Democratic elections are designed to create unequal outcomes: for some to win, others have to lose. This book examines the consequences of this inequality for the legitimacy of democratic political institutions and systems. Using survey data collected in democracies around the globe, the authors argue that losing generates ambivalent attitudes towards political authorities. Because the efficacy and ultimately the survival of democratic regimes can be seriously threatened if thelosers do not consent to their loss, the central themes of this book focus on losing: how losers respond to their loss and how institutions shape losing. While there tends to be a gap in support for the political system between winners and losers, it is not ubiquitous. The book paints a picture oflosers' consent that portrays losers as political actors whose experience and whose incentives to accept defeat are shaped both by who they are as individuals as well as the political environment in which loss is given meaning.Given that the winner-loser gap in legitimacy is a persistent feature of democratic politics, the findings presented in this book contain crucial implications for our understanding of the functioning and stability of democracies.
"Based on data from democracies across the globe, this book examines how election losers and their supporters respond to their loss and how institutions shape losing"--Provided by publisher.
NOTES TO CHAPTER 3 Philip H. Wicksteed , The Common Sense of Political Economy ( London : Macmillan , 1910 ) , chap . V. 2 . There are , of course , exceptions . See Arthur Bentley , The Process of Government .
Drawing on recent feminist discussions, this collection critically reassesses ideas about agency, exploring the relationship between agency and coercion in greater depth and across a range of disciplinary perspectives and ethical contexts.
This is a laugh-out-loud exploration of sexuality, family, female friendship, grief, and community.
In an era when quack COVID treatments and bizarre QAnon theories have entered mainstream, this book explains how to assure both freedom of ideas and a commitment to truth.
Still, most who say they use sectoral approaches will likely point to the same motley crew of intellectual forebears: Alexander Gerschenkron, Raymond Vernon, Robert Gilpin, James Kurth, A. G. Hopkins, H. A. Innis, M. H. Watkins, ...
Robert Leiken became more potent as a critic of the Sandinistas as an alleged former peace-movement activist and early supporter of the Sandinistas. ... See S. Robert Lichter, Stanley Rothman, and Linda Lichter ...
Labour MP Alan Johnson fully agreed: 'The government, George Osborne in particular, went over the top with the stuff they were saying. The Treasury papers suggested that banks were going to crash straight away, we were going to be into ...
Non-Consensus Investing is a must-read for anyone who seeks to understand why active investing disappointed and how it can succeed—analysts and amateurs, fiduciaries and financial advisors, aspiring and practicing money managers, as well ...
Basic Guide to the National Labor Relations Act