Comparative Politics

Session: B1(b) - Workshop: Inequality, Intergroup Relations and Social Solidarity in the 21st Century - Deconsolidation Panels: Reactionary Politics and the Rise of the Right (see/voir F1(b))

Date: May 30, 2017 | Time: 08:45am to 10:15am | Location: KHS-251 (Kerr Hall South)| iOS / Outlook

Sponsor / Commanditaire: Centre for the Study of Democratic Citizenship, Canadian Opinion Research Archive based at Queen’s University, Chaire de recherche en psychologie politique de la solidarité sociale

Joint Session / Séance conjointe: with/avec Political Behaviour/Sociology/Comportement politique/sociologie

Chair/Président: Michael J. Donnelly (University of Toronto)

Discussant/Commentateur: Benjamin Moffitt (Uppsala University)

Daniel Westlake (University of British Columbia) : Following the Right: The Impact of Left-right Ideology on Parties' Multiculturalism Positions and Policy Adoption
Abstract: Parties play an essential role in both the politics of redistribution and the politics of multiculturalism. Existing work tends to link left parties to the development of liberal immigration policies (Howard, 2009; Givens and Luedtke, 2005). It is often assumed that this relationship also applies to multiculturalism. Yet, work on left parties in Sweden and Switzerland shows that left parties also face pressures to take on more restrictive immigration policies, and at times there is support on the right for more open immigration policies (Hinnfors et al., 2012; Kreisi et al. 2008) Additionally, in Australia and Canada the mainstream right played a central role in the adoption of multiculturalism policies. It is not clear that being a party on the left, and therefore supportive of redistribution, leads to support for multiculturalism. This paper compares the positions that mainstream left and mainstream right parties have taken over the past 4 decades in 21 countries. It shows that, in the absence of far-right parties, mainstream right parties are just as likely to support multiculturalism as mainstream left parties. It further uses hazard modeling to demonstrate that it is mainstream right support of multiculturalism, as opposed to left party support, that influences the adoption of multicultural policies.

---

Edward Koning (University of Guelph) : Pioneers for Problematic Populism: The Role of Unsuccessful Anti-Immigrant Politicians in the Subsequent Success of Anti-Immigrant Parties
Abstract: There is a large body of research explaining the fortunes of anti-immigrant parties by factors such as the electoral system, public opinion, electoral niches in the party system, and characteristics of the parties and leaders themselves. As a result, we know much about the kinds of places in which we might encounter anti-immigrant parties, and the kind of parties that are most likely to be successful. In contrast, we know less about the relevance of timing in determining these types of parties’ success. This paper aims to understand the electoral fortunes of anti-immigrant parties by investigating the role of anti-migrant politicians that participated in earlier elections. By examining parliamentary elections in Western Europe since the 1980s, the paper concludes that the electoral breakthrough of anti-immigrant parties is frequently preceded by unsuccessful politicians with similar political platforms in earlier elections. While these ‘populist pioneers’ did not achieve any electoral success themselves, they did pave the way for future like-minded politicians, in particular by increasing the salience of issues of immigration and integration and pushing the boundaries of politically palatable rhetoric.

Paper or Poster / Communication ou Présentation visuelle

---

Francisco Beltran (University of Toronto) : Tradition and Migration Policy in the UK, Sweden and Canada
Abstract: This paper starts out with the recent changes in the British and Swedish immigration and integration policies prompted by the conflict in Syria. While both countries have relaxed the requisites for Syrian nationals to obtain a residence permit, the policy aims in these two cases are quite different. In the British case, applicants can obtain an extension of their temporary resident status, whereas in Sweden they can expect to become permanent residents and bring their families relatively soon. These differing policy approaches are considered as divergent responses to different degrees of populist presure against immigration, but this paper claims the key factor lays in the respective long term stance of British and Swedish political elites towards migration, international solidarity, and citizenship. In other words, I hypothesize that it is political tradition and path dependency what dictates current migration and social integration policies in both countries, not a reaction towards populist forces or differing social attitudes towards migrants. In order to validate this hypothesis, I will asses the impact on the design and implementation of migration and integration policies of political parties, relevant interest groups and government agencies, on the one hand, and populist social and political movements, on the other hand. This research attempts to reasses the relative role of political institutions in shaping migration policies vis-à-vis public opinion and political demands. Finally, I will draw some parallels with the current Canadian policy towards Syrian asylum seekers, assesing the relevance of variables such as populism, institutions and path dependence.

---