Advertisement

Populist Politicians: Populism, Democratic Dissatisfaction and the Perception of Representation. The Case of Greece

  • Marcel LewandowskyEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Politische Vierteljahresschrift Sonderhefte book series (PVS)

Abstract

This article investigates populism as an attitude of political elites. Based on an extensive discussion of research on populism, it develops a concept that harmonizes the role perceptions of political elites in representative democracies with dissatisfaction as an evaluative and populism as a specific normative orientation towards democracy. Based on candidate data of the 2015 Greek parliamentary election, this contribution offers an empirical analysis of the linkage between dissatisfaction with democracy, role perceptions and populism. Finally, implications for further research are discussed in detail.

References

  1. Akkerman, Agnes, Cas Mudde, and Andrej Zaslove. 2014. How Populist Are the People? Measuring Populist Attitudes in Voters. Comparative Political Studies 47: 1324–1353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akkerman, Agnes, Andrej Zaslove, and Bram Spruyt. 2017. ‘We the People’ or ‘We the Peoples’? A Comparison of Support for the Populist Radical Right and Populist Radical Left in the Netherlands. Swiss Political Science Review [online first].Google Scholar
  3. Albertazzi, Daniele, and Sean Mueller. 2013. Populism and Liberal Democracy. Populists in Government in Austria, Italy, Poland and Switzerland. Government and Opposition 48: 343–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Almond, Gabriel A., and Sidney Verba. 1965. The Civic Culture. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
  5. Andreadis, Ioannis. 2012. Measuring Satisfaction with Democracy among Candidates: What Is the Effect of the Electoral Outcome? Paper presented at the 2nd Plenary Conference of the CCS, January 27–29, Mannheim.Google Scholar
  6. Andreadis, Ioannis. 2016. The Greek candidate study 2015. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.Google Scholar
  7. Andreadis, Ioannis, and Saskia Ruth-Lovell. 2019. Using Surveys to Measure the Populist Attitudes of Political Elites. In The Ideational Approach to Populism: Concept, Theory, and Method, eds. Kirk Hawkins, Ryan Carlin, Levente Littvay and Cristobal Rovira Kaltwasser, London: Routledge, 112–127.Google Scholar
  8. Andreadis, Ioannis, and Yannis Stavrakakis. 2017. European Populist Parties in Government: How Well are Voters Represented? Evidence from Greece. Swiss Political Science Review 23: 485–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barr, Robert R. 2009. Populists, Outsiders and Anti-Establishment-Politics. Party Politics 15: 29–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Canovan, Margaret. 1999. Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy. Political Studies 67: 2–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Canovan, Margaret. 2001. Taking Politics to the People. Populism as the Ideology of Democracy. In Democracies and the Populist Challenge, ed. Yves Mény and Yves Surel, 25–44. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Caramani, Daniele. 2017. Will vs. Reason: The Populist and Technocratic Forms of Political Representation and Their Critique to Party Government. American Political Science Review 111: 54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coghill, Ken, Colleen Lewis and Katrin Steinack. 2012. How Should Elected Members Learn Parliamentary Skills: An Overview. Parliamentary Affairs 65: 505–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Blasio, Emiliana, and Sorice, Michele. 2018. Populism between direct democracy and the technological myth. Palgrave Communications 4.Google Scholar
  15. Decker, Frank. 2004. Der neue Rechtspopulismus. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dickinson, Nicholas. 2018. Advice Giving and Party Loyalty: an Informational Model for the Socialisation Process of New British MPs. Parliamentary Affairs 71: 343–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Easton, David. 1975. A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support. British Journal of Political Science 5: 435–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Esaiasson, Peter and Holmberg, Sören. 1996. Representation From Above: Members of Parliament and Representative Democracy in Sweden. Routledge: London/New York.Google Scholar
  19. Fishbein, Martin. 1963. An Investigation of the Relationships between Beliefs about an Object and the Attitude toward that Object. Human Relations 16: 233–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fuchs, Dieter. 1993. Trends of political support in the Federal Republic of Germany. In Political culture in Germany, eds. Dirk Berg-Schlosser and Ralf Rytlewski, 232–68. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hawkins, Kirk A., and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser. 2017. What the (Ideational) Study of Populism Can Teach Us, and What It Can’t. Swiss Political Science Review 23: 526–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ignazi, Piero. 1996. The Intellectual Basis of Right-Wing Anti-Partyism. European Journal of Political Research 29: 279–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jennings, M. Kent. 1992. Ideological Thinking among Mass Publics and Political Elites. Public Opinion Quarterly 56: 419–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Katz, Richard S. 2001. The Problem of Candidate Selection and Models of Intraparty Democracy. Party Politics 7: 277–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lewandowsky, Marcel. 