Trust and authority in the age of mediatised politics

This article examines the role of trust in the age of mediatised politics. Authority, we suggest, can be successfully enacted despite the disrupted nature of the public sphere if both rational and moral trust are utilised to formulate validity claims. Drawing from Maarten A. Hajer's theorisation of authority in contemporary politics, we develop a model of how political actors and institutions as well as the media employ both rational and moral trust performances to generate authority. Analysing a Finnish case of controversial investigative journalism on defence intelligence, we show how the media in network governance need to critically evaluate the authority performances of political actors while at the same time enacting their own authority performances to retain their position within the governing network and to manufacture trust among networked publics. This volatile position can lead to situations where the media compete for authority with traditional political institutions.

Emotion and Politics: Noncognitive Psychological Biases in Public Opinion

Contemporary politics is noteworthy for its emotional character. Emotions shape and, in turn, are elicited by partisan polarization, public opinion, and political attitudes. In this article, we outline recent work in the field of emotion and politics with an emphasis on the relationship between emotion and polarization, issue attitudes, information processing, and views on democratic governance. We also highlight a growing body of scholarship that examines the racial and gender differences in emotion's ability to affect political behavior. We conclude with a discussion of unaddressed questions and suggestions for future directions for scholars working in this area of growing importance. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 25 is May 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

US South remains distinctive as divisions sharpen

Significance The US South, defined as the eleven states of the 19th-century Confederacy, was a Democratic stronghold for 100 years after the Civil War. Now, with some of the country’s heaviest concentrations of Black Democratic supporters and White evangelical Republican voters, it encompasses the intensified schisms in contemporary politics. Impacts There will be seven Senate races in the South in November, two of which will not have an incumbent. Nine Southern states will have Republican governors in 2022, with Republican-controlled legislatures in ten. Beto O’Rourke, the Democrat who gave Republican Ted Cruz a close Senate race in 2018, is running for governor of Texas.

Understandings of Democracy

While democracy is popular and still enjoys supremacy in contemporary political discourse with limited challenges from alternatives, it has also been acknowledged that democracy is in crisis. However, if most people love democracy and politicians have to live with democracy, how can democracy be in trouble? Understandings of Democracy examines this puzzling phenomenon, arguing that (1) people hold distinct understandings of democracy; (2) popular conceptions of democracy are significantly shaped by socioeconomic and political contexts; (3) such varying conceptions generate different baselines for people to assess democratic practices and to establish their views of democracy; and (4) such distinct conceptions also drive political participation in different ways. Overall, popular understandings of democracy have critically shaped how citizens respond to authoritarian or populist practices in contemporary politics. Using new survey instruments embedded in the Global Barometer Surveys (GBS), this book highlights the significance and essentialness of how people assess the tradeoffs between key democratic principles and instrumental gains when they conceptualize democracy for comparative research on popular understandings of democracy. Furthermore, weaving together GBS II survey data from seventy-two societies and survey experiments, this book scrutinizes some key micro-dynamics that drive people’s critical political attitudes and behaviors, which are centered on how people understand democracy in different ways. Overall, this book theorizes and demonstrates that, as a critical but underappreciated component of the demand-side dynamics, varying conceptions of democracy offer significant explanatory power for understanding why democracy is in trouble, even when most people profess to love democracy.

Unjust History and Its New Reproduction—A Reply to My Critics

Demands calling for reparations for historical injustices—injustices whose original victims and perpetrators are now dead—constitute an important component of contemporary struggles for social and transnational justice. Reparations are only one way in which the unjust past is salient in contemporary politics. In my book, Injustice and the Reproduction of History: Structural Inequalities, Gender and Redress, I put forward a framework to conceptualise the normative significance of the unjust past. In this article, I will engage with the insightful comments and try to address the concerns of the contributors to the symposium on my book. I will discuss (i) whether and in what sense my framework incorporates past-regarding duties, (ii) how it is different from causal interpretations of the relationship between past and present injustice, (iii) whether it can carve out a greater place for blame in our thinking about responsibility for (historical) structural injustice, (iv) whether such a responsibility needs to hinge upon an account of solidarity, and (v) how de-temporalising injustice can cast new light on immigration politics. In particular, I will stress and further clarify the importance that the notion of ‘structural debt’, which my book develops to reflect on historical responsibility, can play in thinking about what is owed to an unjust history.

Racism and Nationalism

This article reviews the current scholarship around racism and nationalism, two of the mostly hotly debated issues in contemporary politics. Both racism and nationalism involve dividing humanity into groups and setting up some groups as innately superior to others. Until recently, racism and nationalism were both widely seen as unpleasant relics of times past, destined to disappear as the principles of equality and human rights become universally embraced. But both concepts have proved their resilience in recent years. Scholars have been devoting new attention to the “racialization” of ethnic and national identities in the former Soviet Union and East Europe, the regions that are the main focus of this journal. The article examines the prevailing approaches to understanding the terms “racism” and “nationalism,” which are distinct but overlapping categories of analysis and vehicles of political mobilization. Developments in genomics have complicated the relationship between perceptions of race as a purely social phenomenon. The essay explores the way racism and nationalism play out in two self-proclaimed “exceptional” political systems – the Soviet Union and the United States – which have played a prominent role in global debates about race and nation. It briefly discusses developments in other regions, such as the debate over multiculturalism in Europe.

The Romance of Canada: Nationalism and Canadian Historiography

This is a short overview history of the relationship between Canadian historians and Canadian nationalism. It maps the historiography of Canadian nationalism against its significant manifestations in Canadian society and developments in nationalism scholarship internationally. Three conjunctures when the fate of the nation loomed large in Canadian historiography are featured. Evidence from the Canadian Historical Review (chr) is highlighted throughout, and, for each conjuncture, relevant articles from the chr are provided for further reading. In reflecting on this history, this article considers Canadian historians’ accomplishments and failures in understanding Canadian nationalism as well as the contemporary politics and praxis of their relationship with nation.

Cases and methods

This chapter presents the five cases. They are all wealthy Western European democracies. They feature quite a few similarities, concerning the evolution of turnout, electoral volatility, or the growing success of far-right parties. Yet, they also allow for some variation regarding their electoral systems, ranging from very majoritarian to very proportional and a resulting variety of party systems. Each country’s institutional setup and contemporary politics is briefly presented in turn. For each of the five countries, the chapter briefly discusses data availability and sources. For the five countries, we present the legislative agenda and the party agenda from the early 1980s to the late 2000s at least. Finally, we explain the choice of fixed-effects negative binomial regression, given the specific structure of the data and the goals of the study.