Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorGuasti, Petrade
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-05T08:18:42Z
dc.date.available2021-05-05T08:18:42Z
dc.date.issued2020de
dc.identifier.issn2183-2463de
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/72959
dc.description.abstractPopulism and technocracy reject vertical accountability and horizontal accountability. Populism and technocracy can combine to form ‘technocratic populism.’ The study assesses the extent to which democratic decay can be traced to the actions of technocratic populists as opposed to institutional factors, civil society, fragmentation and polarization. The main findings of this article are that technocratic populism has illiberal tendencies expressed best in its efforts at executive aggrandizement (cf. Bermeo, 2016). Without an effective bulwark against democratic erosion (cf. Bernhard, 2015), technocratic populism tends to undermine electoral competition (vertical accountability), judiciary independence, legislative oversight (horizontal accountability), and freedom of the press (diagonal accountability). The most effective checks on technocratic populist in power, this study finds, are the courts, free media, and civil society. This article highlights the mechanisms of democratic decay and democratic resilience beyond electoral politics. It indicates that a combination of institutional veto points and civil society agency is necessary to prevent democratic erosion (cf. Weyland, 2020). While active civil society can prevent democratic erosion, it cannot reverse it. Ultimately, the future of liberal democracy depends on the people’s willingness to defend it in the streets AND at the ballot box.de
dc.languageende
dc.subject.ddcPolitikwissenschaftde
dc.subject.ddcPolitical scienceen
dc.subject.otheraccountability; democratic decay; democratic resilience; technocratic populismde
dc.titlePopulism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013-2020)de
dc.description.reviewbegutachtet (peer reviewed)de
dc.description.reviewpeer revieweden
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3420de
dc.source.journalPolitics and Governance
dc.source.volume8de
dc.publisher.countryPRT
dc.source.issue4de
dc.subject.classozpolitische Willensbildung, politische Soziologie, politische Kulturde
dc.subject.classozPolitical Process, Elections, Political Sociology, Political Cultureen
dc.subject.thesozTschechische Republikde
dc.subject.thesozCzech Republicen
dc.subject.thesozDemokratiede
dc.subject.thesozdemocracyen
dc.subject.thesozPopulismusde
dc.subject.thesozpopulismen
dc.subject.thesozTechnokratiede
dc.subject.thesoztechnocracyen
dc.subject.thesozpolitische Partizipationde
dc.subject.thesozpolitical participationen
dc.subject.thesozpostsozialistisches Landde
dc.subject.thesozpost-socialist countryen
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Namensnennung 4.0de
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Attribution 4.0en
internal.statusformal und inhaltlich fertig erschlossende
internal.identifier.thesoz10064243
internal.identifier.thesoz10037672
internal.identifier.thesoz10055018
internal.identifier.thesoz10046570
internal.identifier.thesoz10054194
internal.identifier.thesoz10035023
dc.type.stockarticlede
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.source.pageinfo473-484de
internal.identifier.classoz10504
internal.identifier.journal787
internal.identifier.document32
internal.identifier.ddc320
dc.source.issuetopicVarieties of Technocratic Populism around the Worldde
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i4.3420de
dc.description.pubstatusVeröffentlichungsversionde
dc.description.pubstatusPublished Versionen
internal.identifier.licence16
internal.identifier.pubstatus1
internal.identifier.review1
internal.dda.referencehttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/oai/@@oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3420
ssoar.urn.registrationfalsede


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record