Pub Date : 2022-02-02DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2021.2022337
Bastiaan van Apeldoorn, Naná de Graaff
ABSTRACT The Covid-19 crisis has once again brought the role of the state in the capitalist economy to the fore. Rather than viewing this as a ‘return of the state’, this article conceptualises the current dynamic in terms of a reconfiguration of the roles the state plays, distinguishing between a market-creating, a market-correcting, a market-intervening, and a market-directing role, with each role having both an internal and an external dimension. This conceptual mapping of the diversity of state-capital configurations is then applied to offer a novel reading of the recent capitalist state trajectories of the US and of China. We conclude that there is – notwithstanding persistent differences – a relative convergence inasmuch as the still strongly market-directing Chinese state also has at the same come to embrace a global market-creating role, while the US is now also showing signs of a stronger emphasis on market-direction.
{"title":"The state in global capitalism before and after the Covid-19 crisis","authors":"Bastiaan van Apeldoorn, Naná de Graaff","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2021.2022337","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2022337","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Covid-19 crisis has once again brought the role of the state in the capitalist economy to the fore. Rather than viewing this as a ‘return of the state’, this article conceptualises the current dynamic in terms of a reconfiguration of the roles the state plays, distinguishing between a market-creating, a market-correcting, a market-intervening, and a market-directing role, with each role having both an internal and an external dimension. This conceptual mapping of the diversity of state-capital configurations is then applied to offer a novel reading of the recent capitalist state trajectories of the US and of China. We conclude that there is – notwithstanding persistent differences – a relative convergence inasmuch as the still strongly market-directing Chinese state also has at the same come to embrace a global market-creating role, while the US is now also showing signs of a stronger emphasis on market-direction.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48382685","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-24DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2021.2022322
Matthew J. Baltz
ABSTRACT The election of Donald Trump in 2016 marked the beginning of a new chapter in US–China relations. His administration’s imposition of tariffs and high-level trade negotiations captured the most attention and headlines. But these attempts to coerce China into breaking down key pillars of its ‘state capitalist’ developmental model have been only one, outward-facing element of his administration’s response to China’s growing economic and military strength. This article focuses on three inward-facing policy areas, the politics of which have been shaped by China’s rise and the evolution of the US economy: (1) the governance of inward foreign direct investment; (2) government procurement and local content requirements; and (3) state projects to promote new technologies and domestic productive capabilities. It finds evidence of modest reforms of government regulations and limited expansions in state capacity but that these may prove to be more significant in the long term.
{"title":"What lies beneath the ‘tariff man’? The Trump administration’s response to China’s ‘state capitalism’","authors":"Matthew J. Baltz","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2021.2022322","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2022322","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The election of Donald Trump in 2016 marked the beginning of a new chapter in US–China relations. His administration’s imposition of tariffs and high-level trade negotiations captured the most attention and headlines. But these attempts to coerce China into breaking down key pillars of its ‘state capitalist’ developmental model have been only one, outward-facing element of his administration’s response to China’s growing economic and military strength. This article focuses on three inward-facing policy areas, the politics of which have been shaped by China’s rise and the evolution of the US economy: (1) the governance of inward foreign direct investment; (2) government procurement and local content requirements; and (3) state projects to promote new technologies and domestic productive capabilities. It finds evidence of modest reforms of government regulations and limited expansions in state capacity but that these may prove to be more significant in the long term.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41597997","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-12DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2021.2010345
Julian Erhardt, Markus Freitag, Steffen Wamsler, Maximilian Filsinger
ABSTRACT In times of severe crises, citizens are frequently found to rally-‘round-the-flag – i.e. to increase trust in their government. Drawing on an original survey experiment with real-world information at the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, we portray the saliency of rally-relevant issues of the crisis. Contrary to our expectation, this priming effect lowers governmental trust. Mediation analyses show that respondents are more trusting towards their in-group, but simultaneously display less pride in institutions and less positive attitudes towards the political elite, which leads to a reduction in governmental trust. Our study shows that crises do not always lead to a rally-‘round-the-flag effect – it crucially depends on whether people consider their democratic institutions capable of coping with the crisis. Moreover, our findings demonstrate the need to unravel the black box of the rally-effect to get a more accurate picture of the driving forces behind governmental trust during crises.
