Euroskepticism

Political Capital is a Budapest-based, independent political research and consultancy institute with a decade of experience, a strong international network and reputation. The basic values of the institute are parliamentary democracy and market economy. The institute's main fields of interest are political radicalism, extremism and its social background, conspiracy theories, prejudices, election research and Russian political influence within the EU. Political Capital has strong expertise in quantitative analyses.

The Future of Greater Europe. Perspectives on Macro-Regional
Development
Edited by
Mikhail Vedernikov & Anna Ivanova

Авторский коллектив монографии:
Годованюк К.А., Тимофеев П.П., Осколков П.В., Охошин О.В.,
Ведерников М.В., Цвык А.В., Невская А.А., Сергеев Е.А., Шеин С.А.,
Соколов А.П., Кутырев Г.И., Бояшов А.С., Доманов А.О., Юшков И.В.,
Сайфуллин Э.К., Иванова А.К., Айвазян А.С., Дридгер Й., Воробьев П.С.

Продолжая исследования предшественников о развитии и кризисах на территории Европы и ближнего зарубежья, этот труд призван представить собственный взгляд на будущее макрорегиона Большая Европа. Основной вопрос, которым задаются авторы монографии –  в каких условиях страны Большой Европы могли бы развиваться наиболее благополучно? Какие направления региональной интеграции (или дезинтеграции) должны были бы получить наибольшее внимание при выборе долгосрочной стратегии развития, в первую очередь внутри ЕС и ЕАЭС? Для того чтобы приблизиться к ответу на этот непростой вопрос, предстоит проанализировать интеграционные процессы в регионе, определить основные вызовы и точки бифуркации. Специфика поставленной задачи предполагает проведение фундаментального анализа значительного числа явлений общественной жизни, которые сложно не только обобщить, но и изложить в одной книге. Авторы монографии сконцентрировались на ряде основополагающих и наиболее актуальных вопросов интеграции, которые в первую очередь требуют оценки и осмысления.

The survey "What next for democracy?", which conducted 22,041 interviews in 26 countries, was designed by the Fondation pour l’innovation politique, and the polling institute Ipsos was in charge of running it. All the results can be viewed in 23 languages* as open data on the Fondation pour l’innovation politique website (http://data.fondapol.org/democratie/ou-va-la-democratie/).

Over the past several years, signs of destabilisation in the democratic world have been abundant. High abstention rates and the populist vote are eroding governments’ electoral bases and their legitimacy, while a process of regression towards authoritarian methods of government can be seen in some central and eastern European countries. Older liberal democracies have also been tempted to follow this path through their security policies and, in particular, counter-terrorism measures. Moreover, democracies are faced with the powerful effects of the historic transition that is now epitomised by the notion of ‘globalisation’. There is no doubt that the processes of global dispersion and reconstruction are closely linked to the destabilisation of democratic systems.

Democracy is part of a bigger picture. A specific sequence of events allowed the emergence, establishment and entrenchment of the democratic political system. By profoundly changing the world, an alternative solution would also inevitably change the democratic system and perhaps spell its end. It is therefore important to consider the potential erosion of democracy and examine the current situation and potential future of a method of government based on the radical, spectacular and unique idea of allowing citizens to choose their governments. The turbulent period we have seen over the past quarter of a century raises serious questions concerning the concept of democracy.

