政党对民主倒退和差异化整合的看法

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q2 AREA STUDIES
R. Bellamy, S. Kröger, M. Lorimer
{"title":"政党对民主倒退和差异化整合的看法","authors":"R. Bellamy, S. Kröger, M. Lorimer","doi":"10.1177/08883254221096168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Both political parties and differentiated integration (DI) play an ambivalent role in regard to democratic backsliding. Parties’ positioning towards democratic backsliding has not always been straightforward, and DI has been seen as facilitating it. We analyse whether party actors view democratic backsliding as a problematic issue for the EU, if they think DI facilitates it, and how they consider the EU should respond to it. Drawing on thirty-five interviews and a survey of forty-two party actors in seven member states, we show that many do view backsliding as problematic. Moreover, around half worried that DI could facilitate backsliding, though others did not link the two. Finally, almost all considered it legitimate for the EU to address democratic backsliding. Although centre-of-left actors are most likely to worry about democratic backsliding and favour EU intervention, actors across the political spectrum are sceptical about accepting DI in matters pertaining to Article 2.","PeriodicalId":47086,"journal":{"name":"East European Politics and Societies","volume":"37 1","pages":"563 - 583"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Party Views on Democratic Backsliding and Differentiated Integration\",\"authors\":\"R. Bellamy, S. Kröger, M. Lorimer\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08883254221096168\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Both political parties and differentiated integration (DI) play an ambivalent role in regard to democratic backsliding. Parties’ positioning towards democratic backsliding has not always been straightforward, and DI has been seen as facilitating it. We analyse whether party actors view democratic backsliding as a problematic issue for the EU, if they think DI facilitates it, and how they consider the EU should respond to it. Drawing on thirty-five interviews and a survey of forty-two party actors in seven member states, we show that many do view backsliding as problematic. Moreover, around half worried that DI could facilitate backsliding, though others did not link the two. Finally, almost all considered it legitimate for the EU to address democratic backsliding. Although centre-of-left actors are most likely to worry about democratic backsliding and favour EU intervention, actors across the political spectrum are sceptical about accepting DI in matters pertaining to Article 2.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47086,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"East European Politics and Societies\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"563 - 583\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"East European Politics and Societies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08883254221096168\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"East European Politics and Societies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08883254221096168","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

政党和差别化整合(DI)在民主倒退中都扮演着矛盾的角色。各党派对民主倒退的定位并不总是直截了当的,而DI一直被视为促进了民主倒退。我们分析政党成员是否将民主倒退视为欧盟的一个问题,如果他们认为DI促进了这一问题,以及他们认为欧盟应该如何应对。通过35次访谈和对7个成员国的42位政党成员的调查,我们发现许多人确实认为倒退是一个问题。此外,大约一半的人担心DI会促进倒退,尽管其他人没有将两者联系起来。最后,几乎所有人都认为欧盟应对民主倒退是合法的。尽管中左翼人士最有可能担心民主倒退并支持欧盟干预,但整个政治领域的人士都对在与第2条有关的问题上接受DI持怀疑态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Party Views on Democratic Backsliding and Differentiated Integration
Both political parties and differentiated integration (DI) play an ambivalent role in regard to democratic backsliding. Parties’ positioning towards democratic backsliding has not always been straightforward, and DI has been seen as facilitating it. We analyse whether party actors view democratic backsliding as a problematic issue for the EU, if they think DI facilitates it, and how they consider the EU should respond to it. Drawing on thirty-five interviews and a survey of forty-two party actors in seven member states, we show that many do view backsliding as problematic. Moreover, around half worried that DI could facilitate backsliding, though others did not link the two. Finally, almost all considered it legitimate for the EU to address democratic backsliding. Although centre-of-left actors are most likely to worry about democratic backsliding and favour EU intervention, actors across the political spectrum are sceptical about accepting DI in matters pertaining to Article 2.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: East European Politics and Societies is an international journal that examines social, political, and economic issues in Eastern Europe. EEPS offers holistic coverage of the region - every country, from every discipline - ranging from detailed case studies through comparative analyses and theoretical issues. Contributors include not only western scholars but many from Eastern Europe itself. The Editorial Board is composed of a world-class panel of historians, political scientists, economists, and social scientists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信