Democratic Backsliding, Subsidized Speech, and the New Majoritarian Entrenchment

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Shinar
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Government Funding ◽  
Private Speech ◽  
The Political ◽  
Structural Problem ◽  
Democratic Change ◽  
The Government

Abstract This Article argues that democratic backsliding is operationalized through selective government funding of private speech. Subsidized speech can leverage the government’s voice while silencing or diminishing voices that seek to challenge the government’s message or create the background conditions for critical faculties. This leveraging, in turn, serves to entrench the power of the political majority, further insulating it from the processes of democratic change. Despite the voluminous literature on free speech, few discuss the problem of subsidized speech, even though it plays an ever-growing role in the formation of public discourse and public opinion. Accordingly, the Article makes three contributions. First, the Article examines three jurisdictions (Israel, Hungary, and Poland), arguing that the strategic use of subsidized speech is particularly prevalent in countries that are experiencing some version of “democratic backsliding.” The commonalities between these countries are no accident, for the motivation is the same: increasing governmental domination of civil society. Second, the Article departs from the extant approaches that identify subsidized speech as a problem for free speech or equality, by situating subsidized speech as a structural problem for democracy: majoritarian entrenchment. Although democracies have mechanisms to prevent entrenchment of the current political majority, those focus on elections and related aspects. Entrenchment, however, is not confined to these contexts. The Article thus extends the problem of entrenchment to the speech context. Third, the Article introduces and develops the “anti-entrenchment” principle. When the government seeks to entrench its power through funding decisions, the anti-entrenchment principle is triggered. Applying the anti-entrenchment principle can have far-reaching consequences, for it may require the government to subsidize precisely the speech it rejects.

scholarly journals TOWARDS RENOVATION OF RUSSIAN CITIES

2019 ◽  
pp. 158-164
Author(s):  
I. A. Sviridov ◽  
S. B. Sborshikov
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Private Sector ◽  
Urban Development ◽  
Program Implementation ◽  
Living Conditions ◽  
The Political ◽  
Environmental Aspects ◽  
Organizational Model ◽  
First Results ◽  
The Government

At present, the reconstruction and modernization of urban development is provided in many cities of Russia. This is due to the fact that living conditions of the population do not meet the modern requirements. The government cannot solve this problem without the involvement of the private sector and population, for which it is necessary to develop an organizational model for the program implementation which identifies the participants, forms mechanisms for their interaction, coordinates the program with public opinion, adjusts the legislative and regulatory framework, conducts research into technical, engineering, social historical, demographic, historical, architectural, transport and environmental aspects of the renovation program. To identify the first results of this program, it is necessary to analyze them. The article shows what happens during the implementation of the renovation program which affects the interests of the population of our country and the political and macroeconomic stability of the country. In order to increase the effectiveness of renovation program, all the participants should take permanent measures, because it is the most important factor affecting the economy development of the whole country.

scholarly journals Come Fly With Me: Analyzing The F-35 Aircraft Acquisition Discourse to Study Incivility in Question Period

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arun Jacob
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Political Discourse ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Political Rhetoric ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Accountability ◽  
The People ◽  
Canadian Politics ◽  
The Government

The main objective behind the parliamentary practice of Question Period is to ensure that the government is held accountable to the people. Rather than being a political accountability tool and a showcase of public discourse, these deliberations are most often displays of vitriolic political rhetoric. I will be focusing my research on the ways in which incivil political discourse permeates the political mediascape with respect to one instance in Canadian politics - the acquisition of the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter. I believe that incivility in the political discourse of Question Period must be understood within the mechanics of the contemporary public sphere. By interrogating the complexities of how political discourse is being mediatized, produced and consumed within the prevailing ideological paradigms, I identify some of the contemporary social, cultural and political practices that produce incivility in parliamentary discourse.

Political Attitudes of China’s Post-1980s Generation

2017 ◽  
Vol 09 (04) ◽  
pp. 112-124
Author(s):  
Wei SHAN
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Political Attitudes ◽  
The Political ◽  
Public Issues ◽  
Public Opinion Surveys ◽  
The Government

The political attitudes of the post-1980s generation in China are important for understanding the country’s political future. Public opinion surveys reveal the post-1980s group as the least nationalistic and more sceptical of the government than the older generations. They show little interest in politics despite their confidence of participating in public issues. In the long term, Beijing will have to face a society led by the more critical and less obedient post-1980s.