The paper attempts to study how economic situation in the member countries of the European Union in 2005-2011 affected the national party systems’ attitude towards the EU and the European integration (the EU cleavage). The authors made suggestion that economic decline could result in growing Euroskepticism.
This hypothesis was derived from three main arguments: economic voting theory, suggesting that voters “punish” the ruling parties in case of economic decline; the role the EU plays in determining national economic policy (specifically, strict austerity requirements); the overall international context of global economic crisis. In order to measure the attitude of the national parties towards the EU, the data from the Manifesto Project Database (MPD), a large scale content analysis database of electoral promises (manifestos) of national political parties was applied. Then the authors looked at 41 elections in the EU member states in 2005-2011, for which MPD data are available, and measured the declared
position of the parties participating in the elections regarding the EU. In an econometric study, the proxies of national party systems attitudes were regressed on proxies of economic situation in the EU countries, attempting to test the main hypotheses. Specifically, four proxies of attitude towards the EU were used: the share of votes obtained by euroskeptical parties; the average level of Euroskepticism in national party manifestos of all parties participating in elections; the average level of Euroskepticism of the ruling coalition emerging from elections; the average level of Euroskepticism weighted by the share of votes obtained by particular parties. The results of the estimates do not confirm that economic indicators
(especially GDP and inflation) have had a significant impact on the Euroskepticism; the results are not robust and vary from specification to specification. The article shows, however, that higher unemployment levels are negatively correlated with the Euroskepticism. The authors explain these findings by the
predominance of expressive behavior in voting patterns in Europe. Specifically, they argue that voting was driven primarily by identity issue. However, in this case identity should be related not to ethnic or regional features, but to consumption behavior patterns. The results are also placed in a broader context, attempting to link the EU-specific findings to processes observed in other parts of the world.

Tο βιβλίο του Θύμιου Τζάλλα δεν είναι μόνο ένας διαυγής οδικός χάρτης που καθιστά προσπελάσιμο τον λαβύρινθο του Brexit, αλλά και ένα συναρπαστικό πολιτικό θρίλερ που καταδεικνύει αφενός το δηλητήριο του λαϊκισμού και αφετέρου την αδυναμία του πολιτικού κόσμου να εναρμονιστεί με εύλογες κοινωνικές αγωνίες. Ο συγγραφέας καταγράφει πρόσωπα και συμπεριφορές, δημόσιες παλινωδίες και καντρίλιες παρασκηνίου, καθοριστικής σημασίας στιγμές, αποφάσεις και μεταστροφές, ακτινογραφεί τους Remainers και τους Brexiteers, αποκαλύπτει άγνωστα συμβάντα και φωτίζει γωνιές του βρετανικού δράματος, συγκρίνοντάς το-πολύ εύστοχα-με το ελληνικό. Το αποτέλεσμα του δημοψηφίσματος ανέδειξε ένα θεμελιώδους σημασίας ζήτημα στις σύγχρονες δημοκρατίες: ο πολιτικός κόσμος της Βρετανίας καλείται να φέρει εις πέρας κάτι που δεν πιστεύει ότι είναι προς το συμφέρον της χώρας. Στην Ελλάδα, το Όχι έγινε Ναι, στη Βρετανία το παλεύουν ακόμη. Η ανάγνωση του βιβλίου μάς βοηθά να καταλάβουμε τι και πώς συνέβη, να συνειδητοποιήσουμε ότι οι επιπτώσεις του Brexit θα μας επηρεάσουν στο εγγύς μέλλον και ίσως αλλάξουν τη φυσιογνωμία της Ευρώπης. O Θύμιος Τζάλλας έχει εργαστεί σε βρετανικά think tank με αντικείμενο έρευνας τον ρόλο της δευτερεύουσας νομοθεσίας στην κοινοβουλευτική διαδικασία, καθώς και τον αντίκτυπο της μεταρρύθμισης της κυβέρνησης συμμαχίας Κάμερον-Κλεγκ στο κράτος πρόνοιας. Έχει δουλέψει επίσης στο Βρετανικό και Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο. Αρθρογραφεί στο Policy Network, τον ΕUobserver, το Balkan Insight με θέμα τον κεντρώο χώρο και την άνοδο των ριζοσπαστικών κομμάτων στην Ελλάδα και τη Βρετανία. Στην Ελλάδα γράφει για το Brexit και τη σχέση ελληνικού και βρετανικού ευρωσκεπτικισμού στο Inside Story, το Fact News, την Καθημερινή, τα Νέα και τη Lifo.