How did Inequality Gain Such Prominence on the Democratic Party Agenda?

K. Bentele
{"title":"How did Inequality Gain Such Prominence on the Democratic Party Agenda?","authors":"K. Bentele","doi":"10.1108/S0895-993520210000028001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years there has been a dramatic expansion in both the number and scope of policy proposals explicitly intended to reduce inequality proffered by policymakers in the Democratic Party. In the following, it is argued that this state of affairs is the result of a complex series of developments triggered by the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) protests. OWS dramatically enhanced both the salience and the politicization of economic inequality. These developments altered the strategies of elites and organizations within the institutional left and advantaged elite movement allies within the Democratic Party. In combination, these indirect and elite-mediated responses resulted in antiinequality positions becoming integrated into both the partisan identity and the platform of the Democratic Party. Despite the Occupy movement being relatively short-lived and explicitly eschewing reliance on institutional politics, it nonetheless had a significant impact on conventional politics. By significantly shifting the political discourse around the issue of inequality, the movement reshaped the political landscape in a manner that created new opportunities and openings for political actors. As organizations within the Democratic Party's coalition increasingly adopted antiinequality messaging this both pressured and incentivized establishment Democrats to fully embrace an antiinequality agenda. This account is consistent with a theory of political parties in which the key actors are activists and interest groups, not party leaders, and social movement research that suggests that movements are often more influential in the earliest stages of the policymaking process.","PeriodicalId":431806,"journal":{"name":"Research in Political Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Political Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0895-993520210000028001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years there has been a dramatic expansion in both the number and scope of policy proposals explicitly intended to reduce inequality proffered by policymakers in the Democratic Party. In the following, it is argued that this state of affairs is the result of a complex series of developments triggered by the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) protests. OWS dramatically enhanced both the salience and the politicization of economic inequality. These developments altered the strategies of elites and organizations within the institutional left and advantaged elite movement allies within the Democratic Party. In combination, these indirect and elite-mediated responses resulted in antiinequality positions becoming integrated into both the partisan identity and the platform of the Democratic Party. Despite the Occupy movement being relatively short-lived and explicitly eschewing reliance on institutional politics, it nonetheless had a significant impact on conventional politics. By significantly shifting the political discourse around the issue of inequality, the movement reshaped the political landscape in a manner that created new opportunities and openings for political actors. As organizations within the Democratic Party's coalition increasingly adopted antiinequality messaging this both pressured and incentivized establishment Democrats to fully embrace an antiinequality agenda. This account is consistent with a theory of political parties in which the key actors are activists and interest groups, not party leaders, and social movement research that suggests that movements are often more influential in the earliest stages of the policymaking process.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不平等问题是如何在民主党议程上占据如此重要的位置的?
近年来,民主党决策者明确提出的旨在减少不平等的政策建议在数量和范围上都有了戏剧性的扩大。本文认为,这种事态是由占领华尔街(OWS)抗议引发的一系列复杂事态发展的结果。占领华尔街极大地增强了经济不平等的突出性和政治化。这些发展改变了精英和机构左派内部组织的策略,以及民主党内部有利的精英运动盟友。综合起来,这些间接的和精英介导的反应导致反不平等的立场成为民主党的党派认同和纲领的一部分。尽管占领运动相对短暂,并且明确避开了对制度政治的依赖,但它对传统政治产生了重大影响。通过显著改变围绕不平等问题的政治话语,该运动以一种为政治行动者创造新机会和开放的方式重塑了政治格局。随着民主党联盟内的组织越来越多地采用反不平等的信息,这既压力又激励了民主党人完全接受反不平等的议程。这种说法与政党理论相一致,其中关键角色是活动家和利益集团,而不是政党领导人,社会运动研究表明,运动往往在政策制定过程的最初阶段更具影响力。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Systemic Inequality, Sustainability and COVID-19 Creative Disappointment: How Movements for Democracy: Spawn Movements for Even More Democracy * Stones versus Routines: Students and Politicians in Higher Education Tuition Policy * Index Prelims
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1