2019. Policy congruence and strategic loyalty: which parties nominate candidates dissatisfied with democracy? Evidence from 11 European countries. Political Research Exchange 1: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lewandowsky, Marcel, Heiko Giebler, and Aiko Wagner. 2016. Rechtspopulismus in Deutschland. Eine empirische Einordnung der Parteien zur Bundestagswahl 2013 unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der AfD. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 57: 257–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Linde, Jonas, and Joakim Ekman. 2003. Satisfaction with democracy: A note on a frequently used indicator in comparative politics. European Journal of Political Research 42: 391–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. May, John D. 1973. Opinion Structure of Political Parties: The Special Law of Curvilinear Disparity. Political Studies 21: 135–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McAllister, Ian. 1991. Party Elites, Voters and Political Attitudes: Testing Three Explanations for Mass-Elite Differences. Canadian Journal of Political Science 24: 237–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mény, Yves, and Yves Surel. 2002. The Constitutive Ambiguity of Populism. In Democracies and the Populist Challenge, eds. Yves Mény and Yves Surel, 1–21. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moffitt, Benjamin. 2016. The Global Rise of Populism: Performance, Political Style, and Representation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mudde, Cas. 2004. The Populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition 39: 542–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mudde, Cas, and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser. 2012. Populism and (Liberal) Democracy. A Framework for Analysis. In Populism in Europe and the Americas. Threat or Corrective for Democracy?, eds. Cas Mudde and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser, 1–26. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Mudde, Cas, and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser. 2013. Exclusionary vs. Inclusionary Populism: Comparing Contemporary Europe and Latin America. Government and Opposition 48: 147–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Müller, Jan-Werner. 2016. Was ist Populismus? Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  36. Nørgaard, Asbjørn Sonne, and Robert Klemmensen. 2018. The personalities of Danish MPs: Trait and aspect level differences. Journal of Personality (online first).Google Scholar
  37. Pitkin, Hanna. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  38. Putnam, Robert D. 1971. Studying Elite Political Culture: The Case of “Ideology”. American Political Science Review 65: 651–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Putnam, Robert D. 1973. The Beliefs of Politicians. Ideology, Conflict, and Democracy in Britain and Italy. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Rooduijn, Matthijs. 2014. The Nucleus of Populism: In Search of the Lowest Common Denominator. Government and Opposition 49: 572–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schumann, Siegfried. 2014. Persönlichkeit und Wahlverhalten. In Handbuch Wahlforschung, eds. Jürgen W. Falter and Harald Schoen, 591–624. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
  42. Singh, Shane P. 2016. Compulsory Voting and Dissatisfaction with Democracy. British Journal of Political Science 48: 843–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Spruyt, Bram, Gil Keppens, and Filip van Droogenbroeck. 2016. Who Supports Populism and What Attracts People to It? Political Research Quarterly [online first].  https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912916639138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stavrakakis, Yannis, Ioannis Andreadis, and Giorgos Katsambekis. 2016. A new populism index at work: identifying populist candidates and parties in the contemporary Greek context. European Politics and Society [online first].  https://doi.org/10.1080/23745118.2016.1261434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Steiner, Nils D., and Claudia Landwehr. 2018. Populistische Demokratiekonzeptionen und die Wahl der AfD: Evidenz aus einer Panelstudie. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 59: 463–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Strøm, Kaare. 1990. A Behavioral Theory of Competitive Political Parties. American Journal of Political Science 34: 565–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Taggart, Paul 2004. Populism and representative politics in contemporary Europe. Journal of Political Ideologies 9: 269–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Van Hauwaert, Steven, and van Kessel, Stijn. 2017. Beyond protest and discontent: A cross-national analysis of the effect of populist attitudes and issue positions on populist party support. European Journal of Political Research [online first].Google Scholar
  49. Westle, Bettina. 2010. Politische Kultur. In Vergleichende Regierungslehre. Eine Einführung, ed, Hans-Joachim Lauth, 306–325. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations