Affiliation:
1. Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands
2. University of Mannheim, Germany
Abstract
Modern liberal democracies demand high and equal levels of political action. Unequal levels of political action between ideological groups may ultimately lead to biased policy. But to what extent do citizens’ ideological preferences affect their likelihood to participate politically? And does the institutional environment moderate this relationship? From rivaling theories, the authors construct hypotheses regarding the relationship between ideological preferences and participation and those regarding the moderating effect of state institutions. They test them for six modes of political action—voting, contacting, campaigning, cooperating, persuading, and protesting—through multilevel analyses of 27 elections in 20 Western democracies. First, they find that citizens’ ideological preferences are an important determinant political action. Second, they find that majoritarianism outperforms consensualism: In majoritarian systems, political action is more widespread and not less equal across the crucial factor of ideological preferences. The field should therefore reconsider Lijphart’s conclusions about the superiority of consensualism.
Subject
Sociology and Political Science
Reference47 articles.
1. Losers' Consent
2. Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems
3. Learning to Lose: Election Outcomes, Democratic Experience and Political Protest Potential
4. Armingeon, K. ( 2007). Political participation and associational involvement . In J. W. van Deth, J. R. Montero, & A. Westholm (Eds.), Citizenship and involvement in European democracies: A comparative analysis (pp. 358-383). London: Routledge.
5. WHAT AFFECTS VOTER TURNOUT?
Cited by
73 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献