{"title":"What drives political support? Evidence from a survey experiment at the onset of the corona crisis","authors":"Julian Erhardt, Markus Freitag, Steffen Wamsler, Maximilian Filsinger","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2021.2010345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2010345","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In times of severe crises, citizens are frequently found to rally-‘round-the-flag – i.e. to increase trust in their government. Drawing on an original survey experiment with real-world information at the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, we portray the saliency of rally-relevant issues of the crisis. Contrary to our expectation, this priming effect lowers governmental trust. Mediation analyses show that respondents are more trusting towards their in-group, but simultaneously display less pride in institutions and less positive attitudes towards the political elite, which leads to a reduction in governmental trust. Our study shows that crises do not always lead to a rally-‘round-the-flag effect – it crucially depends on whether people consider their democratic institutions capable of coping with the crisis. Moreover, our findings demonstrate the need to unravel the black box of the rally-effect to get a more accurate picture of the driving forces behind governmental trust during crises.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41892510","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-12DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2021.2023269
Emel Parlar Dal, Samiratou Dipama
ABSTRACT This paper critically assesses the (de)legitimation strategies used by rising powers against existing formal and informal International Organizations (IOs), especially the G7/8, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In doing so, it first analyzes how legitimacy relates to multilateralism and vice versa. Then, it examines why legitimacy matters to rising powers and explores the two main (de)legitimation strategies—regime shift and competitive regime creation—used by rising powers when they contest the legitimacy of the existing IOs. Finally, it uses the cases of the G20 and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) to highlight the strengths and limits of regime shift and competitive regime creation strategies. This paper argues that rising powers' quest for enhanced legitimacy by means of joining alternative existing institutions (G20) or creating new institutions (AIIB) seems to have produced limited results because, like the status-quo institutions, the G20 and AIIB also suffer from legitimacy deficit.
{"title":"Rising powers’ quest for increased legitimacy through IOs in an era of loose multilateralism","authors":"Emel Parlar Dal, Samiratou Dipama","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2021.2023269","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2023269","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper critically assesses the (de)legitimation strategies used by rising powers against existing formal and informal International Organizations (IOs), especially the G7/8, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In doing so, it first analyzes how legitimacy relates to multilateralism and vice versa. Then, it examines why legitimacy matters to rising powers and explores the two main (de)legitimation strategies—regime shift and competitive regime creation—used by rising powers when they contest the legitimacy of the existing IOs. Finally, it uses the cases of the G20 and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) to highlight the strengths and limits of regime shift and competitive regime creation strategies. This paper argues that rising powers' quest for enhanced legitimacy by means of joining alternative existing institutions (G20) or creating new institutions (AIIB) seems to have produced limited results because, like the status-quo institutions, the G20 and AIIB also suffer from legitimacy deficit.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43090534","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-12DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2021.2022876
S. Rogers
ABSTRACT State-owned capital investment into so-called illiberal democracies in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) has risen to become a more significant feature of CEE political economies, although knowledge of the impact of such transnational flows on illiberal capitalist development remains limited. This article analyses this form of capitalist relation by contributing to and consequently fusing two strands of burgeoning academic literature: (1) the political economy of illiberalism and (2) state capitalism. The result is an expansion of the purview of each: the former by focusing on CEE illiberalism’s external (state) capitalist dimensions; the latter via an upgrading of the rigour of the term ‘state capitalism’ through analysis of ‘new territorialities’. Empirically, I use a Case Study Analysis of Chinese state-owned capital investment into Serbia with focus on two Sino-Serbian agreements and identify two issues that may come to characterise the broader relationship between CEE illiberalism and Chinese state-owned capital investment.
