The Populist Moment

2021 ◽  
pp. 149-178
Author(s):  
Julio F. Carrión
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Change ◽  
Political Power ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Level Playing Field ◽  
Close Attention ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Playing Field

This chapter unpacks the populist moment by paying close attention to two main mechanisms that explain the reproduction of populism in power: electoral validation and the aggrandizement of executive power by eliminating institutional checks and balances and reducing societal accountability. The chapter shows how populist presidents found electoral validation for their radical institutional change by winning key referendums and immediate reelection. All these legitimizing elections have one important commonality: despite valid complaints about the lack of a level playing field, contenders did not dispute their outcome. The chapter also examines the different mechanisms populist presidents use to transfer political power in their favor: the gaining of new presidential powers; the subordination of state institutions, in particular the judiciary and the legislature; and the reduction of societal accountability by curtailing freedom of expression and association. These processes are examined in four cases of unconstrained populism in power.

Populism and Science

2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 200-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry Collins ◽  
Robert Evans ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Group ◽  
Government Support ◽  
Moral Leadership ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Democratic Values ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Form Of Life ◽  
Independent Judiciary ◽  
Superior Knowledge

The risk of populism is ever-present in democratic societies. Here we argue that science provides one way in which this risk can be reduced. This is not because science provides a superior truth but because it (a) preserves and celebrates values that are essential for democracy and (b) contributes to the network of the checks and balances that constrain executive power. To make this argument, we draw on Wittgenstein’s idea of a form of life to characterize any social group as being composed of two opposing elements: an organic aspect that defines what the group has in common and an enumerative aspect that describes the differing ways in which the organic core can be displayed. Whilst the organic faces of science and democracy are clearly different there are significant overlaps that include values such as disinterestedness, universalism and honesty. This overlap in values is the first way in which science can prevent populism: by providing moral leadership. The second, its role in a network of checks and balances, also depends on these values. Science does not contribute to the checks and balances because it provides epistemically superior knowledge; it contributes because it provides morally superior knowledge that, alongside institutions such a free press, independent judiciary and additional tiers of government, support the democratic ecosystem. Failures of democracy occur when this ecosystem is damaged – too much science leads to technocracy, but too little creates the conditions for populism. To prevent this, we argue that citizens must (re)learn the value of democratic values. These include endorsing an independent judiciary and other state institutions, even when these hinder policies of which they might approve and, of particular concern in this context, recognizing that independent experts, of which scientists are the exemplar, are part of this network of checks and balances.

Institutional organisation of the European Union in the time of crisis – horizontal division of power and functions

2016 ◽  
pp. 54-66
Author(s):  
Monika Poboży
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
European Council ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Strong Position ◽  
Institutional System ◽  
The Eu

The article poses a question about the existence of the rule of separation of powers in the EU institutional system, as it is suggested by the wording of the treaties. The analysis led to the conclusion, that in the EU institutional system there are three separated functions (powers) assigned to different institutions. The Council and the European Parliament are legislative powers, the Commission and the European Council create a “divided executive”. The Court of Justice is a judicial power. The above mentioned institutions gained strong position within their main functions (legislative, executive, judicial), but the proper mechanisms of checks and balances have not been developed, especially in the relations between legislative and executive power. These powers do not limit one another in the EU system. In the EU there are therefore three separated but arbitrary powers – because they do not limit and balance one another, and are not fully controlled by the member states.

Humans as a Service

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremias Prassl
Keyword(s):  
Business Models ◽  
Disruptive Innovation ◽  
Level Playing Field ◽  
Employment Relationships ◽  
Playing Field ◽  
On Demand ◽  
Gig Economy ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Digital Work ◽  
Stable Employment

The rise of the gig economy is disrupting business models across the globe. Platforms’ digital work intermediation has had a profound impact on traditional conceptions of the employment relationship. The completion of ‘tasks’, ‘gigs’, or ‘rides’ in the (digital) crowd fundamentally challenges our understanding of work in modern labour markets: gone are the stable employment relationships between firms and workers, replaced by a world in which everybody can be ‘their own boss’ and enjoy the rewards—and face the risks—of independent businesses. Is this the future of work? What are the benefits and challenges of crowdsourced work? How can we protect consumers and workers without stifling innovation? Humans as a Service provides a detailed account of the growth and operation of gig-economy platforms, and develops a blueprint for solutions to the problems facing on-demand workers, platforms, and their customers. Following a brief introduction to the growth and operation of on-demand platforms across the world, the book scrutinizes competing narratives about ‘gig’ work. Drawing on a wide range of case studies, it explores how claims of ‘disruptive innovation’ and ‘micro-entrepreneurship’ often obscure the realities of precarious work under strict algorithmic surveillance, and the return to a business model that has existed for centuries. Humans as a Service shows how employment law can address many of these problems: gigs, tasks, and rides are work—and should be regulated as such. A concluding chapter demonstrates the broader benefits of a level playing field for consumers, taxpayers, and innovative entrepreneurs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document