article poses is how the notion of religion is included in the election manifestos of three Dutch (LPF, PVV, and FvD) and one German (AfD) populist and nationalist parties, and what this inclusion reveals about the connection between religion and populist parties. Religious keywords in the election manifestos of said political parties are researched and discussed. It leads to the conclusion that the notion of religion is not central to these political parties, unless it is framed as a stand against Islam. Therefore, these parties defend the Jewish-Christian-humanistic nature of the country encompassing the separation of 'church' or faith community and state, the care for the historical and cultural heritage of church buildings, and the subordination of the freedom of religion to the freedom of expression. The election manifestos also reveal that Buddhism and Hinduism are absent in the discourses of these political parties. ; Peer reviewed

The description of the pandemic situation in the Netherlands and Poland was updated until 1st of June, 2022. ; This paper provides a comparison of the regulation of the pandemic in the Netherlands and Poland in order to determine whether a country with a high level of adherence to the rule of law in normal circumstances would also maintain this adherence in exceptional circumstances to a greater degree than a country with an initially lower level of adherence. The central questions posed in the paper are the following: what is the role of the rule of law in regulating the pandemic in the Netherlands and Poland? Is it true that the Dutch government was more successful in preserving legality than its Polish counterpart. By comparing the regulations in the two countries, the paper explores what role the rule of law – in particular, the principle of legality – may play in a crisis situation like this. According to Carl Schmitt, in a state of emergency, order has to be restored first before a return to the 'normal' legal order is possible. Does the regulation of the COVID-19 pandemic in the two countries confirm Schmitt's claim or not? ; The writing of this chapter was funded by the National Science Centre, Poland, according to Decision no. 2017/27/B/HS5/01053. ; Bart van Klink - b.van.klink@vu.nl ; Marta Soniewicka - marta.soniewicka@uj.edu.pl ; Leon van den Broeke - c.vanden.broeke@vu.nl ; Bart van Klink – Professor of Legal Methodology at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands. He is co-editor-in-chief of the international journal Law and Method and director of the research programme Boundaries of Law. His research interests include the fact-value distinction in multidisciplinary research, symbolic legislation and contemporary challenges to the rule of law, such as populism and the pandemic. Currently, he is working, as part of the research group Societas Im/perfecta, on the role of utopia in law and politics. ; Marta Soniewicka – University Professor at the Department of Philosophy of Law and Legal Ethics, ...