Business power, right-wing populism, and noisy politics: lessons from Brexit and Swiss referendums

IF 3.2 2区经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS

Socio-Economic Review Pub Date : 2023-11-14 DOI:10.1093/ser/mwad061

Daniel Kinderman

{"title":"Business power, right-wing populism, and noisy politics: lessons from Brexit and Swiss referendums","authors":"Daniel Kinderman","doi":"10.1093/ser/mwad061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article contributes to debates on business power, noisy politics, and right-wing populism. The populist right weakens strategies of quiet politics, which many suggest has led to a steep decline of business power. I challenge this view and argue that a combination of innovative strategies and ample financial resources allow business associations to exercise power in this environment. Drawing on new empirical evidence, the article makes three central contributions. First, I suggest that the failure of Remain business advocacy in the 2016 Brexit referendum resulted from the constraints of administrative legislation (the PPERA), weaknesses in campaigning strategies, and the CBI leadership’s decision to not register as a campaign organization. Second, while my regression analysis provides some support for Culpepper’s quiet politics argument, the Swiss business federation Economiesuisse has won 90% of the referendum campaigns it has led, including many referendums with high issue salience against right-wing populists. Third, Economiesuisse shows that business strategies of ‘loud voice’ can be successful. With money and innovative public-facing campaigning strategies, business organizations can win in noisy environments and against right-wing populists.","PeriodicalId":47947,"journal":{"name":"Socio-Economic Review","volume":"105 10","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Socio-Economic Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwad061","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article contributes to debates on business power, noisy politics, and right-wing populism. The populist right weakens strategies of quiet politics, which many suggest has led to a steep decline of business power. I challenge this view and argue that a combination of innovative strategies and ample financial resources allow business associations to exercise power in this environment. Drawing on new empirical evidence, the article makes three central contributions. First, I suggest that the failure of Remain business advocacy in the 2016 Brexit referendum resulted from the constraints of administrative legislation (the PPERA), weaknesses in campaigning strategies, and the CBI leadership’s decision to not register as a campaign organization. Second, while my regression analysis provides some support for Culpepper’s quiet politics argument, the Swiss business federation Economiesuisse has won 90% of the referendum campaigns it has led, including many referendums with high issue salience against right-wing populists. Third, Economiesuisse shows that business strategies of ‘loud voice’ can be successful. With money and innovative public-facing campaigning strategies, business organizations can win in noisy environments and against right-wing populists.

查看原文本刊更多论文

商业力量、右翼民粹主义和嘈杂的政治:英国退欧和瑞士公投的教训

本文有助于讨论商业权力、嘈杂的政治和右翼民粹主义。民粹主义右翼削弱了安静政治的策略，许多人认为，这种策略导致了商业实力的急剧下降。我对这种观点提出了挑战，我认为，创新战略和充足的财务资源相结合，可以让商业协会在这种环境中行使权力。利用新的经验证据，本文做出了三个主要贡献。首先，我认为在2016年英国脱欧公投中，留欧企业倡导的失败是由于行政立法(PPERA)的限制、竞选策略的弱点以及CBI领导层决定不注册为竞选组织。其次，虽然我的回归分析为卡尔佩珀的“安静的政治”论点提供了一些支持，但瑞士经济联合会(Economiesuisse)在其领导的公投活动中赢得了90%的胜利，其中包括许多针对右翼民粹主义者的高度突出问题的公投。第三，瑞士经济表明，“大声说话”的商业策略是可以成功的。有了资金和创新的面向公众的竞选策略，商业组织可以在嘈杂的环境中战胜右翼民粹主义者。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Socio-Economic Review Multiple-

CiteScore

6.80

自引率

10.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： Originating in the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics (SASE), Socio-Economic Review (SER) is part of a broader movement in the social sciences for the rediscovery of the socio-political foundations of the economy. Devoted to the advancement of socio-economics, it deals with the analytical, political and moral questions arising at the intersection between economy and society. Articles in SER explore how the economy is or should be governed by social relations, institutional rules, political decisions, and cultural values. They also consider how the economy in turn affects the society of which it is part, for example by breaking up old institutional forms and giving rise to new ones. The domain of the journal is deliberately broadly conceived, so new variations to its general theme may be discovered and editors can learn from the papers that readers submit. To enhance international dialogue, Socio-Economic Review accepts the submission of translated articles that are simultaneously published in a language other than English. In pursuit of its program, SER is eager to promote interdisciplinary dialogue between sociology, economics, political science and moral philosophy, through both empirical and theoretical work. Empirical papers may be qualitative as well as quantitative, and theoretical papers will not be confined to deductive model-building. Papers suggestive of more generalizable insights into the economy as a domain of social action will be preferred over narrowly specialized work. While firmly committed to the highest standards of scholarly excellence, Socio-Economic Review encourages discussion of the practical and ethical dimensions of economic action, with the intention to contribute to both the advancement of social science and the building of a good economy in a good society.