Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Guasti, Petra
Data de Publicação: 2020
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i4.3420
Resumo: Populism 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.
id RCAP_181c03df93a16eb5e498f0270daabcec
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3420
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)accountability; Czech Republic; democratic decay; democratic resilience; populism; technocracy; technocratic populismPopulism 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.Cogitatio2020-12-17info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i4.3420oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3420Politics and Governance; Vol 8, No 4 (2020): Varieties of Technocratic Populism around the World; 473-4842183-2463reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3420https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i4.3420https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3420/3420Copyright (c) 2020 Petra Guastihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGuasti, Petra2022-10-21T16:03:06Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3420Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:13:45.650725Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)
title Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)
spellingShingle Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)
Guasti, Petra
accountability; Czech Republic; democratic decay; democratic resilience; populism; technocracy; technocratic populism
title_short Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)
title_full Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)
title_fullStr Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)
title_full_unstemmed Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)
title_sort Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)
author Guasti, Petra
author_facet Guasti, Petra
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Guasti, Petra
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv accountability; Czech Republic; democratic decay; democratic resilience; populism; technocracy; technocratic populism
topic accountability; Czech Republic; democratic decay; democratic resilience; populism; technocracy; technocratic populism
description Populism 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.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-12-17
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i4.3420
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3420
url https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i4.3420
identifier_str_mv oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3420
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3420
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i4.3420
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3420/3420
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Petra Guasti
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Petra Guasti
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Politics and Governance; Vol 8, No 4 (2020): Varieties of Technocratic Populism around the World; 473-484
2183-2463
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799130591190319104