Matching Items (4)
Description
In 2016, the Western world was shocked by the victory of the "Leave" campaign in the referendum on European Union membership in Great Britain and by the victory of Donald Trump in the United States' presidential election. These two electoral successes have been called "populist" campaigns in their respective countries. In this paper, I ask whether the widespread populist sentiment in the United States and Great Britain qualifies as "populist" and should be regarded as part of the same movement. I then explore whether Trump and Leave voters are motivated by a common issue or set of issues. Initially, I frame my argument by defining populism and showing how both campaigns meet the definition. Next, I compare the Leave campaign with the Trump campaign and explore the similarities and differences in the demographics and opinions of their supporters. I determine that while the Trump and Leave campaigns certainly have differences, they should ultimately be treated as two branches of the same movement. Finally, I conclude that both campaigns are more motivated by versions of cultural resentment than economic anxiety.
ContributorsDunning, Alexander Chase (Author) / Lennon, Tara (Thesis director) / Simhony, Avital (Committee member) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
This thesis examines the recent emergence of populist radical right-wing parties across Western and Eastern Europe. Starting with the insufficiency of current explanations for this rise, I examine micro-, macro-, and meso- scale cross-national analyses to determine which major variables predict the rise of populist right-wing forces across these nation-states. Finally, using the conceptual resources of social identity theory, the paper argues that social status may be a mediating factor by which economic and cultural-identitarian forces influence the populist radical right.
ContributorsFerdowsian, Ryan Sameer (Author) / Hechter, Michael (Thesis director) / Pout, Daniel (Committee member) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05
Description
In 2015, the Law and Justice Party [Prawo I Sprawiedliwość, PiS] won the majority of seats in parliament and took control of Poland. PiS has a populist platform that has led to undemocratic practices, especially in the judicial branch, that are being questioned by the EU. This study evaluates the role that globalization, a concept that has been linked to other European countries’ citizens' appeal to right-wing populist groups, has in Poland’s rise of PiS. Two Polish websites, Przeglad and Wprost were analyzed to observe the change in positive and negative language before and after PiS’s rise to power and to observe how it has impacted party polarization. Articles that had one or more of eight key terms associated with globalization were analyzed for the negativity and positivity. Additionally, when observing sentiment over time, the term “globalization” has converged between the two websites, while “WTO” has remained consistent. Overall, the results showed that language has shifted towards neutrality, with a movement from strong positive or strong negative, to weak positive and weak negative; however, with only a few key terms being statistically significant there is a need for further research into more key terms and additional websites.
ContributorsMitina, Maria (Author) / Thomson, Henry (Thesis director) / Cichopek-Gajraj, Anna (Committee member) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05
Description
Operational code analysis (OCA) is a common method of content analysis within the foreign policy analysis (FPA) literature used to determine the “operational code” of state leaders and, by extension, the foreign policy behaviors of their respective state. It has been tried and tested many times before, on many different world leaders from many different time periods, to predict what the foreign policy behavior of a state/organization might be based on the philosophical and instrumental beliefs of their leader about the political universe. This paper, however, questions if there might be types of politicians that OCA, conducted using the automated Verbs In Context System (VICS), has problems delivering accurate results for. More specifically, I have theoretical reasons for thinking that populist leaders, who engage in a populist style of communication, confound VICS’ analysis primarily because the simplistic speaking style of populists obscures an underlying context (and by extension meaning) to that leader’s words. Because the computer cannot understand this underlying context and takes the meaning of the words said at face value, it fails to code the speeches of populists accurately and thus makes inaccurate predictions about that leader’s foreign policy. To test this theory, I conduct the content analysis on speeches made by three individuals: Donald Trump, Boris Johnson, and Narendra Modi, before and after they became the executives of their respective countries, and compared them to a “norming “ group representing the average world leader. The results generally support my hypotheses but with a few caveats. For the cases of Trump and Johnson, VICS found them to be a lot more cooperative than what I would expect, but it was also able to track changes in their operational code - as they transition into the role of chief executive – in the expected direction. The opposite was the case for Modi’s operational code. All-in-all, I provide suggestive evidence that OCA using VICS has trouble providing valid results for populist leaders.
ContributorsLuengas, David Leonardo (Author) / Thies, Cameron (Thesis advisor) / Lewis, Paul (Committee member) / Wright, Thorin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020