Organization of American States

1960 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 484-485 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Dominican Republic ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Political Prisoners ◽  
The Political ◽  
Special Report ◽  
American States ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Relationship

Following an investigation resulting from the request by the government of Venezuela that the Council of the Organizationof American States (OAS) ask the Inter-American Peace Committee to look into the flagrant and widespread violations of human rights by the government of the Dominican Republic, the Committee, in a special report, allegedly concurred with the charges, stressing its opinion that international tensions in the Caribbean had increased and would continue to increase, so long as the Dominican Republic persisted in its repressive policies. On the basis of evidence collected during its four-month investigation, the Committee condemned such practices as the denial of free assembly and free speech, arbitrary arrest, cruel and inhuman treatment of political prisoners, and the use of intimidation and terror as political weapons. Despite reports of 1,000 arrests for subversive activities, the Dominican Republic had accounted for only 222 such arrests and had pointed to acts of elemency granted to many of these people; the Committee had, however, been barred from visiting the country. Desirous nevertheless of avoiding any step which might adversely affect the fate of the political prisoners, and in the hope that the Dominican Republic would decree an amnesty on Easter, April 17, the Committee postponed making a pronouncement on the case; instead, it merely issued a general report on April 14 on the relationship between violations of human rights and the political tensions affecting the peace of the Hemisphere. In the later special report the Committee noted that the hope of an amnesty had turned out to be unfounded, and that it had therefore decided to examine all the information available to it, mosdy in the form either of testimony from exiles and other nationals who had recently been in the Dominican Republic or of extensive and reliable press material.

Malaysia's Najib faces continuing challenge from 1MDB

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
The Political ◽  
Investment Fund ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Government ◽  
National Investment ◽  
National Organisation

Subject Malaysia's political outlook following the Bersih 4 protests. Significance Former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad is to be officially questioned about his presence at the 'Bersih 4' mass protests organised by the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih) on August 29 and 30, local press reports said today. By allowing the rallies to proceed peacefully, Prime Minister Najib Razak had sought to extend the political respite brought by his July 28 cabinet reshuffle. His position nationally and within the governing United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) is under threat amid political difficulties relating to the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) national investment fund. Impacts The Malaysian parliamentary opposition's weakness means civil society will provide most opposition to the government for now. The Bersih movement's mostly urban support limits its challenge to the government, which enjoys strong rural support. Public doubts about the effectiveness of Malaysian anti-corruption frameworks will stunt their development.

III. The Loyalist Association Movement of 1792–93 and British Public Opinion

1966 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald E. Ginter
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Late Spring ◽  
Careful Examination ◽  
The Political ◽  
Public Prosecution ◽  
Political Left ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Political Scene

In November 1792 John Reeves, with the explicit approval and active sup-port of both the government and the Windhamite Whigs, and with the countenance of the duke of Portland and his friends, instituted a movement of loyalist associations which quickly spread throughout the country. The movement was founded in reaction to an enthusiastic resurgence of British radical activity which followed the defeat of the combined armies under the duke of Brunswick, and it rallied a now militant conservative sentiment in favour of detecting and suppressing by intimidation and public prosecution all allegedly seditious activities. This crisis in public opinion, which was at once the parent and the offspring of the loyalist association movement, was not the first to have occurred in 1792. An earlier crisis occurred in favour of the political left during the late spring of 1792 and was followed by a relatively mild reaction to the right. It seems clear that, during the earlier months of 1792 at least, there were considerable bodies of both conservative and liberal opinion of various shades in the country. But by the beginning of the following year the complexity and ferment of the political scene had become so great that it is not at all clear to what extent or how rapidly liberal opinion had been supplanted in the country by conservative sentiment. The purpose of this paper is to reassess the nature, effect and significance of the loyalist association movement by undertaking a more careful examination of the phraseology of many of its addresses and declarations as well as of the proceedings and circumstances peculiar to the meetings in which they were approved.

scholarly journals ALWAYS AT WAR: AN ANALYSIS OF FEAR IN CONTEMPORARY POLITICS

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr. Lubna Ahsan
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
Political Discourse ◽  
International Security ◽  
People Of Color ◽  
The Political ◽  
Nuclear Arsenal ◽  
Rational Actor ◽  
Contemporary Politics ◽  
Economic Collapse ◽  
The Government

A culture always at war, America’s political discourse has become saturated with hatred and fear. The establishment media, which once thrived on gathering information, exists solely for anxiety promotion. Confirmation of our greatest fears, from economic collapse to nuclear annihilation, is projected unfiltered on every platform, tailored to match what scares us most. As we like and we share, our fears grow exponentially, leaving us stuck in a frozen state of paranoia. Fear is everywhere. We are afraid Trump will start a war with North Korea, relying on Kim Jong-Un to be a rational actor. We’re also afraid Kim will unleash his nuclear arsenal on America and rely on Trump’s rational diplomacy to keep international security in check. We’re afraid Trump is a Russian puppet and hope the Mueller probe will save us from the death of our democracy. We fear the political goals of Democrats, who hope to overturn a legitimate election using a fake Russia investigation. We’re worried the fascist government will suppress free speech and we’re worried the government isn’t doing enough to suppress free speech to stop hate. There are too many guns for children to be safe, and not enough guns for teachers to protect us. We want to elect more women, people of color, LGBTQ individuals, and Muslims to preserve their rights. We fear women, people of color, LGBTQ individuals, and Muslims as we want to preserve our rights. We are afraid of migrants leaping into our borders and we are terrified of the government cracking down on innocent refugees on the border. As we hyperventilate over an infinite amount of threats, we lash out and grasp whatever form of defense lies closest.

