A discussion of Paul M. Sniderman, Michael Bang Petersen, Rune Slothuus, and Rune Stubager's Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy: Islam, Western Europe, and the Danish Cartoon Crisis

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 466-467
Author(s):  
Rebekah Tromble

The 2005 Danish cartoon crisis has been the topic of much discussion among political science scholars. In September 2011 we ran a symposium on Jytte Klausen’s The Cartoons That Shook the World that centered on the tensions between multiculturalism, civility, and freedom of expression disclosed by the controversy. Paul M. Sniderman, Michael Bang Petersen, Rune Slothuus, and Rune Stubager’s Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy: Islam, Western Europe, and the Danish Cartoon Crisis (Princeton 2014) revisits the Danish crisis. Drawing on randomized experiments linked to broader survey research, the authors offer a nuanced account of Danish public opinion, and argue that the sensitivity of Danes to civil liberties concerns explains why the cartoon controversy did not result in an anti-Muslim backlash. The topic, the argument, and the methodology are important, and so we have invited a range of political science scholars to review the book. — Jeffrey C. Isaac

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-172
Author(s):  
Justyna Przedańska

The last decade has exposed the recession of freedom throughout the world. It arises from the latest Freedom in the World 2020 report that civil liberties and political rights have deteriorated in 64 countries, while only 37 have seen a slight improvement in these areas. The principles of liberal democracy (the rule of law, free elections, minority rights and freedom of expression) in Europe, historically the best-performing region in terms of freedom in the world, have come under serious pressure in recent years. In the article, starting from an analysis of the categories of freedom presented in many aspects, followed by a discussion of the assumptions and concepts of liberalism, as well as the political project referred to as non-liberal democracy, which has grown out of their criticism, the author identifies the problem of instrumentalization and relativization of freedom, which leads to the restriction of freedom of speech, freedom of minorities, religious freedom and sexual freedom, replacing the individual freedoms of the citizens with the so-called collective freedom.


2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 612-615
Author(s):  
Abdulkader Sinno

Jytte Klausen's The Cartoons That Shook the World offers an interesting political science account of the Danish cartoon controversy and of a broader set of tensions between multiculturalism, civility, and freedom of expression. The book is also a fascinating case study of how political science can itself become the object of dispute, due to Yale University Press' decision to publish the book without any reproductions of the controversial cartoons.We have thus asked a range of political scientists to comment on the Danish cartoon imbroglio, the book's analysis of it, and the controversy over the book itself.—Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor


2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 622-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura M. Weinrib

In the formative years of the modern First Amendment, civil liberties lawyers struggled to justify their participation in a legal system they perceived as biased and broken. For decades, they charged, the courts had fiercely protected property rights even while they tolerated broad-based suppression of the “personal rights,” such as expressive freedom, through which peaceful challenges to industrial interests might have proceeded. This article focuses on three phases in the relationship between the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the courts in the period between the world wars: first, the ACLU’s attempt to promote worker mobilization by highlighting judicial hypocrisy; second, its effort to induce incremental legal reform by mobilizing public opinion; and third, its now-familiar reliance on the judiciary to insulate minority views against state intrusion and majoritarian abuses. By reconstructing these competing approaches, the article explores the trade-offs – some anticipated and some unintended – entailed by the ACLU’s mature approach.


2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-50
Author(s):  
Carolyn Logan ◽  
Pablo Parás ◽  
Michael Robbins ◽  
Elizabeth J. Zechmeister

ABSTRACTData quality in survey research remains a paramount concern for those studying mass political behavior. Because surveys are conducted in increasingly diverse contexts around the world, ensuring that best practices are followed becomes ever more important to the field of political science. Bringing together insights from surveys conducted in more than 80 countries worldwide, this article highlights common challenges faced in survey research and outlines steps that researchers can take to improve the quality of survey data. Importantly, the article demonstrates that with the investment of the necessary time and resources, it is possible to carry out high-quality survey research even in challenging environments in which survey research is not well established.


1996 ◽  
Vol 26 (105) ◽  
pp. 595-609
Author(s):  
Eric Hershberg

The author argues that the Spanish transition from authoritarianism to liberal democracy as well as the so called social democratic approach to modemization have been stylized into ideal types in the Weberian sense of the term. The Spanish model has gamered widespread attention. lts influence transcends the academic sphere, as Spain has provided political elites across the world with a model of regime change, especially in Latin America and Eastem Europe, where observers are intrigued both by the facility with which transition took place and by Spain's reencounter with the prosperous zones of Western Europe. These idealizations are confronted with the real costs of Spains transition and the democratic deficits of the Spanish Socialists management of crisis.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  

