scholarly journals When Does Income Inequality Cause Polarization?

Author(s):  
Jacob R. Gunderson

Scholars have long been concerned with the implications of income inequality for democracy. Conventional wisdom suggests that high income inequality is associated with political parties taking polarized positions as the left advocates for increased redistribution while the right aims to entrench the position of economic elites. This article argues that the connection between party positions and income inequality depends on how party bases are sorted by income and the issue content of national elections. It uses data from European national elections from 1996 to 2016 to show that income inequality has a positive relationship with party polarization on economic issues when partisans are sorted with respect to income and when economic issues are relatively salient in elections. When these factors are weak, however, the author finds no relationship between income inequality and polarization.

1995 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Pacek ◽  
Benjamin Radcliff

Political folk wisdom has long suggested that the electoral fortunes of left-of-centre political parties are affected by the rate of turnout. As is so often the case, the conventional wisdom has yet to be subjected to wide empirical scrutiny. In this Note, we attempt such an examination in the context of national elections in industrial democracies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
pp. 980-990
Author(s):  
Simone Dietrich ◽  
Helen V Milner ◽  
Jonathan B Slapin

Abstract Looking at texts of election manifestos, this paper examines systematic differences among political parties within and across countries in how they position themselves on foreign aid and in how these manifesto pledges translate into commitments to disburse aid. Conventional wisdom suggests that left-leaning parties may be more supportive of foreign aid than rightwing parties, but also that foreign aid may not be sufficiently electorally salient for parties to stake out positions in campaign materials, such as manifestos. We leverage a new data set that codes party positions on foreign aid in election manifestos for 13 donors from 1960 to 2015. We find that parties differ systematically in how they engage with foreign aid. Left-leaning governments are more likely to express positive sentiment vis-à-vis aid than right-leaning governments. We evaluate the effects of positions on aid outcomes and find that positive aid views expressed by the party in government translate into higher aid commitments, though only for left-leaning parties.


Author(s):  
Rafaela M. Dancygier

As Europe's Muslim communities continue to grow, so does their impact on electoral politics and the potential for inclusion dilemmas. In vote-rich enclaves, Muslim views on religion, tradition, and gender roles can deviate sharply from those of the majority electorate, generating severe trade-offs for parties seeking to broaden their coalitions. This book explains when and why European political parties include Muslim candidates and voters, revealing that the ways in which parties recruit this new electorate can have lasting consequences. The book sheds new light on when minority recruitment will match up with existing party positions and uphold electoral alignments and when it will undermine party brands and shake up party systems. It demonstrates that when parties are seduced by the quick delivery of ethno-religious bloc votes, they undercut their ideological coherence, fail to establish programmatic linkages with Muslim voters, and miss their opportunity to build cross-ethnic, class-based coalitions. The book highlights how the politics of minority inclusion can become a testing ground for parties, showing just how far their commitments to equality and diversity will take them when push comes to electoral shove. Providing a unified theoretical framework for understanding the causes and consequences of minority political incorporation, and especially as these pertain to European Muslim populations, the book advances our knowledge about how ethnic and religious diversity reshapes domestic politics in today's democracies.


Author(s):  
Dawn Langan Teele

In the 1880s, women were barred from voting in all national-level elections, but by 1920 they were going to the polls in nearly thirty countries. What caused this massive change? Contrary to conventional wisdom, it was not because of progressive ideas about women or suffragists' pluck. In most countries, elected politicians fiercely resisted enfranchising women, preferring to extend such rights only when it seemed electorally prudent and necessary to do so. This book demonstrates that the formation of a broad movement across social divides, and strategic alliances with political parties in competitive electoral conditions, provided the leverage that ultimately transformed women into voters. As the book shows, in competitive environments, politicians had incentives to seek out new sources of electoral influence. A broad-based suffrage movement could reinforce those incentives by providing information about women's preferences, and an infrastructure with which to mobilize future female voters. At the same time that politicians wanted to enfranchise women who were likely to support their party, suffragists also wanted to enfranchise women whose political preferences were similar to theirs. In contexts where political rifts were too deep, suffragists who were in favor of the vote in principle mobilized against their own political emancipation. Exploring tensions between elected leaders and suffragists and the uncertainty surrounding women as an electoral group, the book sheds new light on the strategic reasons behind women's enfranchisement.


Slavic Review ◽  
1965 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 653-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. J. Groth

Much valuable information on the dynamics of Poland's political life between the world wars is still to be uncovered in the records of national elections. Of particular interest are the contests of 1919, 1922, and 1928, since in all of these elections political parties were still allowed to participate directly (as they were not in 1935 and 1938), and governmental restraint and manipulation were not yet so massive as to cast doubt on the entire result (as in 1930).


Author(s):  
Paul A. Dawson ◽  
James E. Zinser

Citizens participate in the electoral process both to enjoy intrinsic benefits and in the hope of future bene fits. Factors affecting the strength of these consumption and investment motives therefore will affect registration and turnout rates, levels of campaign contributions, and electoral margins. To some extent, the strength of these motives is fixed by relatively static factors: levels of district per capita income, the degree of income inequality, the partisan division of registered voters. However, both motives also are affected by factors more apt to vary: for example, statutory arrangements, the activities of political parties, levels and types of campaign expenditures. In particular, statutory arrangements and the activities of parties which reduce costs can increase participation. Moreover, substan tial efforts to alter the partisan division of registered voters can increase campaign contributions. Also, campaign expenditures channel motivations in partisan directions, stim ulate partisan turnout, and affect electoral margins. Results reported here suggest the likelihood of bipartisan support for policies facilitating registration and voting, challenge assumptions about the effects of incumbency on campaign contributions, raise doubts about legislated ceilings on cam paign expenditures, and weaken the case for public financing of congressional elections.


Significance Research by Thomas Piketty shows that a form of free-market ideology has been a key driver of rising income inequality since the 1980s. The airing of alternative ideas, the challenge of decarbonising economies and the potential for the COVID-19 crisis to reset politics raise the prospect of a paradigm shift. Impacts In much of the global South, borrowing constraints and obstacles to taxing the wealthy will make redistribution harder. Strengthening democratic institutions may be as important as strengthening pro-equity political parties to advance redistributive agendas. Political parties in OECD nations have focused on ‘identity’ issues since the 1980s; COVID-19 is bringing redistribution back to the fore.


2012 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 464-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Keane ◽  
Richard Rogerson

The response of aggregate labor supply to various changes in the economic environment is central to many economic issues, especially the optimal design of tax policies. Conventional wisdom based on studies in the 1980s and 1990s has long held that the analysis of micro data leads one to conclude that aggregate labor supply elasticities are quite small. In this paper we argue that this conventional wisdom does not hold up to empirically reasonable and relevant extensions of simple life cycle models that served as the basis for these conclusions. In particular, we show that several pieces of conventional wisdom fail in the presence of human capital accumulation or labor supply decisions that allow for adjustment along both the extensive and intensive margin. We conclude that previous estimates of small labor supply elasticities based on micro data are fully consistent with large aggregate labor supply elasticities. (JEL D91, E24, J22)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document