A political Esperanto, or false friends? Left and right in different political contexts

IF 3.6 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE European Journal of Political Research Pub Date : 2023-07-27 DOI:10.1111/1475-6765.12618
JESPER LINDQVIST, JOHAN A. DORNSCHNEIDER-ELKINK
{"title":"A political Esperanto, or false friends? Left and right in different political contexts","authors":"JESPER LINDQVIST,&nbsp;JOHAN A. DORNSCHNEIDER-ELKINK","doi":"10.1111/1475-6765.12618","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The simplification of the political landscape in terms of ‘left’ and ‘right’ is common across most democracies, if not most of the world. This would suggest that the terminology has a shared core meaning in different political contexts. While no such stable element has been established in the political science literature, various potential dividing lines that may form the core meaning have been proposed. This paper is the most extensive comparative study to our knowledge that evaluates these proposals by studying responses to open-ended survey questions on what voters associate with the terms ‘left’ and ‘right’. Data from eight different democratic political contexts are analysed using quantitative text analysis methods. The results demonstrate varied support for the different explanations. Evidence is found in all contexts for the hypothesis that acceptance of inequality divides left- from right-wing politics. That the left-right dimension is a divide between those for and against government intervention in the economy, or between those for change and against change, is mostly congruent with our findings. We find less evidence that either secular/religious divisions, or different conceptions of equality, consistently differentiate left from right. Our findings point towards the existence of a context-independent underlying dimension of left-right competition.</p>","PeriodicalId":48273,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Political Research","volume":"63 2","pages":"729-749"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Political Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6765.12618","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The simplification of the political landscape in terms of ‘left’ and ‘right’ is common across most democracies, if not most of the world. This would suggest that the terminology has a shared core meaning in different political contexts. While no such stable element has been established in the political science literature, various potential dividing lines that may form the core meaning have been proposed. This paper is the most extensive comparative study to our knowledge that evaluates these proposals by studying responses to open-ended survey questions on what voters associate with the terms ‘left’ and ‘right’. Data from eight different democratic political contexts are analysed using quantitative text analysis methods. The results demonstrate varied support for the different explanations. Evidence is found in all contexts for the hypothesis that acceptance of inequality divides left- from right-wing politics. That the left-right dimension is a divide between those for and against government intervention in the economy, or between those for change and against change, is mostly congruent with our findings. We find less evidence that either secular/religious divisions, or different conceptions of equality, consistently differentiate left from right. Our findings point towards the existence of a context-independent underlying dimension of left-right competition.

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
政治世界语,还是假朋友?不同政治背景下的左派和右派
用 "左 "和 "右 "来简化政治格局在大多数民主国家,甚至世界上大多数国家都很常见。这表明,在不同的政治背景下,这一术语具有共同的核心含义。虽然政治学文献中尚未确立这种稳定的要素,但已提出了可能构成核心含义的各种潜在分界线。本文是我们所知的最广泛的比较研究,通过研究选民对 "左派 "和 "右派 "的开放式调查问题的回答,对这些提议进行了评估。本文采用定量文本分析方法对来自八个不同民主政治环境的数据进行了分析。结果显示,不同的解释得到了不同的支持。在所有情况下,都有证据证明接受不平等会划分左翼和右翼政治这一假设。左右维度是支持和反对政府干预经济的人之间的分野,或者是支持变革和反对变革的人之间的分野,这与我们的研究结果基本一致。我们发现较少证据表明,世俗/宗教分野或不同的平等观念始终是左右派的分野。我们的研究结果表明,左右竞争存在一个与背景无关的基本维度。
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
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
5.70%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: European Journal of Political Research specialises in articles articulating theoretical and comparative perspectives in political science, and welcomes both quantitative and qualitative approaches. EJPR also publishes short research notes outlining ongoing research in more specific areas of research. The Journal includes the Political Data Yearbook, published as a double issue at the end of each volume.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Correction to (When) do electoral mandates set the agenda? Government capacity and mandate responsiveness in Germany Issue Information Patterns of democracy and democratic satisfaction: Results from a comparative conjoint experiment
×
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