{"title":"Illiberal capitalist development: Chinese state-owned capital investment in Serbia","authors":"S. Rogers","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2021.2022876","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2022876","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT State-owned capital investment into so-called illiberal democracies in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) has risen to become a more significant feature of CEE political economies, although knowledge of the impact of such transnational flows on illiberal capitalist development remains limited. This article analyses this form of capitalist relation by contributing to and consequently fusing two strands of burgeoning academic literature: (1) the political economy of illiberalism and (2) state capitalism. The result is an expansion of the purview of each: the former by focusing on CEE illiberalism’s external (state) capitalist dimensions; the latter via an upgrading of the rigour of the term ‘state capitalism’ through analysis of ‘new territorialities’. Empirically, I use a Case Study Analysis of Chinese state-owned capital investment into Serbia with focus on two Sino-Serbian agreements and identify two issues that may come to characterise the broader relationship between CEE illiberalism and Chinese state-owned capital investment.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45836551","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2021.2022336
Ilias Alami, M. Babić, Adam D. Dixon, I. T. Liu
ABSTRACT This article introduces and lays the groundwork for this Contemporary Politics special issue on the ‘new’ state capitalism. We start by noting that the rubric state capitalism tends to elicit paradoxical responses, from uncritically embracing the term and overstretching its realms of application, to rejecting its validity altogether. We argue that the source of such ambivalence resides in issues of conceptual definition, which have led to a number of analytical impasses. We propose instead to construe state capitalism as a set of critical interrogations concerning the changing role of the state, thereby introducing a degree of plasticity in the use of the category. We call this the problématique of state capitalism. We subsequently identify three major themes that are explored in this dedicated issue, and that warrant further research in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, namely (1) its class underpinnings, (2) its global nature, and (3) its relational character.
{"title":"Special issue introduction: what is the new state capitalism?","authors":"Ilias Alami, M. Babić, Adam D. Dixon, I. T. Liu","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2021.2022336","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2022336","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article introduces and lays the groundwork for this Contemporary Politics special issue on the ‘new’ state capitalism. We start by noting that the rubric state capitalism tends to elicit paradoxical responses, from uncritically embracing the term and overstretching its realms of application, to rejecting its validity altogether. We argue that the source of such ambivalence resides in issues of conceptual definition, which have led to a number of analytical impasses. We propose instead to construe state capitalism as a set of critical interrogations concerning the changing role of the state, thereby introducing a degree of plasticity in the use of the category. We call this the problématique of state capitalism. We subsequently identify three major themes that are explored in this dedicated issue, and that warrant further research in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, namely (1) its class underpinnings, (2) its global nature, and (3) its relational character.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46550311","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2021.2023260
Gianni Del Panta
ABSTRACT By focusing on the 2019 Algerian uprising that led to Bouteflika’s removal, this article explores how broad and mass-based convergences of various social and political opposition actors can produce an existential threat to autocracies. It develops a dynamic understanding that analyses the behaviour of political groups, social classes, and state actors. To do so, it points to the hegemonic contraction of the ruling coalition, the outbreak of a long series of protests in the pre-2019 period, and the gradual emergence of a cross-class and cross-ideological convergence in the course of the uprising. The article not only contributes to debates about authoritarian regimes and mobilizations, but also demonstrates how the scholarship might develop more nuanced accounts by combining insights from the structuralist approach and microfoundational studies. To analyse the uprising in Algeria, it relies on secondary sources and press analysis, taking into account three leading Algerian newspapers and two well-known websites.
{"title":"Defeating Autocrats from below: Insights from the 2019 Algerian uprising","authors":"Gianni Del Panta","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2021.2023260","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2023260","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT By focusing on the 2019 Algerian uprising that led to Bouteflika’s removal, this article explores how broad and mass-based convergences of various social and political opposition actors can produce an existential threat to autocracies. It develops a dynamic understanding that analyses the behaviour of political groups, social classes, and state actors. To do so, it points to the hegemonic contraction of the ruling coalition, the outbreak of a long series of protests in the pre-2019 period, and the gradual emergence of a cross-class and cross-ideological convergence in the course of the uprising. The article not only contributes to debates about authoritarian regimes and mobilizations, but also demonstrates how the scholarship might develop more nuanced accounts by combining insights from the structuralist approach and microfoundational studies. To analyse the uprising in Algeria, it relies on secondary sources and press analysis, taking into account three leading Algerian newspapers and two well-known websites.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43847818","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-31DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2021.2022323
Nathaniel H. Sperber
ABSTRACT The emergent literature on ‘new state capitalism' has offered little in terms of class analysis so far. This stands in contrast with prior twentieth-century writings which had sought to retool Marxist class theory to highlight the ambivalent position of the ‘state class' in settings where the state owned large concentrations of productive capital. This article sets out a novel conceptual framework for analyzing the class situation of officials and executives embedded in government and state-owned enterprises. Overseers and managers of state-owned capital should be understood as Janus-faced actors, participating simultaneously in political and economic fields, articulating political hierarchy with power over capital. Furthermore, fractions inside the state can be identified in so far as the authority to operate, and to allocate, capital is distributed unevenly within the state’s ruling stratum. As an illustration, an examination of the class ramifications of central-level SOEs in China is provided.