scholarly journals POLITICAL SYSTEM AS A CONDITION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF STATE AND LAW

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 1803-1805
Author(s):  
Dimitar Spaseski
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Political Culture ◽  
Political System ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
The State ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
The People ◽  
Democratic Societies ◽  
The Government

The state has a central place in the political system. Through its structure and positioning the country has the strength to be a unifier of society against its overall division of the various classes and layers, ethnic, cultural and other groups. The legitimacy of all these processes is given by laws that determine the trajectory of all processes and the conditions under which the processes take place. The state, by adopting the highest legal acts such as: the constitution and the laws, achieves one of its most important functions, which is the management of society. The state directs society to promote development, but also punishes and sanction infringements and mistakes. Depending on who exercises power in the state, i.e. whether it belongs to the people, to an individual or to a powerful group, the political system can be determined. The political system in itself includes the overall state relations, the relations in society and the guidelines for the conduct of the policy of the state. A state in which the government is elected by the people through direct elections certainly fulfills the basic requirement for the development of a stable civil society. The political system is one of the sub-systems of the entire civil society. The political system is specific in that all the activities and relations of which it is composed are directed to the state and its functions. The structure of the political system is composed of political and legal norms, political knowledge, political culture and political structure. These elements confirm the strong relationship between the state, the law and the political system. Developed democratic societies can talk about a developed political system that abounds with political culture and democracy. It is the aspiration of our life. Investing in democratic societies we invest in the future of our children. If we separate the subjects of the political system, we will determine that the people are the basis of the political system. All competencies intertwine around people. Political systems are largely dependent not only on the political processes that take place in them every day, but also on the economic performance and the economic power of the states. Economic stagnation or regression in some countries often threatens democracy and its values. We often forget that we cannot speak of the existence of a functioning and well-organized democratic political system without its strong economic support. In conditions of globalization, it is necessary to pay special attention to international positions as the main factor of the political system, for the simple reason that the functions of the state in this process are increasingly narrowing.

De politicus, de diplomaat en de deskundige in het veiligheidsbeleid

Res Publica ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-58
Author(s):  
Louis Tobback
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
The Political ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
European Continent ◽  
The Public ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
The Government

Who makes decisions concerning defence policy in Belgium? Not the public opinion, because otherwise there would be no Cruise missiles.Not the Parliament, because the parliamentarians only ratify international treaties. Not the Minister of Foreign Affairs, because the Minister of Defence makes decisions without contacting Foreign Affairs. Even the Government as a whole and the Prime Minister do not much take care about the defence policy. The so-called experts concerning defence policy are the militaries, the diplomats and the NATO-bureaucrats.Yet, the political problems with respect to the Atlantic Alliance and the division of the European continent, wilt constrain the politicians to reconsider the basic options of the policy.

Religious Speech in Public Discourse

2021 ◽  
pp. 79-113
Author(s):  
Nicholas Hatzis
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Safe Space ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Deliberative Process ◽  
Religious Speech ◽  
Governmental Power ◽  
The Government

The thesis that the government is justified in restricting insults to religious feelings implies a broader view about the place of religious speech in public discourse, and about the nature of public discourse itself. The implication is that it should be possible to be critical or negative about religion provided that this is expressed in a moderate and respectful manner, but the speaker who disregards norms of civility can be legitimately silenced by the state. This means that public discourse is seen as a highly regulated space for orderly discussion, with the role of the regulator played by the government. The chapter argues that there are good reasons to adopt a different view of public discourse and think of it as the safe space for an open deliberative process where all citizens have an equal claim to speak even if what they say is abusive or offensive if judged by the prevailing civility standards. This is a necessary condition for allowing a society to reflect upon its values, and change. Further, this understanding of public discourse grounds two important limitations on governmental power to regulate speech. First, the procedure and agenda of public debate are not neutral, value-free issues situated outside public discourse and reserved for the government. Rather, they are substantive questions, part of the debate itself, and subject to constant reinterpretation. Secondly, free speech includes, and the legal right to freedom of expression ought to protect, both the substance and the manner in which an opinion is expressed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document