IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v8y2020i3p32-44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disentangling How Populism and Radical Host Ideologies Shape Citizens’ Conceptions of Democratic Decision-Making

Author

Listed:
  • Reinhard Heinisch

    (Department of Political Science, University of Salzburg, Austria)

  • Carsten Wegscheider

    (Department of Political Science, University of Salzburg, Austria)

Abstract

In this article, we aim to disentangle the extent to which citizens’ conceptions of democratic decision-making are shaped by populist attitudes or rather by radical left and right host ideologies. Following recent work by Landwehr and Steiner (2017), we distinguish four modes of decision-making embedded in different conceptions of democracy: trusteeship democracy, anti-pluralism, deliberative proceduralism, and majoritarianism. Drawing on data from Austria and Germany, we show that populism and radical host ideologies tap into different dimensions of democracy. While populism is primarily directed against representative forms of democratic decision-making, preferences for deliberative procedures and majority decisions appear entirely shaped by radical left and right host ideologies. Populism thus views decision-making based on the general will of the people as the only legitimate democratic procedure, whereas radical left and right host ideologies aim at involving the relevant group(s) of citizens. Further analyses of the interactions between populist attitudes and radical host ideologies confirm that the effects of populism remain robust and thus independent of the specific manifestations of radical host ideologies. These findings help to disentangle the causes of democratic discontent and to develop possible responses through democratic reforms that specifically and separately aim to mitigate populism and radical host ideologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Reinhard Heinisch & Carsten Wegscheider, 2020. "Disentangling How Populism and Radical Host Ideologies Shape Citizens’ Conceptions of Democratic Decision-Making," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 32-44.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:8:y:2020:i:3:p:32-44
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/2915
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser, 2014. "The Responses of Populism to Dahl's Democratic Dilemmas," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 62(3), pages 469-469, October.
    2. Hibbing, John R., 2001. "Process Preferences and American Politics: What the People Want Government to Be," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(1), pages 145-153, March.
    3. Robert A. Huber & Christian H. Schimpf, 2017. "On the Distinct Effects of Left-Wing and Right-Wing Populism on Democratic Quality," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(4), pages 146-165.
    4. Joan Font & Magdalena Wojcieszak & Clemente J. Navarro, 2015. "Participation, Representation and Expertise: Citizen Preferences for Political Decision-Making Processes," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 63, pages 153-172, April.
    5. Margaret Canovan, 1999. "Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 47(1), pages 2-16, March.
    6. Wuttke, Alexander & Schimpf, Christian & Schoen, Harald, 2020. "When the Whole Is Greater than the Sum of Its Parts: On the Conceptualization and Measurement of Populist Attitudes and Other Multidimensional Constructs," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(2), pages 356-374, May.
    7. Koen Abts & Stefan Rummens, 2007. "Populism versus Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55, pages 405-424, June.
    8. Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser, 2014. "The Responses of Populism to Dahl's Democratic Dilemmas," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 62(3), pages 470-487, October.
    9. Koen Abts & Stefan Rummens, 2007. "Populism versus Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55(2), pages 405-424, June.
    10. Neblo, Michael A. & Esterling, Kevin M. & Kennedy, Ryan P. & Lazer, David M.J. & Sokhey, Anand E., 2010. "Who Wants To Deliberate—And Why?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(3), pages 566-583, August.
    11. Nils Steiner & Claudia Landwehr, 2018. "Populistische Demokratiekonzeptionen und die Wahl der AfD: Evidenz aus einer Panelstudie," Working Papers 1812, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Heidi Schulze & Marlene Mauk & Jonas Linde, 2020. "How Populism and Polarization Affect Europe’s Liberal Democracies," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 1-5.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kim, Seongcheol, 2022. "Von Lefort zu Mouffe. Populismus als Moment und Grenze radikaler Demokratie [From Lefort to Mouffe: Populism as moment and limit of radical democracy]," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 32(4), pages 767-786.
    2. Krause, Werner & Wagner, Aiko, 2021. "Becoming part of the gang? Established and nonestablished populist parties and the role of external efficacy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27(1), pages 161-173.
    3. Krause, Werner & Spittler, Marcus & Wagner, Aiko, 2017. "Attraktion und Repulsion. AnhängerInnen rechts- und linkspopulistischer Parteien im europäischen Vergleich," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 45(Sonderban), pages 106-137.
    4. Carlos de las Heras-Pedrosa & Carmen Jambrino-Maldonado & Patricia P. Iglesias-Sánchez & Elena Millán-Celis, 2020. "Populism and Independence Movements in Europe: The Catalan-Spanish Case," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Yunyi Qin, 2023. "Grassroots governance and social development: theoretical and comparative legal aspects," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.
    6. Emiliana De Blasio & Michele Sorice, 2018. "Populism between direct democracy and the technological myth," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-11, December.
    7. Krause, Werner & Giebler, Heiko, 2020. "Shifting Welfare Policy Positions: The Impact of Radical Right Populist Party Success Beyond Migration Politics," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 56(3), pages 331-348.
    8. Antonino Castaldo & Luca Verzichelli, 2020. "Technocratic Populism in Italy after Berlusconi: The Trendsetter and his Disciples," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 485-495.
    9. Nicolás Cachanosky & Alexandre Padilla, 2020. "A panel data analysis of Latin American populism," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 329-343, September.
    10. Koch, Cédric M., 2021. "Varieties of populism and the challenges to Global Constitutionalism: Dangers promises and implications," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 10(3), pages 400-438.
    11. Philipp Harms & Claudia Landwehr & Maximilian Lutz & Markus Tepe, 2020. "Deciding how to decide on public goods provision: The role of instrumental vs. intrinsic motives," Working Papers 2018, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    12. Laura Cervi & Santiago Tejedor, 2020. "Framing “The Gypsy Problem”: Populist Electoral Use of Romaphobia in Italy (2014–2019)," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    13. Merve Genç, 2023. "#NotDying4Wallstreet: A Discourse Analysis on Health vs. Economy during COVID-19," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    14. Giebler, Heiko & Werner, Annika, 2020. "Cure, Poison or Placebo? The Consequences of Populist and Radical Party Success for Representative Democracy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 56(3), pages 293-306.
    15. Robert Weymouth & Janette Hartz-Karp & Dora Marinova, 2020. "Repairing Political Trust for Practical Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-25, August.
    16. Zürn, Michael, 2022. "How Non-Majoritarian Institutions Make Silent Majorities Vocal: A Political Explanation of Authoritarian Populism," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 20(3), pages 788-807.
    17. Nils D. Steiner, 2022. "Economic inequality, unfairness perceptions, and populist attitudes," Working Papers 2203, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    18. Manuel Hensmans, 2021. "Exploring the dark and bright sides of Internet democracy: Ethos-reversing and ethos-renewing digital transformation," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/321232, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    19. Stefan Rummens & Koen Abts, 2010. "Defending Democracy: The Concentric Containment of Political Extremism," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(4), pages 649-665, October.
    20. Petra Guasti & Debora Rezende de Almeida, 2019. "Claims of Misrepresentation: A Comparison of Germany and Brazil," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 152-164.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:8:y:2020:i:3:p:32-44. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.