{"title":"Servants of the state or masters of capital? Thinking through the class implications of state-owned capital","authors":"Nathaniel H. Sperber","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2021.2022323","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2022323","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The emergent literature on ‘new state capitalism' has offered little in terms of class analysis so far. This stands in contrast with prior twentieth-century writings which had sought to retool Marxist class theory to highlight the ambivalent position of the ‘state class' in settings where the state owned large concentrations of productive capital. This article sets out a novel conceptual framework for analyzing the class situation of officials and executives embedded in government and state-owned enterprises. Overseers and managers of state-owned capital should be understood as Janus-faced actors, participating simultaneously in political and economic fields, articulating political hierarchy with power over capital. Furthermore, fractions inside the state can be identified in so far as the authority to operate, and to allocate, capital is distributed unevenly within the state’s ruling stratum. As an illustration, an examination of the class ramifications of central-level SOEs in China is provided.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44385124","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-28DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2021.2022335
Kyunghoon Kim
ABSTRACT This paper argues that state capitalism is not just a developing world phenomenon; a number of high-income economies in Europe and Asia have experienced a notable expansion of state capitalism over the past two decades. By using data on equity and investment fund shares from government balance sheets, this paper compares the strength of state capitalism across more than 30 high-income economies since 2000. This dataset enables the analysis of government ownership of economic entities in totality and over time. By analysing the diverse cases of the United States, Britain, and Norway in depth, this paper also emphasises the importance of the historical, political, and socio-economic contexts in understanding the persistence of and government influence in state capitalism through corporate ownership. Based on these analyses, this paper challenges the analytical value of ‘geographical imaginaries’ that categorise high-income economies as liberal capitalists and developing economies as statist capitalists.
{"title":"Locating new ‘state capitalism’ in advanced economies: an international comparison of government ownership in economic entities","authors":"Kyunghoon Kim","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2021.2022335","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2022335","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper argues that state capitalism is not just a developing world phenomenon; a number of high-income economies in Europe and Asia have experienced a notable expansion of state capitalism over the past two decades. By using data on equity and investment fund shares from government balance sheets, this paper compares the strength of state capitalism across more than 30 high-income economies since 2000. This dataset enables the analysis of government ownership of economic entities in totality and over time. By analysing the diverse cases of the United States, Britain, and Norway in depth, this paper also emphasises the importance of the historical, political, and socio-economic contexts in understanding the persistence of and government influence in state capitalism through corporate ownership. Based on these analyses, this paper challenges the analytical value of ‘geographical imaginaries’ that categorise high-income economies as liberal capitalists and developing economies as statist capitalists.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42272392","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-23DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2021.2015086
E. Meka
ABSTRACT To what extent is political fragmentation associated with changes in democracy? The article uses the European integration process of ten Central and East European democracies to argue that political fragmentation is distinctly related to changes in democracy, depending on whether it is the government or opposition that is fragmented. Moreover, this association is mitigated by EU conditionality in the integration process. The paper tests the argument through the use of time-series cross-sectional data. The findings illustrate the importance of opposition fragmentation as an essential factor in explaining changes in democracy. In conclusion, the article draws attention to the understudied literature on opposition fragmentation by highlighting the theoretical implications of the findings for comparative politics and European integration.
{"title":"How much opposition? Political fragmentation and changes in democracy","authors":"E. Meka","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2021.2015086","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2015086","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT To what extent is political fragmentation associated with changes in democracy? The article uses the European integration process of ten Central and East European democracies to argue that political fragmentation is distinctly related to changes in democracy, depending on whether it is the government or opposition that is fragmented. Moreover, this association is mitigated by EU conditionality in the integration process. The paper tests the argument through the use of time-series cross-sectional data. The findings illustrate the importance of opposition fragmentation as an essential factor in explaining changes in democracy. In conclusion, the article draws attention to the understudied literature on opposition fragmentation by highlighting the theoretical implications of the findings for comparative politics and European integration.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60110832","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：