This GSoD In Focus provides a brief overview of the global state of democracy at the end of 2019, prior to the outbreak of the pandemic, and assesses some of the preliminary impacts that the pandemic has had on democracy globally in 2020. Key findings include: • To address the COVID-19 pandemic, starting in March 2020, more than half the countries in the world (59 per cent) had declared a national state of emergency (SoE), enabling them to take drastic temporary (and in most cases necessary) measures to fight the pandemic. These measures have included in most cases temporarily curbing basic civil liberties, such as freedom of assembly and movement, and in some cases postponing elections. • International IDEA’s Global Monitor of COVID-19’s Impact on Democracy and Human Rights finds that more than half the countries in the world (61 per cent) had, by the end of November 2020, implemented measures to curb COVID-19 that were concerning from a democracy and human rights perspective. These violated democratic standards because they were either disproportionate, illegal, indefinite or unnecessary in relation to the health threat. • Concerning developments have been more common in countries that were already non-democratic prior to the pandemic (90 per cent) and less common, although still quite widespread, in democracies (43 per cent). • The democracies that have implemented democratically concerning measures are those that were already ailing before the pandemic. More than two-thirds were democracies that were either backsliding, eroding or weak prior to the pandemic. • Almost a year since the first outbreak of COVID-19, the pandemic seems to have deepened autocratization in most of the countries that were already non-democratic. However, in at least 3 of those countries (Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Thailand), the pandemic has also tapped into existing simmering citizen discontent and may have been the tipping point in unleashing massive protest waves demanding democratic reform. The pandemic has also seemingly deepened democratic backsliding processes and exposed the democratic weakness and fragility of new or re-transitioned democracies (Malaysia, Mali, Myanmar, Sri Lanka). In a few cases, the pandemic has also exposed countries that showed no apparent sign of democratically ailing prior to the pandemic, but where concerning democratic developments have occurred during the pandemic and which risk seeing a significant deterioration in their democratic quality as a result (i.e. Argentina, El Salvador). • The aspects of democracy that have seen the most concerning developments during the pandemic are freedom of expression, media integrity, and personal integrity and security. However, the freedoms that have been restricted across most countries are freedom of movement and assembly. Another core democratic process that has been heavily affected by the pandemic is the electoral, with half the elections scheduled between February and December 2020 postponed due to the pandemic. • The pandemic has also shown democracy’s resilience and capacity for renovation. Innovation through accelerated digitalization has occurred across most regions of the world. And democratic institutions, such as parliaments, courts, electoral commissions, political parties, media and civil society actors, have fought back against attempts at executive overreach and democratic trampling or collaborated to ensure effective responses to the pandemic. The review of the state of democracy during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 uses qualitative analysis and data of events and trends in the region collected through International IDEA’s Global Monitor of COVID-19’s Impact on Democracy and Human Rights, an initiative co-funded by the European Union.


Author(s):  
Richard Johnston

Survey research and empirical political science grew up together. Although the bills for commercial survey fieldwork are mainly paid for nonpolitical purposes, early surveys were justified publicly for their contribution to a deepened understanding of the electorate. Even today, polls on political questions are the loss leader for many high-profile firms. On the academic side, systematic quantitative investigation of political phenomena began with the Erie County Study (Lazarsfeld, et al. 1968, cited under Based on Purpose-Built Academic Data Sets), and academic and commercial practices intersected with controversies over quota versus probability sampling in the 1940s (Converse 1987). Survey research on public opinion and elections was the central force in shaping empirical methods for the discipline as a whole. Whereas survey research was initially a path along which insights from sociology and psychology were imported into political science, in time political scientists came to dominate the trade. Also with time, survey analysts were forced to acknowledge the limitations of their own method, for causal inference in general but also for historical and institutional nuance. As an expression of a scientific temperament, survey research thus yielded ground to other techniques, most notably statistical analysis of archival data on one hand and experimentation on the other. But these challenges arguably have forced the sample survey to reveal its versatility. Cross-level analyses are increasingly common—all the more so as our understanding of the statistical foundations of multilevel modeling has grown. In addition, surveys are serving increasingly as vehicles for experimentation, a way of recruiting subjects outside the laboratory and off-campus and of linking random selection of subjects to random assignment to experimental treatment or control. The current period is one of massive flux and, possibly, rapid obsolescence. On the one hand, target populations are growing less compliant with surveys, even as the bases for survey coverage become more uncertain. On the other hand, new techniques have emerged, often linked to new funding models. Most critical is the World Wide Web. Ironically, the emergence of the web as a survey platform has revived controversies, seemingly settled in the 1940s, over the requirement for probability samples. Through all of this, concern has grown about the very meaning of survey response and its relation to public opinion—indeed, if such a thing as public opinion exists.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document