Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T21:03:56.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Impact of Religion on the Space of Competition: The Dutch Case

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2010

Huib Pellikaan
Huib Pellikaan*
Affiliation:
University of Leiden
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Huib Pellikaan, Department of Political Science, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK Leiden, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The political practice of consociational democracies to take religion off the political agenda has led to the idea that religious issues only play a marginal role in the left-right ideological framework. This study demonstrates that religion has more than a marginal effect on the left-right placement of parties and thus on the space of competition. The analysis shows that voters for secular parties and voters for religious parties have different motives and beliefs on which they base the orderings of parties on the left-right scale. In other words, each group of voters defines its own left-right scale. These different left-right scales are individually single-peaked but there is no collective transitivity of orderings of parties. The intransitivity is a clear violation of Downs' condition for placing all parties on a single line in a manner agreed upon by all voters. Instead of having one left-right dimension as some sort of “super issue,” there are at least two left-right scales, one for voters for secular parties and one for voters for religious parties.

Type
Articles
Information
Politics and Religion , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , December 2010 , pp. 469 - 494
Copyright
Copyright © Religion and Politics Section of the American Political Science Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aarts, C. W. A. M., and Thomasen, J. J. A.. 2008. “Dutch Voters and the Changing Party Space 1989–2006.” Acta Politica 43:203–234.Google Scholar
Andeweg, R. B., and Irwin, G. A.. 2005. Governance and Politics of the Netherlands. New York, NY: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Benoit, K., and Laver, M.. 2006. Party Policy in Modern Democracies. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Budge, I., Klingemann, H. D., Volkens, A., Bara, J., and Tanenbaum, E.. eds. 2001. Mapping Policy Preferences. Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments 1945–1998. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Byrnes, T. A., and Katzenstein, P. J.. eds. 2006. Religion in an Expanding Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Caramani, D. 2004. The Nationalization of Politics. The Formation of National Electorates and Party Systems in Western Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Checkel, J. T., and Katzenstein, P. J.. eds. 2009. European Identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Daalder, H. 1966. “Parties, Elites, and Political Developments in Western Europe.” In Political Parties and Political Development, eds. LaPalombara, J., and Weiner, M.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 43–77.Google Scholar
Daalder, H., and Rusk, J. G.. 1972. “Perceptions of Party in the Dutch Parliament.” In: Comparative Legislative Behavior: Frontiers of Research, eds. Patterson, S. C., and Wahlke, J. C.. New York, NY: Wiley, 143–198.Google Scholar
De Beus, J. W., Lehning, P. B., and van Doorn, J. A. A.. eds. 1989. De ideologische driehoek. Nederlandse politiek in historisch perspectief (English title here). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Boom.Google Scholar
De Swaan, A. 1973. Coalition Theories and Cabinet Formations. A Study of Formal Theories of Coalition Formation Applied to Nine European Parliaments after 1918. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Downs, A. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Franklin, M. 1992. “The Decline of Cleavage Politics.” In Electoral Change. Responses to Evolving Social and Attitudinal Structures in Western Countries, eds. Franklin, M., Mackie, T. T., and Valen, H.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 383–405.Google Scholar
Hazan, R. Y. 1997. Centre Parties, Polarization and Competition in European Parliamentary Democracies. London, UK: Continuum.Google Scholar
Kirchheimer, O. 1966. “The Transformation of the Western European Party System.” In Political Parties and Political Development, eds. LaPalombara, J., and Weiner, M.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 177–200.Google Scholar
Klingemann, H. D. 1995. “Party Positions and Voter Orientations.” In Citizens and the State, eds. Klingemann, H. D., and Fuchs, D.. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 183–205.Google Scholar
Klingemann, H. D., Volkens, A., Bara, J., Budge, I., and Mcdonald, M.. eds. 2006. Mapping Policy Preferences II. Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments in Eastern Europe, European Union and OECD 1990–2003. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kotler-Berkowitz, L. A. 2001. “Religion and Voting Behavior in Great Britain: A Reassessments.” British Journal of Political Science 31:523–554.Google Scholar
Kriesi, H. P., Grande, E., Lachat, R., Dolezal, M., Bornschier, S., and Frey, T.. 2008. West European Politics in the Age of Globalization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Laver, M. ed. 2001. Estimating the Policy Position of Political Actors. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Laver, M., and Hunt, W. B.. 1992. Policy and Party Competition. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lijphart, A. 1968. The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Lijphart, A. 1982. “The Relative Salience of the Socio-Economic and Religious Issue Dimensions: Coalition Formations in Ten Western Democracies, 1919–1979.” European Journal of Political Research 10:201–211.Google Scholar
Lipschits, I. 1977. Politieke stomingen in Nederland. Inleiding tot de geschiedenis van de Nederlandse politieke partijen (Political Ideologies in the Netherlands. Introduction to the History of the Dutch Political Parties). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Lipset, S. M., and Rokkan, S.. 1967. “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments.” In Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives, eds. Lipset, S. M., and Rokkan, S.. New York, NY: The Free Press, 1–64.Google Scholar
Mair, P. 1997. Party System Change. Approaches and Interpretations. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mair, P. 2001. “Searching for the Positions of Political Parties. A Review of Approaches and a Critical Evaluation of Expert Survey.” In Estimating the Policy Positions of Political Actors, ed. Laver, M.London, UK: Routledge, 10–30.Google Scholar
Oskarson, M. 2005. “Social Structure and Party Choice.” In The European Voter. A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies, ed. Thomassen, J.J.A.Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 85–105.Google Scholar
Pellikaan, H., de Lange, S. L., and van der Meer, T.. 2007. “Fortuyn's Legacy: Party System Change in the Netherlands.” Comparative European Politics 5:282–302.Google Scholar
Pellikaan, H., van der Meer, T., and de Lange, S. L.. 2003. “The Road from a Depoliticized to a Centrifugal Democracy.” Acta Politica 38:23–50.Google Scholar
Rose, R., and McAllister, I.. 1991. “Voters Begin to Choose: From Closed Class to Open Elections in Britain.” In Issues in British Electoral Behaviour, eds. Denver, D., and Hands, G.. London, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 219–229.Google Scholar
Sani, G., and Sartori, G.. 1983. “Polarization, Fragmentation and Competition in Western Democracies.” In Western European Party Systems. Continuity and Change, eds. Daalder, H., and Mair, P.. London, UK: Sage, 307–340.Google Scholar
Sartori, G. 2005. Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. London, UK: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E. E. 1960. The Semisovereign People. A Realist's View of Democracy in America. Boston, MA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Schofield, N. 2006. Architects of Political Change. Constitutional Quandaries and Social Choice Theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stepan, A. 2005. “Religion, Democracy, and the ‘Twin Tolerations’.” In World Religions and Democracy, eds. Diamond, L., Plattner, M. F., and Costopoulos, Ph.J.. Baltimore, MA: John Hopkins University Press, 3–23.Google Scholar
Van der Brug, W. 1997. Where's the Party? Voters' Perceptions of Party Positions. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Thesis.Google Scholar
Van der Eijk, C., and Niemöller, B.. 1983. Electoral Change in the Netherlands. Empirical Results and Methods of Measurement. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: CT Press.Google Scholar