The relationship between affective polarization and democratic backsliding: comparative evidence
The relationship between affective polarization and democratic backsliding: comparative evidence
复制标题
情感两极分化与民主倒退之间的关系：比较证据
作者：
Yunus Emre Orhan
在民主国家，选民为什么要投票给不民主的政客？我的主要论点是，情感两极分化已经成为推动支持非民主政治家的主要因素。一旦党派认同在群体隶属关系的等级制度中变成一种突出的身份，它就有可能扩大党派之间的距离。这样的政治环境助长了他们对自己喜欢的政党的积极信念和对另一方的消极信念，这助长了政治上的玩世不恭、不容忍和增加了党派忠诚。因此，跨越党派界限变得代价高昂，即使现任者违反民主原则或现任者的经济政策不符合支持者的利益。这种权衡使不民主的政客能够逃避因不民主行为而受到的选举制裁。我创建了一个扩展版本的Reiljan的情感极化应用程序。新的数据集涵盖了53个国家的情感极化分数，这些分数是通过170次全国选举调查计算出来的。我发现，情感极化的增加与民主倒退、问责制度降低、自由度降低、权利减少和民主审议减少密切相关。然而，意识形态的两极分化没有显示出相关性。
ABSTRACT Why do voters vote for undemocratic politicians in a democracy? My chief contention is that affective polarization has become a primary factor driving support for undemocratic politicians. Once partisan identification turns into a salient identity in the hierarchy of group affiliations, it has the potential to widen inter-party distances. Such a political environment fosters positive beliefs of their preferred party and negative beliefs of the other party, which promote political cynicism, intolerance and increase partisan loyalty. As a result, crossing party lines becomes costly, even when incumbents violate democratic principles or incumbents’ economic policies do not appeal to supporters’ interests. This tradeoff enables undemocratic politicians to evade electoral sanctions for undemocratic behaviour. I created an extended version of Reiljan’s affective polarization application. The new dataset covers affective polarization scores of 53 countries calculated over 170 national election surveys. I find that increasing affective polarization is highly correlated with democratic backsliding, less accountability, less freedom, fewer rights, and less deliberation in democracies. However, ideological polarization has shown no correlation.
投票反对独裁
影响因子：
5
作者：
Svolik, Milan W.
通讯作者：
Svolik, Milan W.